Dalai Lama

I suggest the Dalai Lama be sent to the gulag because he was tyrannical totalitarian dictator who kept Tibet in a feudalist slave society and dares to criticize China's much more benevolent rule.

oligarch wrote:

I suggest the Dalai Lama be sent to the gulag because he was tyrannical totalitarian dictator who kept Tibet in a feudalist slave society and dares to criticize China's much more benevolent rule.

With Tibetan Buddhism, the successive Dalai Lamas form a lineage of (tulku) magistrates which traces back to 1391.[1] According to tradition, the rarefied mindstream of these tulku take repeated births and embodiment to fulfill their Boddhisattva vow.[2] They are of the Gelug School of Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhists hold the Dalai Lama to be one of innumerable incarnations of Avalokiteśvara ("Chenrezig" [spyan ras gzigs] in Tibetan), the bodhisattva of compassion.[3]


aka dali lama isn't one person

Oligarch is talking about the actual incarnation of the Dalai Lama.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Oligarch is talking about the actual incarnation of the Dalai Lama.

oh you mean the buddist thing.
sending someone to a gulag becuse of theyer religon is disgusting

mattabesta wrote:

oh you mean the buddist thing.
sending someone to a gulag becuse of theyer religon is disgusting

Did you actually bother to read the first post of this thread?

Don't try to use tergiversation and manipulation of information as tools to strengthen your arguements for once unveiled they'll shoot back at you.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

oh you mean the buddist thing.
sending someone to a gulag becuse of theyer religon is disgusting

Did you actually bother to read the first post of this thread?

yes and the majoraty is exagerated.

dali lama barly even controlled the cuntry anyway the brits kinda did.

mattabesta wrote:

yes and the majoraty is exagerated.

Please in order to make valid your arguement elaborate more on the topic sustaining why it is exagerated.

mattabesta wrote:

dali lama barly even controlled the cuntry anyway the brits kinda did.

Explain how after British granted independence to Tibet the Dalai Lama barely had any control over the country.

oligarch wrote:

I suggest the Dalai Lama be sent to the gulag because he was tyrannical totalitarian dictator who kept Tibet in a feudalist slave society and dares to criticize China's much more benevolent rule.

you have got to be shitting me !!. i normally dont get mad over something like this, but that really boils my blood, not because of my faith but because that relatively smart person like you can say such crap. first he has received the Nobel peace price, they dont give that to ¨tyrannical totalitarian dictators¨ and china being more benevolent to Tibet than Dalai is complete bull shit, incase you havent heard it China KILLED around 80 UNARMED protesters in Tibet, they were demonstrating for a free Tibet, is that what you call a ¨Benevolent China¨ ?
and (believe or not) mattabesta has a point when Dalai came to power he was only 15 years old, and we wasent there very long he was instated at the 17 November 1950 and in October that same year the China had already started the invasion of Tibet, but that was only a show of force from Chinas side, they demanded negotiations and they got but after 9 years with Chinese army in Tibet, the civilian population of Tibet started a major uprising the Chinese toke use of hard force and after 9 years and 4 month of power Dalai had to flee to India. now look at Tibet a broken down country with little or no education in their own Tibet history and culture, a country without a past has no future. and if i had convinced you that a free Tibet its the best thing and that Dalai is one of the most peacefully and kind people alive, then dont worry he is starting his retirement, so when Tibet will be fried (and it will) this Dalai will not be instated.

Ryom wrote:

oligarch wrote:

I suggest the Dalai Lama be sent to the gulag because he was tyrannical totalitarian dictator who kept Tibet in a feudalist slave society and dares to criticize China's much more benevolent rule.

you have got to be shitting me !!. i normally dont get mad over something like this, but that really boils my blood, not because of my faith but because that relatively smart person like you can say such crap. first he has received the Nobel peace price, they dont give that to ¨tyrannical totalitarian dictators¨ and china being more benevolent to Tibet than Dalai is complete bull shit, incase you havent heard it China KILLED around 80 UNARMED protesters in Tibet, they were demonstrating for a free Tibet, is that what you call a ¨Benevolent China¨ ?

Tibetan protests are very violent and even if they weren't, killing them wouldn't be as bad Dalai Lama's regime which would build walls out of the skulls of peasants who spoke out against the government's brutality in order to terrize the rest of the populace.

Quote :

and (believe or not) mattabesta has a point when Dalai came to power he was only 15 years old, and we wasent there very long he was instated at the 17 November 1950 and in October that same year the China had already started the invasion of Tibet, but that was only a show of force from Chinas side, they demanded negotiations and they got but after 9 years with Chinese army in Tibet, the civilian population of Tibet started a major uprising the Chinese toke use of hard force and after 9 years and 4 month of power Dalai had to flee to India. now look at Tibet a broken down country with little or no education in their own Tibet history and culture, a country without a past has no future.

Even though the Dalai Lama himself was only 15 when he came to power the priest class as a whole still subjected the peasantry(and the vast majority of the country) to back breaking lanor and torture under a primitive feudal system. The Dalai Lama perpetuated this oppression.

Quote :

and if i had convinced you that a free Tibet its the best thing and that Dalai is one of the most peacefully and kind people alive, then dont worry he is starting his retirement, so when Tibet will be fried (and it will) this Dalai will not be instated.

Good, because if he was he would plunge the country back into the Dark Ages that China has been leading Tibet out of.

oligarch wrote:

Tibetan protests are very violent and even if they weren't, killing them wouldn't be as bad Dalai Lama's regime which would build walls out of the skulls of peasants who spoke out against the government's brutality in order to terrize the rest of the populace.

you mean like the people who speak out about the Chinese government at Tiananmen square in 1989 ? you mean like Zhang Zhixin ? and Li Hongzhi ? and the people who followed Falun Gong ?
After invading Tibet in 1950, the China killed over one million Tibetans, destroyed over 6,000 monasteries, and turned Tibets northeastern province, Amdo, into a gulag housing up to ten million people. 250.000 Chinese troops remain stationed in Tibet. In addition, some 7.5 million Chinese have responded to Beijing's incentives to relocate to Tibet they now outnumber the 6 million Tibetans. Through what has been termed Chinese apartheid, ethnic Tibetans now have a lower life expectancy, literacy rate, and per capita income than Chinese inhabitants of Tibet

is that what you call a benevolent china ?

Ryom wrote:

you mean like the people who speak out about the Chinese government at Tiananmen square in 1989 ? you mean like Zhang Zhixin ? and Li Hongzhi ? and the people who followed Falun Gong ?
After invading Tibet in 1950, the China killed over one million Tibetans, destroyed over 6,000 monasteries, and turned Tibets northeastern province, Amdo, into a gulag housing up to ten million people. 250.000 Chinese troops remain stationed in Tibet. In addition, some 7.5 million Chinese have responded to Beijing's incentives to relocate to Tibet they now outnumber the 6 million Tibetans. Through what has been termed Chinese apartheid, ethnic Tibetans now have a lower life expectancy, literacy rate, and per capita income than Chinese inhabitants of Tibet

is that what you call a benevolent china ?

1. Could you show some evidence of this?
2. Taking into account Tibet acquired independence in 1903 during British rule... is Tibet legitimate?

I frankly doubt most of those claims are true.

here is my sources
http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/EM177.cfm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLN4KWxqZ-0 and again by BBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDdeW2qhZ2M&feature=related
and this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep1XNOtSV0Y&feature=related when your done watching click on ¨More¨ in the right corner to see some more links
and http://www.hrw.org/wr2k2/asia4.html

and could you please elaborate your second question ?

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

yes and the majoraty is exagerated.

Please in order to make valid your arguement elaborate more on the topic sustaining why it is exagerated.

mattabesta wrote:

dali lama barly even controlled the cuntry anyway the brits kinda did.

Explain how after British granted independence to Tibet the Dalai Lama barely had any control over the country.

In the battle for supremacy in central Asia between Victorian Britain and Tsarist Russia, a British force under soldier Francis Younghusband eventually invaded Tibet, cut down its warriors with the Maxim gun and occupied Lhasa in 1904. [4] [5] The invasion led to a peace treaty between Britain and Tibet, a document that some Tibetan historians see as recognition of their remote mountain home as an independent entity. Imperial China was outraged by the invasion but could do nothing to stop it and waged a diplomatic battle to protect its own claims over Tibet.

I cun't find anything on slavery and fudal baddness of the dali lama

Ryom wrote:

here is my sources
http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/EM177.cfm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLN4KWxqZ-0 and again by BBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDdeW2qhZ2M&feature=related
and this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep1XNOtSV0Y&feature=related when your done watching click on ¨More¨ in the right corner to see some more links
and http://www.hrw.org/wr2k2/asia4.html

All those serve as sources for your claims, however, they are that, claims, there's no thorough study on how China commited Genocide (killing millions of Tibetans) in Tibet. I require that to give credibility to that claim.

Human Rights Watch? Hmmm... although I don't deny China does oppress several groups and among them those who protest for the freedom of Tibet, I don't consider Human Rights' Watch a credible source for evidence, else, I don't agree with their concept of human rights.

Ryom wrote:

and could you please elaborate your second question ?

About the second question, I do need to research more on Tibet.

Anyway my position is the next:
Tibet should keep cultural integrity through autonomy but not through independence.

the thing you say about sorces is rediculus.

I can say that something is a lie but it dosen't make it one.

mattabesta wrote:

I cun't find anything on slavery and fudal baddness of the dali lama

Read below on the same article you copied and pasted that parragraph from. You'll find that Tibet was even an empire in the IX century.

mattabesta wrote:

the thing you say about sorces is rediculus.

Oh really? How is it ridiculous? Go and check the sources and see if there's any thorough study on the topic.

mattabesta wrote:

I can say that something is a lie but it dosen't make it one.

I didn't say it were lies. I said it were just claims and not evidence.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

I cun't find anything on slavery and fudal baddness of the dali lama

Read below on the same article you copied and pasted that parragraph from. You'll find that Tibet was even an empire in the IX century.

do you take me for an idiot????
I had already read the articel over and for your infromation it wasn't ruled by the dali lama back then.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

the thing you say about sorces is rediculus.

Oh really? How is it ridiculous? Go and check the sources and see if there's any thorough study on the topic.

mattabesta wrote:

I can say that something is a lie but it dosen't make it one.

I didn't say it were lies. I said it were just claims and not evidence.

all i said was that i can claim anything for my own purpus but it dosen´t make my claim valid.

exampel.
co2 output of man has dubeled in the last 2 year accordin to the international shibang. then you can say I don't think the shibang has any valid infromation for that. Doing that is childish although I do support you in this case i wun´t take youtube links as a source.

mattabesta wrote:

all i said was that i can claim anything for my own purpus but it dosen´t make my claim valid.

exampel.
co2 output of man has dubeled in the last 2 year accordin to the international shibang. then you can say I don't think the shibang has any valid infromation for that. Doing that is childish although I do support you in this case i wun´t take youtube links as a source.

It's not childish to question the validity of a highly recognized organization as long as you do it with proper foundations.

Since I don't agree with the concept of human rights Human Rights' Watch is reigned by, I'm in my right to neglect credibility or validity to it.

Example:

Human rights watch just presented evidence that Regime X in Z country has sent 90,000 prisoners to a gulag. They state this si a violation to human rights.

Regime X hasn't ratified Human Rights' Declaration, has its concept of human rights, has its laws and has presented evidence that these 90,000 prisoners were culprits of violent protests, sabotage, murders and rape.

While Human Rights' Watch is right in the fact that Regime X sent 90,000 people to gulags, I don't agree with them that Regime X is violating human rights. You get me?


Now, in this particular case. Nowehere in those links is a thorough study presenting evidences on the claims of Chinese government commiting mass murders in Tibet. That is my point, there is no thorough studies, no evidences, just claims.

Just read those claims and wow. Just wow. All of that is definitely exaggrated by a crapload. It certianly doesn't help both sides at all. Even though I think China should seek peaceful means to the Tibet issue, I still can't help wonder if the issue got into the "Kosovo and Serbia" sitution again.

It won't be pretty, that's for sure.

From the same article you copied and pasted the parragraph from Matti:

Before 1951, according to anthropologists, a vast majority of the people of Tibet were serfs ("mi ser"), often bound to land owned by monasteries and aristocrats.

I know read the post you are right in this case but you can't claim something without a foundation

mattabesta wrote:

I know read the post you are right in this case but you can't claim something without a foundation

There's the foundation sir.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

That is my point, there is no thorough studies, no evidences, just claims.

Very good point comrade, the problem is that unfortunately it can never be proven nether to the Chinese side or the Tibetan side, i chose to belive the clams because i wouldnt be so damn surprised if they did it, if look back at history this thing is not uncommon for a (Coummunistic) dictator regime to do such things. and when Dalai Lama was in power he was only bloody 15 years old, we were all brads when we were that age and trowing him in the Gulag for his short regime (mostly under the control of China) when he was 15 is just wrong. oligarch called him a tyrannical totalitarian dictator how can he be that when never was fully in power? and we canot call him criminal without him actually doing a crime. and a another thing America is one of the only industrial countries who hasent signed ¨The Child-Labor law¨ that dosent mean that if you have a 14 year old working in a sweat shop in US with 0,50$ in pay and working from 8am to 10 PM that its a human rights violation. and one of those links on YouTube was from BBC, dont you see BBC as a valid source? and its funny you say

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

often bound to land

because they still are do to the Hukou system Aka. China's apartheid, do to this almost all the rural workers and Tibetans was consider second class citizens. but to get back to the overall subject on this thread, i mean that we cant a not throw a peace full old man in Gulag for ¨tyrannical totalitarian dictator regime¨ he never actually had, and when he was in power he was only a bloody child, you cant except a child to run a country like Tibet, and even if we do throw him gulag for his short regime, i can honestly say that i would be ashamed of this forum.