<p>In 2005 Uzbekistan staged a massacre that was similar to, but worse, than Tiananmen Square, but which western government or media gives a damn about Uzbekistan?</p>
<p>It is a worrying trend that governments exploit the healthy pursuit and advocacy of human rights and freedoms for their own geopolitical enterprise, and in the process, use the victims of the abuses as puppets.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, no, replace China and Tibet with African nations, or better yet, ethnic factions. NOW nobody gives a ****.</p>
<p>Just on top of my head, I can think of similar situations:</p>
<ol>
<li>Barsque/Spain</li>
<li>Palestine/Israel</li>
<li>(to less extent) Northern Ireland/England</li>
</ol>
<p>So why doesn’t CNN cover them with the kind of bias they’d shown for Tibet/China?? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>“So why doesn’t CNN cover them with the kind of bias they’d shown for Tibet/China??”</p>
<p>-Simple, because they are Commies, and we all know that commies are devils, so I guess it is quite legitimate nowadays to label them as subhumans.</p>
<p>pretty sad how some things that deserve media coverage & attention dont get any, while touching news stories about lost dogs+cats are shown a lot</p>
<p>the real problem is the bias with which the western media reports on China. And other <em>idiotic</em> politicians that bandwagon and automatically jump on China’s case whether or not they know anything of the situation at all.</p>
<p>^^ And how many Han Chinese really know anything about the situation in Tibet?</p>
<p>I’ve travelled in Tibet recently, and was amazed by the numbers of clueless Han tourists.</p>
<p>There is a huge disconnect between state propaganda and reality.</p>
<p>like someone already said- this whole tibet thing is America’s propaganda against China. China has spent so much money for the Beijing olympics and now USA will withdraw from the olympics because of the “Human rights violence committed in Tibet” </p>
<p>We all should remember that CNN and BBC are very much pro american and british government and are soooooo very biased. Just watch a muslim channel like Al jazeera and you will see a very different perspective of what’s hapenning in the middle east.</p>
<p>What shocks me is the audacity of America’s foreign policy where every day people die in Iraq but the few deaths in Tibet are publicized so much. Now Nancy Pelosi is in India to talk to Dalai Lama.</p>
<p>America will always remain anti China and Russia and they will always keep on the propaganda- for example Dalai Lama and this whole Emory university connection.</p>
<p>Also answering the qustion about why does China want Tibet.
Why shouldn’t china want Tibet- when the britisher’s left they randomly segregated countries by dividing them on paper- why should we follow what they decided? What about the thousands of years of history before them.</p>
<p>I feel so saddenned by the unfairness of the world where the powerful can do whatever they want .</p>
<p>Hmm, Tibet against a country with a large army and nuclear missiles, w/o any true support from Europe or US except for a few politicians like Pelosi who talk about stuff they don’t know.
I think the point is moot. Anyways, tibet won’t become independent because the Chinese want it for their sanctuary once global warming becomes a reality.</p>
<p>This thread bothers me. Guys, all news sources are biased (some are more biased than others). News stories are people’s interpretation of events of information so of course it’s going to have some bias. Anyways, whether or not a news source is biased is unimportant. If you are going to read news, do it correctly. Do not read stories and take them for face value. Instead, read them and analyze the journalist’s bias and perspective by analyzing language, tone, etc. This way you can form your own intelligent opinion.</p>
<p>The BBC is probably the most reputable news source in the world. Calling the BBC pro-American does not make sense when it was the BBC that has been against the war in Iraq all this time. </p>
<p>The United States and European countries are not likely to withdraw from the Olympics. (We’ll see though.)</p>
<p>Lastly, no one did a good job of explaining the complexity of the situation. Every one in this thread is so consumed with China-US rhetoric that it seems as though no one is even bothering to think about a possible solution. In addition, no one could answer my question as to why China should not just leave. Instead most every drew faulty parallels to other situations in history or relative modern times. Still, I find this disturbing because people who avoid answering questioning by either asking other questions or just not answering the question just illustrate they are not familiar with the subject of the question. Basically, it seems as though you all are just as uninformed as I am. I think that people our age should not follow in the footsteps of previous generations of Chinese, Americans, Europeans, Indians, etc. and not make it their goal to try to understand the situation of others around the world.</p>
<p>aisgzdavinci:
Thanks for the reasonable perspective.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As shown in the above quote, someone already answered it. You didn’t think the Union/South was analogous and that’s fine but he did answer you. If you are not satisfied, go to research yourself in library and bookstores instead of coming here to tell how ignorant others are. If you have been too lazy to do that in the last few days, don’t come here to sound so self-righteous.</p>
<p>
I am actually quite familiar with the Chinese-Tibet situation. I just wanted to see why some of the posters in this thread were so upset by the media coverage and see what their perspective was on the situation.</p>
<p>
Why would they “just leave”? People have already answered your question very adequately, IMO. But I think that is an almost ridiculous question. It is people who have never been to Tibet or don’t know what they are talking about that seem to think that every Chinese person in Tibet must be an oppressive police officer or PLA soldier. Granted, about ethnic Tibetans constitute roughly 90% of the regions demographics, but there are many ethnic Hans and other Chinese minorities that call Tibet home, that send their kids to school, get married, and make a livelihood there. </p>
<p>Why should they “just leave”? What have they done, besides try to carve out a better life for themselves and their children, like millions of people across the world? And the accusation that China is “flooding” Tibet with Han immigrants… well frankly it reeks with racism and xenophobia. Yes, the Chinese government needs to do its best to try to preserve and keep intact the region’s cultural and religious traditions, but when did Tibet become this racially exclusive area intended only for ethnic Tibetans? Tibet is home for not just ethnic Tibetans and the Dalai Lama.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you are familiar with it, it’s much more constructive to offer your opinion and perspective rather than complaining how uninformed others are. But then you also implied you were “uninformed”. So looks like you have some explaining to do.</p>
<p>^^^
I thought people would be more likely to say how they really felt if I said I was uninformed. I did not want them to think I would grill them for whatever answer I gave.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But this is a different matter altogether and besides the point, which I think you missed. What I AM concerned about is western media bias, which absolutely loves getting on China’s case every opportunity they get.</p>
<p>All the videos I’ve seen showed violent local Tibetans beating civilians, looting and vandalizing property, throwing rocks and other dangerous materials at police vehicles and police. And these reports are from independent sources, many times Westerners, including James Miles from The Economist, footage from an Australian tourist, and other bloggers ([Kadfly[/url</a>] for example). But then the rest of the world jumps on the bandwagon and claims ‘cultural genocide.’ Well, if there is violent civil unrest, then *** is the government supposed to do? What do these idiots mean when they “urge restraint?” If they don’t send in police forces, shops are going to be looted, people killed, and the entire city is going up in flames. If they do send in police, they violate human rights.</p>
<p>Its like if people criticized the government’s actions in the LA riots of '92. Darn those oppressive cops, right? They really should have respected the rioter’s rights to riot. Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with the use of force (which is difficult to confirm at this time, anyway) against rioters-- especially in this recent episode in Tibet which really seemed to get out of hand. And I don’t claim to know the whole story, if this is not it. But just look at sheep like Nancy Pelosi, Sarkozy, and probably the vast majority of the West. How can we all seemingly automatically assume what we have? Unless I’m missing out on some secret news source of info everyone else knows about…</p>
<p>Interestingly, someone actually created a website about this, though it seems more concerned about misleading images rather than actual content. But still gives you an idea of what I’m talking about: [url=<a href=“http://anti-cnn.com/]We”>http://anti-cnn.com/]We</a> Just Want the Truth! CNN:The world’s leader of liars](<a href=“http://kadfly.blogspot.com/]Kadfly[/url”>http://kadfly.blogspot.com/)</p>
<p>I’m not sure mutilating the genitals of Buddhist monks with hot irons qualifies the Chinese government as innocents just trying to help a country out.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure forcibly forbidding Tibetan Buddhists from selecting their next spiritual leader is a blatant form of ethnic cleansing.</p>
<p>The argument that the Chinese are Tibet’s saviors because they’re pumping a bunch of money into Tibet to foster economic development is woefully grounded in a naive modern worldview. I’ve heard Chinese make this argument - we’re building roads and infrastructure for them and they show no gratitude.</p>
<p>The destruction of an ancient culture is at stake as well as the wisdom held within that culture in the name of opening the door for McDonalds and Starbucks. Throwing a bunch of money to Native Americans would not ever overcome the fact that our ancestors systematically destroyed their civilization and vast amounts of ancient wisdom pertinent to the survival of all humanity. </p>
<p>This goes far deeper than economic development.</p>
<p>well well well
Let’s say this.
If the Pope and his cardinals order an insurgence of Catholics in southern Ireland. Will fellow northern protestant Irish and English feel happy about it?
This is exactly what has happened in China. Dalai Lama’s clique, not Dalai Lama himself, planned and ordered the insurgence against ethnic Han Chinese and Muslims living in Tibetan prefecture and Tibetan autonomous region.
As a Han Chinese, I’m furious about the recent unrests in China. Westerners come to Tibet 200 years ago, and drew a line between China and Tibet, then here we go! Two countries born out of imperialistic dominance.
What’s so amusing about western rhetoric is that westerners see the world as if all countries in the planet have accepted the territorial lines drew from the peace of Westphalia, as if every country in the world believes in the international system designed by the west to assist colonization and capitalistic interests.
Chinese are particularly ****ed by the event in Tibet, seriously, they’ve organized protest in Toronto weeks ago to protest against what they call “distortion of western media.” Every Chinese I have talked to expressed a widespread resentment towards Tibetan protests. They think Tibetans are racists, fundamentalists, and idiots.
You may ask:“Why do Chinese hate Tibetan independence when Chinese themselves are coerced by the Chinese government?” The answer is simple. In the Sinic international system, which has dominated east Asia for 2000 years, put Han Chinese, Tibetans, Manchus, and Hmong as a single race. They believe that all those people came from the Yellow river and are descendants of the same people. But a great war broke out in pre historic time where the “yellow emperor” prevailed over all other races. The “Yellow emperor” was allegedly the son of the dragon, and that’s why Han Chinese call themselves the “descendants of the dragon.” Under this logic or legend, Han Chinese believe that it is LEGITIMATE to subjugate Tibetans, Manchus, Mongolians, and Hmong. Even today, there are still takings about subjugating Outer Mongolia.
As for Tibet, Chinese believe that Tibet belongs to China throughout the HISTORY. That is, Chinese believe Tibet was NEVER fully independent. Because NO COUNTRY is fully independent under the SINIC international system. At least, not in the sense of independence established by peace of Westphalia. Why? Because through the last 2000 years of history, there is only ONE emperor(huang di) in Asia, and he is the EMPEROR of the China. Whoever dominates over the “middle kingdom”, aka China, becomes the legitimate ruler of the East Asia. This Emperor grants the right for kings to rule their lands over entire east Asia. That’s why Japanese Shoguns and Korean kings need to give Chinese emperor tributes to be able to have a legitimate status. Chinese emperor is bit like a God. Because remeber, in West, God is God, Caesar is Caesar, in Muslim societies, God is Caesar, in Sinic civilizations, Caesar is GOD.
But unlike Japan and Korea who can have their legitimate kings, however, Tibet is part of China because they belong to the same race.<br>
An understanding of Sinic international system would also help explain why Japanese are obsessed with conquering China, and everybody in Asia don’t like China. lol
If you are for Tibetan independence, you must realize that you are not only against Chinese commies, but also the entire race of Chinese, and their CULTURE. Funny, huh? Welcome to the clash of civilizations where cultures have become the spearheads of all conflicts. </p>
<p>PS: Japanese “Emperor” is called Tian Huang, means the Emperor of the Heaven.
A legitimate emperor in Sinice international system is called Huang Di, Huang literally means emperor, Di means hegemon. As China begins to reemerge as a world super power, it is likely that in the future the Sinic international system will conflict with the international system established by the west.</p>
<p>China’s abuse of Tibetans is inexcusable, and the attempts of Chinese people here to make excuses for it, are laughable and sad.</p>
<p>Making comparisons to events which happened 100-150 years ago is rather irrelevant. If the U.S. was to invade a foreign country and overthrow its government today, I would be just as vocal in opposition - as I am with our ill-advised Iraqi misadventure.</p>
<p>The fact that one country did something wrong in the past, does not excuse another country doing it today.</p>
<p>
Agreed. I recently heard someone essentially say that because Tibetan rulers had at one point in history mistreated fellow Tibetans that it was okay for the Chinese to do so too.</p>