Wednesday, April 16. 2008
Europeans View China as Biggest Threat to Global Security
Posted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Wednesday, April 16. 2008
Perceptions have changed. Spiegel International reports:
China has now overtaken the United States as the greatest perceived threat to global stability in the eyes of Europeans, according to the opinion poll commissioned by the Financial Times. The poll, carried out by the Harris agency between March 27 and April 8 and published on Tuesday, found that 35 percent of respondents in the five largest EU states see China as a bigger threat to world stability than any other state.
Moreover, the United States is also doing better in popularity contests: Atlantic Community noted: "For the first time since 2005, the number of people abroad that view the US as a positive force has increased slightly, to 35 percent."
Related posts in the Atlantic Review:
• Europe is a Threat to the United States
• Transatlantic Foreign Policy Attitudes and Threat Perceptions
A threat? Not yet. And not to peaceful old Europe in any case.
Japan, Korea, Russia and above all Taiwan may face the Dragon's breath but not Europe.
Why should you care, when you didn't care (much) about an ally being attacked?
I think it's just another manifestation of Europe's two favorite vices: inveterate busybodyness and smug self-congratulation....
When European economy is in recession, They instinctively resort to protectionism and exclusivism. It is easier to blame others than to self criticize.
Security is not restricted in military sphere. European countries can not accept China's presence as an ecnomic giant in those African colonized states. As Latin America is regarded as a backyard by US,EU treat Africa as its property. When CHina intrudes into Africa,Latin America,Asia for natural resouces, It challenge EU's privilege , so it's a globe-sphere threat to EU .
China's policy of peaceful coexistence and no interference is welcomed by most of African states. But it was defiled by many European politician as Neo-colonization. China's development make the African states gain reasonable rewards from their resources and help the African states economy prosper . I'll say African states is under unfair trade system for decades of years after European colonial rule. Western world deliberately depreciate the price of natural resources. Europe had to compete with China and India for African natural resources. That's a big challenge to EU. China not only challenge EU's values like democracy and good governance but also its economic interests.
The investigation data about the popularity of each country is highly different in Afica ,Asia than in Europe. I guess "China is the biggest threat to Europe " is more suitable in this case.
No Don I would say there are objective reasons for that assumption. Until very recently, the US have had the monopoly on bad news here, but this honor is now shared with China.
And this for good reason: China has started to compete with Europeans in Africa harshly. Many European countries have realized that Beijing has played them off against each other in relation to economical ties. So they have changed the tone and are more and more arranging themselves behind Brussels to deal with the Chinese.
Also among the ordinary people, the news about state sponsored violation of copyright on our products has left a very bad impression of the Chinese. Many are convinced that the Chinese are determined to steal our share at the world market this way.
Last but not least Tibet traditionally has many advocats here. So the latest images from Tibet (made up or not) have had a lasting impression.
Tibet may be a moral issue but it isn't a international security issue. Chinese colonialism is no different than that practiced by the US, Russia, UK, France, Canada, Mexico, most mid-size nations of the world, etc.
There is minor difference between Tibet and UK 's colonial states. Tibet is under China 's control for more than 700 years. It never was recognized as an independent country in the world. PRC China take the place of Republic of China as China's sole and leagal government. That was supported by UN resolution .
UK's coloniztion in African , Asia , north and sorth American , even Oceania is bloody suppression and wildly plundering their wealth. In my mind they are total different.
Tibet is part of ROC (Republic of China) as Tibet is part of Yuan dynasty,Ming dynasty, Qing dynasty. Tibetan people like other 55 ethnic people in China is a member of the family . Dalai Lama has pathetic influence over tibetan people. only little number of clergy men support him. How many Tibetan people exist in China and how many tibetan people participate in Lhasa riots. Doesn't this show us something.
Dalai lama and its aristocrats can hardly fit for toady's Tibet. The Slavery and theocracy system prevailed before 1959 uprising, does not exists any more. How can dalai lama and once aristocrats go on its luxary life without making those ordinary Tibetan people as cerf. Will those aristocrats and their offspring prepare for self-dependence?
"Tibet independence" is something President Trueman and CIA's fabricated. They want to use Tibet as an religious bulwark to counter communists .
Take a look at the Tibet History. British India waged wars in 1888 and then in 1903 in order to occupy Tibet. 13th Dalai Lama ask Qing central Government(belong to Historical China) for help . At that time Qing Government was weak at home. It can not provide much help to 13th Dalai Lama.
13th Dalai Lama falied to resist British India invasion. Lhasa then was full of British atrocity . British slaughter does not lead the Tibet to be a colonial land of Great Britain.Because another big power Tsar-Russia can not accept British India's monopoly on Tibet area. It exert pressure on then China government (ROC) to held a meeting on Tibet.
Within that meeting , Russia and British government aggree not to challenge China's sovereign rights over Tibet.
In History, there is no offical recognition of Tibet independence. It stay in China's sovereign for more than 700 years. Western media fabricate Tibet independence to vent their hatred on Chinese government and its people,Paterson faked the "Tibet referendum in 1951" to express his "satire" . All of these can not change the fact " Tibet was ,is , and will be part of China" (Www.anti-cnn.com have more detail)
I was not referring to the justifcation of Tibet´s seek of independence. The only thing I wanted to point out was that the news from there contributed to Europeans considering China as a threat. I also know that the bigger European capitals mostly use Tibet as a tool to produce instability in China - but hey, this is the usual power game at the world stage. Potential opponents in the future are best weakened before becoming dangerous.
I can hardly judge the other European countries regarding their historical idea of China, but here in Germany the Chinese have probably never lost the image of the "Yellow Danger" ever since our last emperor ordered a painting about China with this title.
Also countless documentaries about new employed copyright protectors doing nothing but checking Chinese participants at german tradeshows didn´t exactly add to Chinese popularity in the present. This is the fundament of a harsh conflict of our cultures: While the biggest part of our foreign trade depends on high end products and their copyright, Chinese seem to prefer copying foreign success - leaving little room for bilateral harmony.
While I will not claim European influence on Africa is very productive for the natives there, I also consider China´s influence to be at least as difficult. Since this is not the topic here, I will discuss this when appropriate, if you don´t mind.
I have no objection to your above post .
As to copyright infringements on US's, EU's products, I think it is very common in China. It's illeagal and immoral for those chinese companys who made profits through pirate. China will take more strict measures to strike such activity. With the development of China economy, China need to protect its own patents as well. Many countries expreience such stage (Japan, Korean...)
Something need to mention ,(not as an excuse) ,Western world restrict its technic exporting to China during cold war. China had to re-engineer USSR and Western weapons to gain basic military capability. during that isolation time ,There is no way for China to purchase western technology , China had to re-engineer everythings it can get from outside world for its very survival. It is unimaginable that isolated china invent its own computer from nothing during cold war.
When China is excluded from Western powers ' trade system. It is no right to ask CHina to respect its rule. When China make commitments to obey WTO rules , there is no excuse for China to let this pirate things go on. right?
My problem with China is the communist dictatorship. All Chinese suffer under communist rule not just the Tibetans. I welcome the rise of China but at the same time demand democratic freedom for all 1.4 billion not just Tibetans.
The perceived threat and real threat from China is due to the communist leadership. The world will be a much more peaceful and relaxed place once the communist dynasty is history. Taiwan and Hong Kong prove that the Chinese can function democratically and thrive.
Although I think China should promote democracy step by step, I still think your points stand reasons there. China definitely should accelerate its reform in politics and Give more liberty and freedom to native Chinese people.
You guys from western world take for granted that ordinary Chinese people are brain-washed by communist propaganda or yield to the politic supression. Although such pressure exists , the main reason for Chinese people keep silent is : We witness China's progress every year ,evert month. Such progress is not restricted to economy ,income ,welfare..., We do share more liberty and freedom in our routine life. We can go on our life as it is now , and with our expectation for more democracy and freedom. Chinese people seldom think about some radical soultion. Fear for social disturbance may benfit communist party's rule. but I think it is not urgent problem for Chinato solve.
[i]
Zyme - #2.2.1 - 2008-04-17 07:28 - (Reply)
I can hardly judge the other European countries regarding their historical idea of China, but here in Germany the Chinese have probably never lost the image of the "Yellow Danger" ever since our last emperor ordered a painting about China with this title.
[/i]
[color=blue]
Comment:
China is the earlist culture which based on agriculture. CHina historically face severe threat from northern(in China's view) nomadic tribes. That 's why The Great Wall was built thousands years ago. Nomadic tribes had no fixed place to live , they need to transfer from one place to another place for resources like water and grass fields. The natural resources can not always meet people's demands. The struggling for land, water always leads to conflicts between different nomadic tribes.
China 's agricluture needs people settle somewhere , living his life by plantation instead of plundering. so for most part of Chinese history, China is weak and vulnerable to nomadic people. CHina was often harressed by them which lead to China be apt to isolated it from outsides. There is strict ordain to restrict economic exchanges.
THe mongolia and Manchuria aristocrats had conquered China , rule china with strong hand. Han chinese people was treated as the lowest grade people. So mongolia's invasion history have nothing to do with Han Chinese .
Other facts greatly affects Europe history concerns the Turki and Hun people's transfer from Asia to Europe. They are all nomadic people. When they are powerful or just encountering drought can not make a living on herd raising, they intruded into China plundering what they can seize . when China got powerful , it ousted Hun then Turki away from China's border.
Hun people then Turki people select western movements to make a better life there. Leave their traditional dwelling area as a desert or wasteland. Such large scale race/people transfer result in huge effects on Europe history. During Han dynasty and Tang dynasty , China's goal is not on nomadic tribes' lands but on their military threat itself. China did not expand its soils on those desert place during that period of time.
Mongolia's Yuan Dynasty and Manchuria's Qing Dynasty is nomadic people's regieme. It's expansion should not reflect Han Chinese people's characters. China also the victims of Mongolia then Manchuria aritocrats. It make no sense to blame china as aggressive power only because Han Chinese culture assimilate these two people , and establish a multi-people country (China)
"Yellow Danger" is absoultely an illusion towards China from that emperor. Prussia emperor is not well informed with Asia history. Compared to those nomadic Asian states ,middle kingdom is more reconizable and is more apt to be linked with the "Yellow Danger".
[/color]
Zyme - #2.2.1 - 2008-04-17 07:28 - (Reply)
I can hardly judge the other European countries regarding their historical idea of China, but here in Germany the Chinese have probably never lost the image of the "Yellow Danger" ever since our last emperor ordered a painting about China with this title.
Comment:
China is the earlist culture which based on agriculture. CHina historically face severe threat from northern(in China's view) nomadic tribes. That 's why The Great Wall was built thousands years ago. Nomadic tribes had no fixed place to live , they need to transfer from one place to another place for resources like water and grass fields. The natural resources can not always meet people's demands. The struggling for land, water always leads to conflicts between different nomadic tribes.
China 's agricluture needs people settle somewhere , living his life by plantation instead of plundering. so for most part of Chinese history, China is weak and vulnerable to nomadic people. CHina was often harressed by them which lead to China be apt to isolated it from outsides. There is strict ordain to restrict economic exchanges.
THe mongolia and Manchuria aristocrats had conquered China , rule china with strong hand. Han chinese people was treated as the lowest grade people. So mongolia's invasion history have nothing to do with Han Chinese .
Other facts greatly affects Europe history concerns the Turki and Hun people's transfer from Asia to Europe. They are all nomadic people. When they are powerful or just encountering drought can not make a living on herd raising, they intruded into China plundering what they can seize . when China got powerful , it ousted Hun then Turki away from China's border.
Hun people then Turki people select western movements to make a better life there. Leave their traditional dwelling area as a desert or wasteland. Such large scale race/people transfer result in huge effects on Europe history. During Han dynasty and Tang dynasty , China's goal is not on nomadic tribes' lands but on their military threat itself. China did not expand its soils on those desert place during that period of time.
Mongolia's Yuan Dynasty and Manchuria's Qing Dynasty is nomadic people's regieme. It's expansion should not reflect Han Chinese people's characters. China also the victims of Mongolia then Manchuria aritocrats. It make no sense to blame china as aggressive power only because Han Chinese culture assimilate these two people , and establish a multi-people country (China)
"Yellow Danger" is absoultely an illusion towards China from that emperor. Prussia emperor is not well informed with Asia history. Compared to those nomadic Asian states ,middle kingdom is more reconizable and is more apt to be linked with the "Yellow Danger".
[U]
Who can support DALAI lama with substantial proofs . Seems DALAI lama very urgently picture us the so-called "Chinese crack-down in Lhasa". The victims number from Dalai Lama stay to 140 for weeks.
That number suddenly appear almost on all the western media just after Lhasa and bordering area riots. That death toll(140) can be available from March 20 and never changed. A whole month passed, Chinese cruel suppression was channeled to Western Audiences. Their heavy military presence and door-to-door search for rioters did not lead to any casualty? Why dumb your propaganda now?
You can exaggerate that number to make fool of western media and western people, They are talented and enthusiastic to accept those misinformation. But please never ,never provides victims list for check. Tibet-Independence group Austrilian division made a very absurd joke there. They proived the world with a victim-list. In that list Only 40 people were confirmed died in Tibet riots. unfortunately , Chinese government had provide videoclip to prove Dalai followers make lies again. I doubt BBC and CNN can go on its disgraceful measures to challenge the principle of objectiveness and justice for media or journalist. They should know: althrough western people can not distinguish between Napel , india police with Chinese police , althrough western people are not apt to question the linkage between the pictures (include footages) and the reports, they sooner or later will get alert and disgust western media's manipulation.
[/U]
P.S
We all know BBC and CNN are not good examples in their Iraq reporting (omit this paragraph, it is not suitable here.It abuse my rights of "freedom of speach". )
[color=gree]
Britain came into contact with Tibet in the late nineteen century through its occupation of Burma. Upon 1st contact, the Tibetans historical reaction was to deny entry to the British. They had no wish to trade with Britain. So the Tibetans deferred Britain to China for negotiations. China, however, had already given British permission to trade in Tibet.
When Tibet continued to deny the British entry, Britain sent 2 military expeditions into Tibet, causing the 13th Dalai Lama to escape from Lhasa with his entourage. After a brief exile, the 13th Dalai Lama agreed to a truce by allowing British to enter Tibet and also agreed to "war reparations" to Britain.
China became increasingly worried that Britain had managed to gain a foothold in Tibet, and that Britain may annex Tibet. China demanded and received British treaty recognition that "Tibet is a part of China".
Tibet, realizing China's declining power under the onslaught of foreign powers, attempted to persuade Britain to give Tibet military aid, to reclaim "Historical Tibet", areas of Tibetan Empire once held in the 8th century.
Britain, however, was concerned about increased Russian influence in China, and feared that if Britain provided Tibet military aid, it would alienated China and drive China to a Russian alliance. Britain thus refused to give Tibet military aid, and refused to help Tibet assert independence.
In a Tri-parte Treaty between Britain, Russia, and China, China was formally recognized to have "Tibet as part of China", and Britain and Russia both agreed NOT to negotiate directly with Tibet, except through China or her consent.
Britain's primary interest in Tibet was not so much trade, but rather creating a buffer zone for British Burma.
As far as CIA, the story is equally geopolitical.
US had little interest in Tibet during WWII. However, in the 1910's through the 1930's, Tibet began to solicit and receive military aid in weapons and training from Imperial Japan.
The current Tibetan "National Flag" of the Tibetan Exile Government is actually a Japanese design, incorporating the traditional Tibetan code of arm on the fore ground, and a rising sun with radiating rays in the background (One that's very similar to the Imperial Japanese military Rising Sun flag).
Japanese weapons were sent to Tibet, and Japanese military training manuals were printed in Tibetan.
Japan, at the time, was a militaristic Empire, with a state sponsored fundamentalist Zen Buddhism Church that indoctrinated its people to combine Nationalism and Religious zeal.
This form of Buddhism as the backbone of a military society, appealed to the Buddhist Theocracy in Tibet. Tibet began to consider Imperial Japan as its "Buddhist Patron".
This partially explained Tibet's refusal to join the League of Nations, which could have helped Tibet in its "independence" drive. But with Tibet finding Imperial Japan as its "patron", Tibet was less concerned about "independence", and becoming more attracted to the Japanese "Greater Asian Co-prosperity Sphere" idea. Japan had already attempted to extend this "sphere" to Mongolia during the same time. Consequently, Tibet declared neutrality during WWII. And Tibet briefly fought China to regain its "historical territory" during WWII.
Perhaps partially due to Tibet's tie to Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany during WWII, the Ally Powers continued to recognize Tibet as part of China, which was 1 of the 5 Major World Powers during WWII. It was again, geopolitical in nature.
After WWII, Republic of China (ROC) held the legal title to Tibet as part of China. And the other nations did not question it. Tibet also did not seem to question it much. ROC troops had not made any advances to Tibet. Tibet assumed that it would continue the historical relationship with China along the "Patron-Priest" relationship. However, Tibet's assertion of "historical territory" was becoming a problem for ROC government, but ROC government was busy engaged with the Communist forces during the Civil War.
Once the Communist government of PRC won the Civil War, they turned their attention to Tibet. They were able to use their forces to press the Dalai Lama to sign the 17 point agreement, though Tibetan Exile Government claimed that this agreement was "under duress" and thus null and void. (However, this agreement is merely the agreement for setting up the Chinese administration of Tibet as a province. It was not intended as a "Treaty".)
Small number of Tibetans did not go along with the new Chinese arrangement and went into Exile in Nepal.
CIA, after the Korean War, decided to recruit these exiles by the hundreds, trained them in Colorado, and then air dropped them back into Tibet to conduct ambushes and raids on Chinese military in Tibet. CIA support for Tibetan rebels began in 1956. Rebels set up a base in Mustang, Nepal.
The goal from the CIA was never about "Tibetan Independence", but rather to harass China and force China to waste large amount of resources dealing with this problem in Tibet.
But soon, in the late 1960's, US sought China's help to aid the Afghan resistance war against USSR. China required US to shut down all its support for the Tibetans. And the CIA abruptly cut off Tibetan Rebel's funding. Under pressure from US and China, Nepalis government threatened to bomb Mustang Rebel base. The Dalai Lama ordered the Rebels to pull out of Mustang.
[/color]
[i]
@Ravin
But soon, in the late 1960's, US sought China's help to aid the Afghan resistance war against USSR.
[/i]
Afghan war began in 1979 and ended in 1989. Please changed to in the late 1970's, US sought China's help to aid the Afghan resistance war against USSR. I believe you made typing mistake here.
A_guy you misspell or misunderstand the words "Reverse -Engineering" to re-engineering.
[i]
Zyme
Many European countries have realized that Beijing has played them off against each other in relation to economical ties. So they have changed the tone and are more and more arranging themselves behind Brussels to deal with the Chinese.[/i]
It's very natural for China . When it is denied by Merkel Government , Ask other EU states help is a very reasonable choice. China did not ask France or Britain to confront German. What China ask is normal trade with EU states. I don't think China need to challenge the whole EU .
If Merkel Government's position to unite the whole EU to confront China is ok, China's position to strive for supports from other european states is understandable. In German, France , UK almost every powerful EU states there exist such thing in deomestic affairs. Within a country different parties
united to a temporary coalition to compete with its rivals for power. Does this comparable to China's case?
"If Merkel Government's position to unite the whole EU to confront China is ok, China's position to strive for supports from other european states is understandable. In German, France , UK almost every powerful EU states there exist such thing in deomestic affairs. Within a country different parties
united to a temporary coalition to compete with its rivals for power. Does this comparable to China's case?"
Not sure if I understand you correctly. The main reason for European countries to assemble behind Brussels when dealing with China is to prevent Beijing to play european countries off against each other. This way, the EU can determine the rules of the game - and not China playing with EU member states.
Are you the same guy that used the nicknames Merkel and a_guy?
Really it would help if you decided to use one single nickname, otherwise it is difficult to have a reasonable discussion.
So vote them off a couple UN committes and send Bush a stiff note demanding the US cool relations with it's fellow malefactor/totalitarian state.
Don
bitter derision ?
Well, the Chineses aren't going to be a near threat such as invading EU, but they already started their war on the net and show off an agressive nationalism ; especially since the last torch evenments ; they have become "hot" about it and their "goal" has become the subjugation of the western world. I must say, though, that these reactions are more of the youth's. I viewed a few videos this afternoon.
"but they already started their war on the net and show off an agressive nationalism "
That 'agressive natiomalism' (if that is what it is) has been on display since they invaded Tibet in 1950. Arguably much earlier than that - they were actually much like France in grabbing and forcefully assimilating other peoples who once occupied the territory now called China. Tibet is essentially little different - it was controlled by China until 1911 and fell away when the last Emperor was deposed, then was forcibly reintigrated into China.
"especially since the last torch evenments ; they have become "hot" about it and their "goal" has become the subjugation of the western world."
Just because of a few 'torch guards', Franchie? ;)
I'm all for demonizing the 'heathen Chinee' (most Americans are) but don't you think you might be making a sweeping conclusion on rather scant data here? ;)
I failed to mention the US among distinguished practicioners of the trade of forcible integration, my apologies.
But the US largely limited their land-grabs to the Mexican-American War & Florida - arguably the latter was justified by the Spanish planning to allow the British the use of Florida as a landing base from which to land to take New Orleans - something of a violation of strict neutrality.
Not to mention the Cherokees and other American Indians - tbut that is another topic.
'But the US largely limited their land-grabs to the Mexican-American War & Florida - arguably the latter was justified by the Spanish planning to allow the British the use of Florida as a landing base from which to land to take New Orleans - something of a violation of strict neutrality.'
After the Mexican-American War we also paid the Mexican government 15 million dollars (1848 dollars, 330 million today), and agreed to pay off another 3.5 million in claims by Texans against Mexico.
thanks for the chinese history sum-up
"don't you think you might be making a sweeping conclusion on rather scant data here"
dunno, but I have been reading the article that goes with the links, you obviously couldn't
Actually I did read the Speigel story, and just now re-read the story. There was no analysis of why this shift occured. The Tibetan crackdown was mentioned, China's official figure of 470 executions (and suspicions that there are many, many more) were mentioned.
None of this is anything new. So why the change? Europe knew about all this years ago and was unconcerned. Europe (in the form of the IOC) gave China the Olympics because they were unconcerned. So why the sudden concern?
A_Guy have laid out the Chinese 'claim' to rule over Tibet, which is not recent. I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning, but it is not completely unlike the US claim to rule the Mexican War territories, French claims to rule Bretagne, Provence, Savoie, and parts of the Languedoc, or the British claim to rule Scotland, or the Italian claim to rule Sud Tirol.
that's wasn't I was saying, till now we didn't see much of the chinese population opinion in the medias, this is changing, and it is orchestrated by Benjin power ; so far they filtrated the net, convenientely they reopened it for their new agenda : this is not officially the communist government that expresses its angerness but the chinese population, that's the goal !
as far "war" is concerned, seems that they assimilated the western rules, now we have to count with China for the net manipulations
I ment the article in french
franchie - #3.1.1.2.1.1 - 2008-04-17 12:02 - (Reply)
It's a pity you can not read CHinese , If you do , You can find millions of anti western media thread in Chinese forum before or after Tibet events. if you do ,you will not be picky to the so-called Chinese people's "sudden fire" or "angers" towards western media .Western media false coverages on Lhasa and CNN racist curses on Chinese people lead to such indignation. If you really want to know why I feel so angry about CNN and its allies. Check CNN renown presider Cafferty's remarks and CNN's ludicrous appology to that 2 days ago.
China government didn't want chinese netizens' fire jeopardize its once claimed friendship with France and German. But grass-roots chinese people have no such worry. When Chinese disabled girl was attacked by tibet protesters in Paris ,The portrait of a little girl using her body to protect Olympic torch impressed so many Chinese people.
I can not represent other people. I 'll say I personally object any France politician and its sport players come to Beijing. I understand my government position to distinguish ordinary france people and those people who bolster Tibet independence fiercely . I support the government's position to woo western powers , I think that's better for China in the long run. SO I back off from my postion and my sentiments to support my government, not because of politic pressure from my government or self-denial. My cultrue and my moral lead me to make such decision.
If China go on its policy like culture revolution, All the Chinese people(include Tibetan Chinese) can rebel for democarcy and liberty. TIbet situation is getting better as elsewhere in CHina, I totally disagree with western media's propoganda . If Tibetan people themselves carry out this kind of actions, it will not be a great problem, I support more meaningful autonomy in Tibet. But seems CIA and US government sponsored Nation-Democracy-Funding have some strategic target ,which have nothing to do with Human rights. Nation-Democracy-Funding's position on US crimes in iraq make its credibility in doubt.
[i]
NED is the abbreivation of Nations Endorsement for Democracy, An organization was and is mainly supported by US government (especially financially).It do something once CIA did during cold-war periods.
[/i]
No, NED is an abbreviation, rarely used except as its internet address, for the National Endowment for Democracy. Which is an group set up by both political parties and the AFl-CIO under Lane Kirkland and the AFT to spread basic knowledge of democracy and democratice practices,for example the secret ballot, canvassing, setting up polling sites and most importantly transaparent results and accurate results, anywhere in the world. They do receive funding, and have done so under both Democratic and Republican leadership. But the board that determines these grants is independent and does not report to any legislative or executive body in the federal government.
Considering China is indeed the oldest civilization then it also gets credit for being the first slave state and also since it only abolished slavery in 1910 near the end of the Qing Dynasty it also gets credit for being one of the last states to abolish slavery.
Link to the National Endowment for Democracy;
[url]http://www.ned.org/[/url]
[So vote them off a couple UN committes and send Bush a stiff note demanding the US cool relations with it's fellow malefactor/totalitarian state.]
Comment:
Many people from developing wolrd think there is no need leave two seats for Europe in UN Security Council. The world had developed after world war II. There is no need to reserve such priviledges for Europe. If a permenant member is a kind of honour , I think Northern European country like Finland, Norway are more qualified to take that seat.
I think that kind of voting can yield any positive effects. Western media possess the overwhelming edge. the 3rd world country can not fully excercise their rights . US and its Europe alliance will veto any propositions that may challenge the hegemony of western world.
I remember once case that countries from developing world make concerted efforts to kick US out of UN Human Rights Committee.
Can we assume that you are against Germany getting a third European seat on the UNSC, then? ;)
As long as Japan is excluded from UNSC, I don't mind German being a UNSC permanent member. Actually China once ardently welcome German as the bulwark of Europe to balance US hegemony. There is no problem when in Shroder government.
When Merkel took power and advocate an alliance of democractic states to confront China and Russia. When you Mr Don suggest vote China off the UNSC. What response you expect from me about German's UNSC membership. I'll say there exits widely-spread resentment. who is to blame?
I don't know have you ever checked the website Anti-cnn.com , The said strange chinese website(by this forum webmaster) records many German media's false coverages on Tibet Riots. Seems CNN, BBC and your German media encourage violence and protests on Han Chinese . What position you left for grass-root chinese people. Condemning Chinese communist government for Tibet rioters violence against them? That make no sense here. Chinese government give those victims medical care and financial supports.
They inherited their Han Chinese origin. That identification leads to they are natural victims of Western ideology.The so-called "communist dictatorship" validate the violence towards innocent Chinese people. That definitely leads to Chinese people's patriotic sentiments.
Western world sooner or later will realize that it is no use to humiliate Chinese people this way. It make all the Chinese people(including those oversea Chinese who held the same points on H.R. ) united to their government. It's not so simple as BBC or CNN described("Chinese nationalism" ) to their western audiences. As a Chinse guy , I am fully aware with such nationalism (patriotism) . It prevailed when Britain initiate opium war against China in 1840 ,It prevailed when Japan invaded China in 1937. Such sentiments is very natural ,it happened in every Britain's colonial land . unfortunately their voice is ignored and supressed by western media on purposes. I personally think there is no big deal here. Western do what they ought to do (protect western world interests).
But when you check all these things in human rights radar. It's a blur for western media and western countries' governments. Moral grounds not always be western world's territory.
It's a pity so many western world people unsatisfy with their governments and take a dim view on future. well ordinary Chinese people is one of the most optimistic people in the world. Since native Chinses people have confidences on China's progress(including democarcy, freedom and liberty). I don't think the highly exaggerated "CHina dictatorship" is a real threat to Europe. China's rising can be regarded as a threat mainly economically not militarily. China's No-interference is a policy not an attactive ideology. China's gradually democracy progress is not theory but a practice, which performed relatively well in some way.China would encourage developing country participate in UNSC instead of US anti-communist allies.
Be realistic ,Don, Russia will not support German's UNSC bid concerning Merkel Government pugnacious attitudes towards Russia . When in Shroder time , CHina and Russia will support German, and US will veto German's
ticket. Well in Merkel times, CHina and Russia will object German . US will not easily give endorsement to German 's bid. US is the deciding factor . That's the politician 's game.
I need to prompt you this ,Mr Don , it is not enough to earn US gratitudes. CHina and Russia may not possess the strength to let German in UNSC, It can derail the UNSC reform. Let German's UNSC Permanent seat dream be a dream for the forseeable future.
"When you Mr Don suggest vote China off the UNSC. What response you expect from me about German's UNSC membership."
That was derision aimed at Europe, A_guy. Europe cannot vote either the US or China off of the UNSC, but a few years ago European countries showed their contempt for the US by voting the US off a couple of UN committees which used to mean something but which do not any more. Not merely because the US was removed but because of which countries moved into the vacuum. Sudan and Libya are now members of the UN Himan Rights committee, and Iraq under Saddam Hussien was the co-chair and host of a major UN conference on Human Rights.
Why not China and Bejing, I ask? China isn't perfect but it's a helluva lot better than Saddam Hussein was!
This was self-defeating in the end, and compounding the error by voting China off UN committes would only be repeating a stupid mistake, hoping it will work better the second time.
So no, I don't advocate the Europeans who run the UN do any such thing to China.
[u]
A really misused picture appear in western media to prove "MountEverest.net" lies. Check this webpage for detail:
www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/thread-1036-1-1.html
A picture, posted in 2005 by Tibet-Independence group, revive in today's media to prove so called recent "mass execution in Lhasa".
That execution performed in 1995 against some law-breaker . They are all Han-chinese people prosecuted according to China's Criminal Law (no relation to politics).
All the well-informed people can recognize that the uniform of armed-police is several years ago. It's a pity that Chinese armed police had changed their uniform, which lead to MountEverest.net 's bankruptcy in credibility.
Chinese netizens had provide details for the said execution and other background information to that website. The administrator of that Web-site did not want to talk about it in detail. He even deleted some posts concerning this thread. Freedom of speech has its limits.
[/u]
a guy,
" When Chinese disabled girl was attacked by tibet protesters in Paris ,The portrait of a little girl using her body to protect Olympic torch impressed so many Chinese people"
I have seen that picture that upsets Chinese people on an american blog, especially just after San-Francisco procession,(I thought then that the evenment occured in San Francisco ?) and of course on a french blog ; I made then the comment that the whole image doesn't look like a "french scoop", but more of a "manipulation pic", and indeed the effect of that pic fonctionned.
otherwise, Chinese people are like American people, when a protest happens in Paris, they think that the whole country is behind, Paris is not France, it's an international capital. Traditionally the opinion protests focus in this city since ages. Mr Mainard of "reporters without borders" is an agitated brain, no serious journalists, intellectuals or politics takes him seriously. I have seen a few debates on TV with him and a few specialists of international affairs. he was fooled by the intervenants. Dunno who pays him ? I saw on american blogs that pic of him in Greece that seems ok for them, usually they are critic on the Frenchs.
now, check my blog ; I have been making a post on that subject
Sorry, but the results of these polls leave me with the feeling of watching a playground full of children running from one exciting event to the next. And I hope that the nations of Europe handle this shiny new toy better than the last one that kept them fascinated for weeks.
LOL!
i like this response to that poll the best.
Though Helen does a great job over here.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/04/fickle-lot-these-europeans.html
Sometimes it reminds me less of a 'shiny new toy' and more of the child pulling the wings off a dragonfly.
[url=http://www.bakchich.info/article3393.html]click on the links in red, the videos have english subtitles, the "anti-cnn.com" link exposes a list of sites in the US that are held by chinese students[/url]
[url=blank]
Joerg - Atlantic Review - #4 - 2008-04-16 09:53 - (Reply)
@ "Merkel" and "ANONYMOUS"
Your comments were deleted because you abused the privilege to express your opinions here by linking REPEATEDLY to some strange Chinese website.
[/url]
This website "ANTI-CNN.COM" is not a good place for netizens' sightseeing. It do provides something true ,something not appeared in western media.In short , something the webmaster of this forum thinks "strange ".
It's that ok,Joerg, I sent my posts with no Chinese website linkage. Only use the hotlink to emphasize something ,Or just distinguish the original post and my reply
[url=blank]
Moreover, please do not use the name "Merkel" or "Bush" or some other well-known personality. If you are too afraid to use your real name, then at least be a bit creative when inventing a pseudonym.
[/url]
Ok , I change my account to "A_GUY". Your forum does not support Chinese, So I can not use my Chinese name here. It had nothing to do with "..too afraid to use real name".
Since you mention the real name of the netizens , Who vulentarily publicize his name, address and phone-number for REAL-NAME CHECK. If such verifiable
information is not available, you know your request for my "Chinese Name" make no sense.
Please calm down,Joerg.
P.S
By the way ,Paterson and Joy I had give each of you good responses , unfortunately you may not find them here for some reasons. I guess if you see my replies to your posts , You may freak out . So you are lucky also.
It's ridiculous to turn sentences into links that go to nowhere.
If you want to highlight something, then you can use italics.
See explanation here:
[url=http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/faq.php?mode=bbcode]http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/faq.php?mode=bbcode[/url]
@Joerg
first, thanks for the information you provide about BBC Code. I use "italic" and "color" setting in my posts, seems it was treated as spam and was rejected.
Would you mind tell me this: you check posts then make judgements whether it is spam related, or leave this job to computer program.
If it is the latter , I am glad the computer is impartial relatively (unless webmaster impose bias and his inclination into the computer program) . if it is the former case, I really need to know can you restrict a netizen's rights of sending posts by IP-Address prohibitting. In short ,I want to know how powerful you are in this forum. believe me , ignite your fire is the last thing I gonna do in this forum.
Joerg, and the editors, runs a private website and can exclude or include anyone from the comments page, which luckily he does not, for a variety of reasons. Even including not liking the color of someone's hair or where there posting is from or even someone who continually goes off topic. Even this comment could be deleted as it is clearly off topic.
Are you sure this doesn't have something to do with wanting the convince oneself that Iran isn't a threat? It comes right after the wistling heard from past the graveyard.
Gee.....I am amazed that the euros see ANY threats other than of course the US.
At least you manage not to amaze us with a surprising point of view.
CNN'S curse ignite "nationalist fever", If you put in Chinese shoes , you get to know why chinese netizens are so angry.
Cafferty said in a TV show on April 9 that Chinese products were "junk" and the Chinese people were "basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years".
Cafferty's remarks drew indignation from Chinese at home and abroad. CNN then issued a statement on Tuesday saying "it was not Mr. Cafferty's nor CNN's intent to cause offence to the Chinese people, and CNN would apologise to anyone who has interpreted the comments in this way".
However, the network stated that Cafferty was offering his "strongly held" opinion of the Chinese government, not China's people.
[i]
JOE
Regardless of the point you have to make (where any can actually be teased out of each of your grand opus') it's very hard to take them seriously based on the unparalled sophistication in your style of communication.
I'm an older guy - let me give you a tip: it isn't about you. Unless you have a personal anecdote which is meaningful to the point you're trying to make, writing about WHY and HOW you comment is just ridiculous. It's also a sign of foolish defensiveness and little or nothing to do with the subject of the blog at all.
[/i]
[u]
Joe ,Since you did not point out exactly which point (I said ) you think is absurd. I guess I can not powerfully counteract your charges on me.
You can go on teasing me and my points as you did. I hope that maybe helpful to your self-esteem in a christian world.(Check the updating threads in this forum concerning "German consider take christian iraqi refugees".IMO you had better get rid of some radical Muslim belief and embarce christian civilization, at least be a moderate Muslim. )
As to "unparalled sophistication",Joe,if you got problem with my points please let me know . Each my point (you called "sophistication" here) plays its own role , sometimes it concert-ed with other points and facts to prove or disprove something. I do not disappoint at your understanding . I never tie my high-expectation on your understanding. on the countrary,your misunderstanding is very appreciated. It give me a chance to extend my points. Joe, Did i correct your illusion and misunderstanding on my posts? (Check it! I once laugh at your points on your imagination on USA people character under the thread "US might not be the greatest power on earth")
The last thing I want to told you is : You call you are a older guy,have intelligence and experience to instruct me with your tips. I don't want to argue with you on some stupid thing like who is older , who is more intelligent and experienced. You can go on with your self-pity process. we all know individual perception is not very reliable. According to US POLL, President Bush is the most popular president and the most unpopular president in US history. When President Bush wage anti-terrorist war, He is superstar even dwarf Washington and Lincon, When US military force troubled in Iraq, He is more evil than Harry Truman during korean war in 1952. I had point out western media 's highly biased coverages and provide so many proofs about it. I don't think poorly-informed Joe Noory's experience possess convincing power in anything and everything.
Joe, I did not exclude using my experience to showcase what China looks like now ! actually , I mentioned them several times. If you like I can go on with them. You know that was treated as brainwashed propaganda by communist party.Would you grant me another chances to testify western media's prejudice ? IF so, I would like to narrate my story, and hope you can be in touch with. [/u]
There is no embracing one belief or another, etc. There are only two things of importance.
1) Terror is terror. To take up arms against terrorist is just that, and nothing else. Those people gyrating about the US being at war with Islam are liars, and they seem to find no shortage of people willing to buy that line because the hatred is comfortable to them.
2) The point of the US confrontation with terror also involves offering a better idea: the promotion of freedom within society, an open society, and Pluralism. It is NOT about Islam, Christianity, Judaism, or anything else specifically - it's about something that a great many people can't grasp which is the freedom of the individual to practice their beliefs as they wish, and do it of their own vulition with niether or the frustration the guidance of a government entity. And that also goes for other things we call "the pursuit of happiness". Not only are none of these things (within the bounds of harming others) things that should be controlled by the state, but also guided by the state, or promoted by it.
To very stupid people, the WoT is about religion or global hegemony. It isn't. It is about the state fearing the right of the individual and the free association of people because they can't maintain the civil societies that is needed for individuals to thrive in.
The only thing you can call these societies is primitive, paranoiac, and failed.
@Joe noory
I am a Chinese guy and want to tell you something. SOmething we are familiar with but totally distorted in western media like CNN. Take a look at CNN reports, its picture and footages. www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/thread-810-1-1.html
Believe me ,I know exactly what Chinese riot police looks like. CNN's absurd coverages on Lhasa riots totally based on lies. Under those manipulated coverages, there is no doubt native European people hold negative attitude to China.
Do you understand why I told story on Tibet , Western media 's prejudice ,US strategic attempt to defer china's rise. All these things are logically linked . You need a sagacious head instead of aggressive horn.
[color=green]
P.S
video TAPE from CNN is more "instructive".
[u]
excerpt:
Western Media CNN Fabrications regarding Tibet Riots CNN used Fake Videotape
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8697
On the day of the Lhasa Riots (March 14, 2008), there is evidence of media fabrication by CNN.
The videotape presented by CNN in its News Report on the 14th of March (1.00pm EST) was manipulated.
VIDEO: Tibet monks protest against Chinese rulers (CNN, March 14, 2008)
The report presented by CNN's Beijing Correspondent John Vause focussed on the Tibet protests in Gansu province and in the Tibetan capital Lhasa.
What was shown, however, was a videotape of the Tibet protest movement in India.
Viewers were led to believe that the protests were in China and that the Indian police shown in the videotape were Chinese cops.
At the outset of the report, a few still pictures were presented followed by avideo tape showing police repressing and arresting demonstrators in what appeared to be a peaceful protest:
.
JOHN VAUSE, CNN CORRESPONDENT
CNN received these photographs from Gansu province, where there is a large Tibetan population. [still photographs followed by video footage]According to Students for a Free Tibet, about 2,000 protestors took to the streets earlier today. They were there for about three hours. They flew the Tibetan flag and called for an independent Tibet. All of this comes after days of unrest in Tibet after monks, who were marking the 49th anniversary of a failed uprising against Chinese rule. (CNN News, 1.00pm EST, March 14, 2008)
The voice over of John Vause then shifts into reporting on violence in Lhasa. The videotape however depicts the Tibetan protest in Himashal Pradesh, India.
[/u]
[/color]
With time, you'll learn that no media can be taken at face value or implicitly trusted, and that free speech, (for good or the ill that you see it), is the only way to permnit any real information to show itself.
Censorship, as completely paranoid and un-necessary as it is, guarantees that the public can never be sure of the truth. Freedom of speech permits individuals to establish for themselves what they think about reporting, and unlike the state-control model at least offers the opportunity for information to be aired and become testable.
A lot of people don't put much faith in CNN. I barely ever watch it, especially the International version. It's biased, but it's biases are somewhat clear even if they don't state them.
Think about WHY you're fixated on it. You're dwelling on it because though large parts of the world, the marginally trustworthy sources of information are rather limited. If CNN and BBC are all you've got, that is a serious sign of trouble in whatever place its' limited to.
I would add to that, that most of the international broadcasting coming out of the rest of Europe which is transmitted in English or the European languages is rather fluffy, uninteresting, and stuck on issues that don't matter a great deal to anyone outside of Europe or North America and is frequently little more than tourism advertising laced with puff-pieces about art installations and wind-power initiatives.
As for the rest of it: if you have an opinion, STATE IT. There's no need to change your name over and over (if anyone is looking into your activity, they're using IP addresses), there's no need to repeat a reference to the same web-site over and over, there's no need to copy-paste whole articles, or take the name of a published person...
When I say it looks silly, I'm not being insulting. I'm letting you know that it looks silly and isn't terribly persuasive.
If you're looking to either persuade, or engage in some "intellectual Ju-Jitsu" just start by relaxing. The internet is not going to disappear tomorrow.
You're free. The most important part of that, is that you live like someone who is comfortable with it. THEN you'll be able to make your point clearly and have those arguments taken as seriously as they deserve on their own merit.
[color=green][u]
I had told you why i use different user account in this forum. That's not for fun. Any futher discussion is not needed anymore. You seems got no problem to identify me.
It is obvious that you are not a computer expert. You don't exactly know IP-address prohibtting will lead to how much extra burden to a website. expecially when that blacklist can expands disproportionally. I think it is fair that the webmaster make the same efforts (as I once performed to publish my points )to identify my posts then delete them.
If the webmaster can easily delete my posts without any efforts. I will be a total loser. I would not let it happen for now and for ever.
I had backup my posts , If that thing happened, I will re-send them to every thread of this forum so that when someone happen to take a look at our site(atlanticreview.org) under the guidance of GOOGLE. They will hear my voice.
This is my rule ! my game! frankly speaking, I don't take pride in my misconducts here , But I need to vent my angry to western media after all. So "insulting me" is not a big problem here. If that can attract more stander-by on our arguing , It will be very helpful for me to criticize western media and western world's disgraceful records. Joe ! go!go!go!
[/u][/color]
P.S
I am glad you are not a guy manipulated by media. considering your remark on CNN. I give my respect to you on this.
@ franchie
It's a pity you can not read CHinese , If you do , You can find millions of anti western media thread in Chinese forum before or after Tibet events. if you do ,you will not be picky to the so-called Chinese people's "sudden fire" or "angers" towards western media .Western media false coverages on Lhasa and CNN racist curses on Chinese people lead to such indignation. If you really want to know why I feel so angry about CNN and its allies. Check CNN renown presider Cafferty's remarks and CNN's ludicrous appology to that 2 days ago.
China government didn't want chinese netizens' fire jeopardize its once claimed friendship with France and German. But grass-roots chinese people have no such worry. When Chinese disabled girl was attacked by tibet protesters in Paris ,The portrait of a little girl using her body to protect Olympic torch impressed so many Chinese people.
I can not represent other people. I 'll say I personally object any France politician and its sport players come to Beijing. I understand my government position to distinguish ordinary france people and those people who bolster Tibet independence fiercely . I support the government's position to woo western powers , I think that's better for China in the long run. SO I back off from my postion and my sentiments to support my government, not because of politic pressure from my government or self-denial. My cultrue and my moral lead me to make such decision.
If China go on its policy like culture revolution, All the Chinese people(include Tibetan Chinese) can rebel for democarcy and liberty. TIbet situation is getting better as elsewhere in CHina, I totally disagree with western media's propoganda . If Tibetan people themselves carry out this kind of actions, it will not be a great problem, I support more meaningful autonomy in Tibet. But seems CIA and US government sponsored Nation-Democracy-Funding have some strategic target ,which have nothing to do with Human rights. Nation-Democracy-Funding's position on US crimes in iraq make its credibility in doubt.
The Olympic boycott movement is misguided and hypocritical. Has anyone not learned the lessons of the Soviet era boycotts?
The IOC awarded the 2008 games to China at a time when it's human rights record was far worse then today. Yet the international democracy of the IOC felt the Olympic games transcend politics and China's time had come.
I for one want to see an Olympic spectacle on TV without protestors interupting events or Tibetan Buddhist monks immolating themselves for the media.
Who are the big losers in the self-righteous boycott movement? The athletes and the fans.
Anyone who spoils the Olympic experience and spirit will not get my political support.
Considering all of the negative publicity the Moscow Games of 1980 accrued and then the Soviet blocs subsequent tepid reponse to a call for a boycott in 1984. I would say that the Soviets suffered a large setback. The Soviet Union and then Yugoslavia seem to serve as examples that even minor disruptions of the event have lasting consequences for the sponsoring governments. Image for sure but primarily economic.
I was very active in the boycott movement in 1980, two of my athletes were affected, and I can say that the linking of national policy to a country's treatment of its own or any other nation's citizens is exactly what the Olympic movement claims to represent. Especially as most of the Russian officials that I came into contact with seemed more defensive concerning the loss of TV revenue and image rather than any adherence to one of Olympic principles in showing respect for all peoples(not shooting them comes to mind). Rather than simply "panem et circenses."
Plus when an Olympic games are judged a failure or distracted by negative reporting then the moral authority of its sponsors are damaged. But if to say that the US and some of the West, highly unlikely, were to boycott the Beijing Games then the loss of TV revenue would put the sponsoring organization into the red. And even though China is making huge steps in its economy such a loss of prestige and revenue would be catastrophic.
[i][b]
@Reid and Patterson[/b]
[/i]
Thanks for your active participation. I think it’s a well-worth effort to start to bring understandings, for only true understandings could avoid unnecessary conflicts.
My general comment is that: it’s true that there is a lot room to improve for the Chinese government (including on relations to Tibet but not limited) just as it is true for almost all governments (here let’s not forget our war to Iraq, etc.). And taking opportunity of the Olympics to make one’s voices heard is not wrong, but if hijack the Olympic for ones personal affairs, that is not appreciable. While making racist remarks like CNN commentator Cafferty is highly prohibited by all the honorary people.
However, what I think is wrong and unfair is the following:
(1) Making China or Chinese government as if it were evil and all of our western countries upholding human ideals is totally bullshiting. (Not specially targetting at Paterson)
When we talk about freedom of speech and democracy that we take such pride and believe that China lacks, don’t forget that Slavery remained about one hundred years after your(U.S.A) first constitution or really 150 years before now (while China got rid of slavery system thousands of years ago). And the two greatest theorists of democracy in American history: Thomas Jefferson actually defended for the slavery system in his later life, while James Madison kept quiet on the slaves issue (Dominion of Memories by Susan Dunn) which were totally against the idealism of ‘Democracy’ .
Considering how we have treated the American Indians in history then and now and the consequences on the American Indians nowadays, I think it’s only fair that we all take the opportunity in light of Olympic spirit to reflect on ourselves, because it is only fair to compare the native Indians in America with the Tibetans in China. It’s easy to criticize others yet it is hard to face our true nature. By saying this, I am not defending the Chinese government, but I am trying to defend both the native Indians and the Tibetans, and to do that we all human beings need deep reflections.
(2) Though Olympics has its political side, what makes it special is that it has its indepenent and unique spirit - and I believe that is “it makes statement by doing and by challenging oneself” - that’s what each athletic has been doing and why we have great respect to them and to the Olmpyic spirit. For that purpose, though it’s fair for other political groups to make their voices heard, it’s wrong to use politics to hijack Olympics - violence and governmental interference on the Olympic torch is absoultely wrong and uphold no human ideals. In my opinion, boycott is unnecessary either - because it is better to make one’s statements by doing and participating rather than refusing the opportunity.
[u][i]
Tibetan local government abide by a special rule(Kashag institution) which was set up by the Qing Chinese Emeperors. And Chinese military was called to enforce the rule of the Dalai Lama in Tibet from time to time, to quell rebellions in Tibet, and to repel invaders. This form of Tibetan Government even carried down into the Current Tibetan Exile government.
On these 2 basis, major Western powers recognized China's claim over Tibet in the early 1900's by treaties.
*While I do not doubt some genuine feeling of pro-independence among some Tibetans. I do not think that should be exaggerated. Tibetan society and culture is historically rife with sectarian and political fragmentations. For centuries, Tibetan political and religious institutions shifted allegiances from sect to sect and pro-Mongol leaders and pro-Chinese leaders, resulting in countless massacres and complete extinctions of Tibetan sects.
It's out of question that most of Tibetan peoples benefited from the Chinese rule in the last 60 years. Tibetan aristocrats and lama strength became the biggest losers. There is no doubt that Tibetan aristocrats and Russian royals' interests over-weigh those ordinary Tibetan and Russian people in western politician 's mind. Hatred and conflicts became the most handy tools to achieve their goals.They use Dalai lama as a chessman, and Dalai lama use western support(anti-China powers) ,western people's sympathy and religious worship to initiate the March 14 violence. They can no represent the mainstream of Tibet.
The Exile community is about 100,000 in number, and there are 6 million Tibetans in China.If all Tibetans are pro-independence, China would have a massive violent rebellion in 4 provinces.But that has not happened.
Recent protests are centered around Temples, where expectedly, loyalty to the Dalai Lama are highest among Tibetans, and where most of the more religious Tibetans congregate and live near.
[/i][/u]
@Patterson and Patrick Henry,
[i]
What’s the difference between China blocking news organization’s access in Tibet and the U.S. blocking news organization’s access to areas in Iraq or to pictures of soldier’s coffins?
Posted by John Petesch
[/i]
John,
I can find no evidence of this. This appears to be a fairy tale from you. Could you provide a link to this accusation? Do not use http when posting a full link, as it takes to long for it to be reviewed be the site moderators here.
Patrick Henry, Nashville
Posted by PATRICK HENRY at 11:17 am on April 18th, 2008
@Patrick Henry,
According to a recent poll, 60% of Amricans still believe that Saddam was behind 911. So your lack of knowledge of the Iraq pictures may not be so surprising in this context.
Posted by Shiftbear at 11:25 am on April 18th, 2008
@Patrick Henry,
During the seige of Fallujah, reporters were denied access to the area because alledgedly the military could not afford them “protection.” Most likely the pentagon wanted no witnesses to the absolute destruction of a once vibrant, albeit insurgent town. If you never heard about the ban against photos of soldier’s coffins, then you should not pretend to ever having sought evidence of anything.
Posted by John Petesch at 12:07 pm on April 18th, 2008
@Patrick Henry,
If you want info on how the U.S. military has denied reporters access to Fallujah, do a Google search for “reporters denied access to Fallujah.” I don’t think you searched very hard for evidence, as I Immediately found many stories by typing in that simple search query.
Posted by John Petesch at 12:22 pm on April 18th, 2008
@John
Ok, that was right and my accusation was wrong. I did some more searching and that was a policy a few years ago. However, I cannot see the similarity. Perhaps the Pentagon did that in order to give some respect to the families. I hardly equate that to filming people getting beat or arrested by soldiers or police. The only similarity is that is was a decision by governments.
Patrick Henry, Nashville
[b]Cafferty didn't make a clear distinction between the Chinese government and the Chinese people, he was talking about “China” the whole time, so I wouldn’t blame the Chinese for thinking that Cafferty was referring to the Chinese as “goons and thugs”. CNN claim that it always invite some arguing guys as commentators to incur debates. I really don't think racist remarks will do any good to CNN. Without credibility , CNN can go nowhere.
As to the American standards of free speech, you could call Bush an idiot, but could you call whites, blacks, or Jews idiots? As a result, we can call Dalai a wolf but we could not call Chinese as a whole bad people. [/b]
The more I hear about those rhetorics about American “freedom of speech”, the more I feel the hypocrisy deeply imprinted in the American culture. It is so arrogant and ignorant to belittle foreign leaders and governments while your president is responsible for the death of millions of innocent Iraqi people.
Speech is only free to the extent that is tolerated by a form of authority. In the U.S., the authority may not the be government, but it is the establishment of the sum of the governing machinery. That’s why Don Imus had to be removed when the powerful African Americans got angry with his racist remarks. Don Imus left his prominent position with resentiments to those baseball “rough girls” (players).
Freedom of speech in the U.S.? You are not free to hear the truth about the Tibet riots from the Western media.Anti-cnn.com disclose some naked truth about Western media's distortion coverages.
[color=blue][i]
The problem I have with much of the Western media and “pro-Tibetan” is the overhelmingly biased accusation - in the name of free speech - based on total prejudice and emotons, without substantiating the charges with evidences, while conveniently look the other way when the evidences suggest a different picture, which is that innocent Han Chinese were murdered and their livehood damaged by Tibetan rioters.
Mr. Tenzin, if you really care for the Tibetan people, you might think again if you believe the so called “pro-Tibet” are truly pro Tibet. You only need look no further than Iraq to see what a good intension will do, and that, assumes a “good intention” which can’t be said of many of the Western government. You don’t have to search far back in history to find what Britain had done in Tibet and to Tibetans. We needn't to wage a politic games in the name of freedom and democracy.
Posted by James Ouyang at 12:26 pm on April 21st, 2008
[/i][/color]
Or we can simply have a test. I'll call President Bush and say PM Harper idiots or even murderous idiots if I thought that way. I don't fear anybody knocking on my door and then sending my survivors a bill for the bullet used in my execution. I'll also say that Mao Zedong and Hu Jintao are idiots and the former being a despicable murderer of anywhere from 40-75 million Chinese between 1949-1975 via Stephan Courtois' Le Livre Noir du Communism. Let's see you do the same! That is a fair indication of which country has free speech and a free press.
BTW, as despicable as Mr. Imus's comments were he was fired by a private company, CBS, which had to honor the rest of his $40 million contract. And now a few months later he is back at ABC Radio with just as big an audience as before. The FCC was unhappy but did nothing because his comments were protected by the First Amendment. And that CBS and ABC are private companies with the same First Amendments rights as the citizens.
Plus you may want to read the US Constituion because the First Amendment simply says that this right of free speech is not to be interfered with by the government. And if you are still unhappy with the coverage in Tibet then expelling newsmen is not the best way to get your version out as Chinese news is not held in high regard in the West because of decades of propaganda and basically outright lies.
[/i](Paterson)
Or we can simply have a test. I'll call President Bush and say PM Harper idiots or even murderous idiots if I thought that way. I don't fear anybody knocking on my door and then sending my survivors a bill for the bullet used in my execution. I'll also say that Mao Zedong and Hu Jintao are idiots and the former being a despicable murderer of anywhere from 40-75 million Chinese between 1949-1975 via Stephan Courtois' Le Livre Noir du Communism. Let's see you do the same! That is a fair indication of which country has free speech and a free press
[/i]
[b]
Are you so emotional here? I admit western countries have more level of free speech & free press. There is no need to go on with a stupid test? You didn't actually call President Bush and PM Harper idiots or even murderous idiots after all. If you did so , I would very appreciate your "courages".
I hope you got enough evidences to substantiate your charges, or President Bush(PM Harper) himself will charge you for slandering. I personally think Mao Zedong made many mistakes in his later time. But "murderer of 40-75 million Chinese " is definitely a nonesense from Stephan. As to China's leader Hu Jintao , I don't know what he did wrong . So how can I go on with your tests ? I think such proposition is so childish!
Lash out fires on President HU jintao basing on western media's misinformation? I don't think it is a kind of encourage . It reflect a bigoted guy who conquered by his own prejudice. So brave or so boring? leave others to decide! There needs some kind of courages to over-ride one's egotism.
Paterson, Don't play CNN commentator (Cafertty)'s dangerous game, You absoultely got rights to freely express your point-of-views, But don't challenge people's intelligence, If you call a minority people in US as "bunches of goons and mobs" to show off your bravery, I will stand up as other guys ,warning you rationally excercise your rights of freedom speach.
[/b]
[color=CYAN]
@Ron
Insult seems SOOOO important to the Chinese. Perhaps it’s government could better avoid insult by acting above reproach.
Posted by Ron at 4:45 pm on April 20th, 2008
[/color]
[b]
comments:
If Cafferty’s racist remarks is not a big deal to you, You can call your own country and its people "bunch of goons and mobs". because we all know your country is by no means perfect.
I guess this action will be helpful to promote your own country 's democracy and freedom. Your goon or mob father will be defintely proud of your bravery.
If you think your country and people immunize from such critique.then seems nothing need to argue with you.Anyone called his/her copuntry a perfect state is really a goon (Cafferty said)
[color=CYAN]
(Ron:)
Cafferty rightfully named many GOVERNMENT sins, and was not aiming his comments at Chinese people as such. THose who accuse him of racism are guilty of a disingenuous misdirection. They would do better to distinguish the people from the government.
[/color]
comment:
Had you ever read the transcript of said Cafferty's comment? I highly doubt it? In Cafferty's original words he criticize China's product as junks and describe Chinese people "basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years". I don't know What lead to your misjudgement here. Anyone can not tell what Cafferty's remark refers to is a real "goon" .
(sorry I excersise my rights of "freedom of speech" here as many westerner told me here.)
[/b]
NPR (National public Radio ) US-based media(www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15321257)
Dalai Lama (Tenzin Gyatso) was born in an isolated semi-feudal theocracy, in which many people were still serfs on the land belonging to monasteries and big landowners.
[size=15][b]
Comment from a_Chinese_guy:
very informative , Paterson and Patrick Henry are twin in politics. They got little information on Tibet but easily make judgements. Since they were misleaded by western media for decades. there is no need to blame Paterson using double standards to treat China and US .
[/b][/size]
[i][b]Paterson:
Considering China is indeed the oldest civilization then it also gets credit for being the first slave state and also since it only abolished slavery in 1910 near the end of the Qing Dynasty it also gets credit for being one of the last states to abolish slavery.
[/b][/i]
Corey Flintoff's reports clearly indicate to Paterson and Patrick Henry that Slave system do exists in China Tibet Area until 1959. When Tibet aristocrat and lama can not stop Red China's attempts to abolish salveary system in Tibet.They fleed outside Tibet . That 's the end of slavery institution in CHina.
You are not a historian and has pethetic knowledge on history, You defintely misunderstood concept of slavery system. China is not the first slave state in history. But the first feudal system state. China's civilization prevailed during that periods , when capitalism institution got prosper, China is not a big power anymore (until now china can be reluctantly be regarded as a big power by itself). It's ridicuous to argue with you on something in the science of history. You made your own conception to fit for your rhetorics.
Maybe we can develop your nortion of "slaveship,slaveery system" this way: Your boss exploit your products without any mercy and any respect. you live a salve-like life . so we can draw a conclusion here : [B]Until you got self-dependent in your routine life, Your country will not end slavery.[/B]
I really hope you take this reply as an offense to your dignity. Becuse that may prompt you be more patient to recite our country's history.
(John: U.S. blocking news organization’s access to areas in Iraq or to pictures of soldier’s coffins?)
Reply: Perhaps the Pentagon did that in order to give some respect to the families. I hardly equate that to filming people getting beat or arrested by soldiers or police. The only similarity is that is was a decision by governments.
[color=mega]
A_guy's comment on Patrick_Henry's words
if Patrick Henry did not refine his vision in his Nashville
home,He may know what happened in Cuba Guantanamo prisons. Those atrocity by US military staffs will not be in CNN or BBC's appetites.
[/color]
Critics such as writer Christopher Hitchens have drawn attention to positions taken by the Dalai Lama that are less popular in the West, including his support for nuclear testing by India and his prohibition on the worship of a local, non-Buddhist deity in Tibet. Hitchens also cites the Dalai Lama's one-time association with Shoko Asahara, the leader of a Japanese religious cult that spread poisonous nerve gas in the Tokyo subway system.
Hitchens alleges that the Dalai Lama was influenced by a large donation from Asahara's group.
Seems Dalai lama got fidelity problem in his belief. We can forgive him ,He had to pendulate his postion to earn more respect and financial supports. I noticed he played a very controversial role in Lhasa riots.
He and his followers are the sources of western
media's false coverages on Lhasa. His death toll(140) during Lhasa riots is so absurd that even highly biased media like Reuter & BBC will not refer that data anymore (Check the most updating reports from www.alertnet.org).
BBC made so many ludicruous joke on its lhasa coverages, I highly doubt they dare use Dalai lama faked data anymore. Most of victims under the so-called "China's crack-down"(proclaimed by Dalai lama and its exiled government) had been confirmed reincarnating then coming back to their real life. That make the mystery of lamaism disappear and Living Buddha's permanency rooted in some western guys' mind.
Richard Gere and Steven Seagal fully prepare to recieve
dalai lama 's holy water and head-patting rites. "typical goons" like Cafferty said .
I don't blame Dalai lama for anything and everything.
[size=18][color=blue]
He had no bargaining force with China central government. His aristocrats will not accept Tibet status quo. while China will not let Dalai lama recover its theocracy and slavery system.
How can these bunch of lords make a living by themselves.I can not imagine ? They grasp no skill ,and are definitely not capable to fit for the morden life.
Dalai Lama had made world religion and politic journey for decades? There is no big difference before and after his itineracy.In order to focus international spotlight he had to resort to violence in the end. I don't know what else he can do? He instigate his followers to take part in the "Tibet uprise" then deny his linkage to all kinds of violence. He is a total cheater. But in my eyes he is a benign "governor" in his later life. He does not exploit its cerfs and slaves any more. He can live his luxury life on anti-communist benefactor(like CIA , NED).
I urge US government should be more responsible for Dalai Lama's future. Us and its allies should not abandon Dalai lama to woo Chinese government. China is not an important strength to counter balance USSR . So Tibet should never be a "cold-war orphan" any more. Our Tibet policy during cold war make the whole western world bankrupt in crediblity.
Best regards
[/color][/size]
[color=mage]
Chinese President Hu Jintao said on Saturday.
China's conflict with the Dalai Lama was purely a question of national unity and nothing to do with ethnicity, religion or human rights,
He spoke after the humiliation in Olympic torch Paris leg, again denouncing the European Parliament's call to boycott the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympics if Beijing does not start talks with the Dalai Lama about Tibet.
Seems some anti-communist activists lost their temper towards China. CNN commentator Cafferty blatantly made malicious racist remarks on all Chinese in the name of "Freedom of speech". China was described as a junk-state and its pepople as "goons and thugs". BBC and CNN's disgraceful act ignite fire in China. China's forum are full of Chinese netizens' protests against western media. Such patriotic sentiments mis-interpreted as "nationalist fever" by BBC-like media , which leave Mr. Franchie an illusion that appeal for justice(anti western media hegemony) is manipulated by Chinese government.
[/color]
While most of western media's propaganda carry their disinformation campaign on China. When gossip lost its bared its teeth against Chinese people.
Hu's comments, reported by the Xinhua news agency, were among the clearest yet from the top echelon of China's leadership framing the Tibet troubles as an existential threat to the country.
Uh, you might not want to post under the name of a real person. Especially as in England, where the real Simon Rabonovitch lives, has decidedly different laws concerning misrepresentation than the US.
[u]
You are absolutely right . I don't wanna to keep one name for now and ever. Actually i think it is not a big deal. You can contact me in this forum whenever you want.I'll be responsible for what i said no matter in what RSS-account. I have my own reasons for my misconducts(refer to using different nickname here). Believe me ! I don't wanna challenge someone with this littke trick .
I planed to use my nickname 'Merkel' all the time. But you know the name may leads to misunderstanding or some one's unpleasant sentiments. So i changed it to "A_guy". when some my posts were postponed for approval , I changed my account to "Two_guy","three_guy" etc, it is helpful for my posts to past the approval and increase the difficulty for our webmaster to delete my posts in what ever reason.
So i had to told you this: I will change my name from time to time.(No hostility to you here! No hostility in this case ! )
I still got my principles that I will not imitate other guys of this forum if my IP-address is not prohibitted by this forum's webmaster. Since so many computers is available for me , I doubt that measure works for me.
P.S
I happen to read a article by Simon Rabinovitch , I think its reports is not true, so I use his name here for my opinion. Simon Rabinovitch after all say something rights somewhere ,sometime.
Paterson, it's a good work for you to google search "Simon Rabinovitch", typically there exists pile of redundency in google results. How can you be sure "Simon Rabinovitch" is British person? I don't mind change my name to Simon Dandy, or Simon what. I don't care possible misunderstanding, Real-name provides me a kind of protection from post-censoring and post-deleting.
[/u]
[i]
Real-name provides me a kind of protection from post-censoring and post-deleting.
[/i]
Make it clear here , Real-name here means "A_GUY" use some person's name instead of a symbol like "A_GUY". That make him vulnerable to post-censoring and post-deleting.
I am the guy you used to criticize , Do you copy my messages? Anything i said and you think it wrong can be questioned ,I 'll be delighted to inform you something true,something you may never heard from western media.
P.S
Are you a canadian guy? I have no problem in finding something on canadian history and Halper government.
You might also want to stop imagining yourself dramatically dodging spies and use a real name, make cogent opinions in a direct manner, and not copy-paste entore articles into the comments.
Regardless of the point you have to make (where any can actually be teased out of each of your grand opus') it's very hard to take them seriously based on the unparalled sophistication in your style of communication.
I'm an older guy - let me give you a tip: it isn't about you. Unless you have a personal anecdote which is meaningful to the point you're trying to make, writing about WHY and HOW you comment is just ridiculous. It's also a sign of foolish defensiveness and little or nothing to do with the subject of the blog at all.
Just another statement on western media's prejudice
Hi everybody. I read article by cannadian guy in anti-cnn.com.
[u]
I'm an Italian living in Germany and I sincerely have to say, that most of the trusted media here (like 'tagesschau', 'faz', 'sddeutsche',...[i][b]irrecognizable here[/b][/i]) is writing articles as this cannadian did.
I was truely very surprised about the articles you published here. Not because I wouldn't know the media lies to get high ratings,no, just because I don't read things like 'Bild' or 'Focus'. I don't know if it helps you but I truly have to tell you that everybody knows they often like to exaggerate a lot. People who read that stuff DO NOT really care, they want to be entertained ;)
I really do apreciate your work here at anti-cnn.com showing the manipulated information. I wished this made many people here open their eyes and just relay on the 'trusted' media here and less to the entertaining ones or at least compare more media and recognize which one can be trusted the most. I mean, nobody is perfect nor knows everything for sure but there are really great journalists risking their life for some media just to get as close to the truth as they can. And on the other hand there are some inventing 'a good story' just to 'sell their fish'. That is the natural way in an open media world I guess.
Also I appreciate your work here to make me and others understand what you are so angry about. I think the posts here make their point quite clear. I can feel some pain when I read comments like "stupid westerns shut your mouth unless you know the truth" and similar. So I guess this makes me feel like you felt when you saw that manipulated stories.
I know there are some different thinkings on our side and your side. Like Tibet or human rights for example. So as you know western people like to care a lot about others business. Please don't misunderstand that. I don't know why the politicians care (who knows for sure) but I can tell you that the people do care about injustice or oppression of the weak. In our eyes the Tibetans have suffered for so many years with most time (maybe not always) peaceful demonstration. This video can show you how we see the situation: www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/video/video294918.html
I cannot translate all the 4 minutes but here is a short explanation to the video:
"Mao tze tung unifies china, as the communist think - Tibet feels threatened by china - Dalai Lama tries to negotiate peacefully but fails - 1st Tibetan rebellion in '59 fails too - DL flees with about 50.000 fellows to India - China destroys temples and culture forbids religion and prayers "culture revolution" - China commands over the Tibetan people to make it to a Chinese province as fast as possible - The Landscape is adapted to the Chinese ideal - Chinese people come to live isolated in new blocks, old houses are destroyed even a funk mast is positioned on a hill where a Tibetan saint is worshipped - pictures of the rebellion in '87 on the Chinese national holiday where monks protested and policemen intervene - Tibet today, the culture has gone, they are a minority in their own land, "Tibet has become a folklore coulisse for Chinese tourists" - the economic benefit is mainly for the Chinese investors - Monks who did not flee have to obey to a Chinese survey - China wants to educate them to true nationalists - the Chinese survey also says: "DL is an obedient dog of the CIA and therefore has no majority in Tibet" - Tibetan monks want to stand up again, they want REAL religious freedom"
So this is the picture we have about the Tibetan issue in your area. I don't post this to attack you or to blame you in any way. I just hope this helps to communicate in a constructive way somehow. First we have to understand each other and then we can talk. That's why I like this page.
Maybe now you can understand why it is a good way of making money for a media when they show 'poor ' Tibetans being treated badly. This goes straight to the heart of us and we want to help. Some media use this feeling to sell more, they don't care if it's true. It is a shame!
Please anti-cnn , don't be like CNN, don't support prejudice.
[/u]
[u]
Your information about Tibet is out of date. Do we need to tune our wasitwatch to Cold-war time? Do we need to initiate an ideology war once again.
Mao made lots of blunders(crimes) during cultural revolution , But not like what Western propaganda described to its people. Western media monsterize China to prove its moral correctness.
Mao's misconducts will not validate Tibet rioters' violence towards innocent people in Lhasa,Tibet. Mao or comunist party's once misconducts will not nulify China's soverein claim over Tibet or Taiwan. [/u]
[color=green]
China-Tibet dispute is solely about political legitimacy
China's claim to Tibet justifying the 1950 invasion and occupation is based on the fact that in 1279 both countries became part of the Mongul Empire founded by Genghis Khan.
By this bizarre logic the United States could claim ownership of Canada -- or visa-versa -- on the grounds that both countries were once part of the British Empire.
For their part Tibetans gloss over what a feudal society the country was with most people living lives of bonded serfdom bordering on slavery. There is also reasonable evidence that the claims that the Chinese are engaged in "cultural genocide" in Tibet are exaggerated.
But the contest in the court of public opinion between Beijing and the Dalai Lama is not about history. It's about political legitimacy today.
[/color]
[color]
What an interesting thing when you take a look at UK's legacy in Asia and Africa. You can find the shaddow of colonial British in every boiling-point area.
India and Pakistan 's Kashmir dispute, China-india border disputes, Tibet independence claim, Burma and zimbabwe 's desperate poverty and domestic disputes.
[/color]
[b]@Jonathan Manthorpe [/b]
[color=blue]
During the Yuan dynasty, Mongol Rule over the whole China (including Tibet). Although they are different ethnic people, Mongolian people , Tibetan people like Han Chinese people are all belong to "Chinese". We are a multi-ethnic people state for thousands years(no begin from Yuan dynasty). There is no big difference to US.
China's claim over Tibet based NOT merely on that history facts. China also exercised sovereignty over Tibet after that periods, The following 2 dynasties : Ming(1368~1644 AD) and Qing(1644-1911), Tibet was part of china , Tibet was part of Republic of China (founded in 1911 and retreated to Taiwain 1n 1949).
Even if Mongol rule was not enough legal justification for the claim, the following 600 years or so of Chinese rule of Tibet should be ample legal justification.
Additionally, Tibet's status as "independent sovereign" has not existed since the Mongol Rule. Jonathan,You really need to learn the history concerning Tibet and China. China's sovereign claim based on history facts not on your illusion.
[/color]
This form of Buddhism as the backbone of a military society, appealed to the Buddhist Theocracy in Tibet. Tibet began to consider Imperial Japan as its "Buddhist Patron".
This partially explained Tibet's refusal to join the League of Nations, which could have helped Tibet in its "independence" drive. But with Tibet finding Imperial Japan as its "patron", Tibet was less concerned about "independence", and becoming more attracted to the Japanese "Greater Asian Co-prosperity Sphere" idea. Japan had already attempted to extend this "sphere" to Mongolia during the same time. Consequently, Tibet declared neutrality during WWII. And Tibet briefly fought China to regain its "historical territory" during WWII.
Perhaps partially due to Tibet's tie to Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany during WWII, the Ally Powers continued to recognize Tibet as part of China, which was 1 of the 5 Major World Powers during WWII. It was again, geopolitical in nature.
What the fuck is this drivel? And who are these "people"? I could not "resist" the inclusion of more "quotation marks" as it seems to be in "fashion". The Tibetans were without a doubt in Hitler's lecherous paws during the second World War; that is how the movie 'Hellboy' starts and the legend of Eva Herman begins
[color=blue]
Chinesen gegen westliche Presse
"Chinesische Gefühle verletzt"
In Berlin protestierten mehr als 3.000 Chinesen gegen die westliche Berichterstattung. Der
Vorwurf: Westliche Medien würden "Lügen" über die Vorgänge in Tibet verbreiten. VON SVEN
HANSEN
Auch deutsche Medien hätten antichinesische Proteste aus Tibet mit Bildern aus Nepal oder
Indien bebildert, so der Vorwurf der Demonstranten. Foto: dpa
Berlin taz "Deutsche Medien: Keine Lügen! CNN: Keine Lügen!" hallt es am Samstag durch
Berlins Friedrichstraße. Vom gleichnamigen Bahnhof ziehen mehr als 3.000 in Deutschland
lebende Chinesen friedlich zum Potsdamer Platz. Sie tragen hunderte rote Nationalfahnen,
aber auch viele Deutschland-Flaggen. Die meisten Demonstranten sind chinesische Studenten.
Sie sind aus ganz Deutschland zusammen gekommen. Ihr Zorn richtet sich gegen die
Berichterstattung über die Unruhen in Tibet und die Proteste beim olympischen Fackellauf.
"Die Berichterstattung in Deutschland hat die chinesischen Gefühle verletzt," sagt Shen
Qin. Der Wirtschaftsberater, der seit 1985 in Berlin lebt, ist einer der Organisatoren des
Protests. Die Demo mit chinesischen Teilnehmern aus ganz Deutschland nennt er
"selbstorganisiert".
Die meisten deutschen Medien hätten nicht die Wahrheit berichtet. Als Beispiele führen er
und andere immer wieder an, dass westliche Medien einschließlich deutscher Sender und
Zeitungen antichinesische Proteste aus Tibet Hauptstadt Lhasa mit tibetischen Protesten aus
Nepal oder Indien bebildert hätten. Diese falsche Bildauswahl kursiert seit Wochen im
Internet als Beweis für voreingenommene Berichte. Auf die Frage, warum er denn nicht für
freie Berichterstattung aus Tibet demonstriere, sagt Shen, Chinas Regierung würde doch dort
hin Reisen von Journalisten organisieren. Auf den Einwand, dass freie Berichterstattung
doch etwas anderes sei, sagt er, dass könne er nicht beurteilen.
Ein anderer Demonstrant sagt: "Selbstverständlich dürfen nur neutrale Journalisten nach
Tibet und nicht, wer von vornherein negativ eingestellt ist." Mehrere der sehr
disziplinierten Demonstranten tragen vorgefertigte Schilder mit der Aufschrift:
"Pressefreiheit ist nicht Freiheit für Lügen". Manche werfen deutschen Medien
Volksverhetzung vor. Als ein Passant ruft "In Deutschland dürfen die Medien sogar lügen, in
China dürfen sie nicht einmal die Wahrheit berichten", bleiben die Demonstranten stumm.
Bald ertönen Rufe "Ein China für immer!" oder "One World, one Dream" - das Motto der
Pekinger Olympischen Spiele. Hinter den westlichen Medienlügen stehe die Angst vor Chinas
Aufstieg, meint eine 42-jährige Demonstrantin. Ihren Namen will sie nicht nennen. Ihre
Kritik gilt dem Wochenmagazin Der Spiegel. "Er beschreibt China als Monsterland", sagt sie.
"Wer in China war, hat aber ein anderes Bild." Sicher gebe es dort auch hässliche Seiten.
Aber China brauche Zeit, um sich zu demokratisieren. Bereits vergangenes Jahr hatte Der
Spiegel mit der Titelgeschichte "Die gelben Spione" über staatliche chinesische
Wirtschaftsspionage viele in Deutschland lebende Chinesen erzürnt. Der Artikel erinnerte an
Warnungen vor der angeblichen "Gelben Gefahr" und erklärte pauschal in Deutschland lebende
Chinesen zu Handlangern chinesischer Spionage.
Etliche Demonstranten reagieren verunsichert, wenn sie angesprochen werden. Mit
Journalisten wollen sie lieber nicht reden. Einige tragen Fotos von fünf Verkäuferinnen,
die in Lhasa in einem Geschäft verbrannten. Tibeter hatten es bei den Unruhen am 14. März
angezündet. Dass chinesische Opfer in den meisten westlichen Berichten nicht vorkamen, gilt
als Beweis für die Voreingenommenheit. Diese zeige sich auch beim Angriff eines tibetischen
Demonstranten auf eine im Rollstuhl sitzende chinesische Sportlerin beim Fackellauf in
Paris. Während westliche Medien über die Proteste berichteten, sei der Angriff auf die
Behinderte ignoriert worden. "Erst vor wenigen Tagen haben deutsche Medien berichtet, zu
den Olympischen Spielen müssten alle ausländischen Studenten China verlassen," klagt die
Flugblattverteilerin Liu Ling. "Doch auch das ist falsch." Während in London und Manchester
am Samstg Chinesen gegen den britischen Sender BBC demonstrierten, ist der US-
Nachrichtenkanal CNN der Hauptfeind. Gegen den Sender demonstrierten Chinesen an seinem
Hauptsitzt Atlanta sowie in Los Angeles. CNN wird jetzt in der Volksrepublik "China
Negative News" genannt.
CNN hatte bei einem Foto auf seiner Webseite Tibeter, die Steine auf chinesische Polizisten
warfen, weggeschnitten und so einen falschen Eindruck erweckt. Später bezeichnete CNN-
Kommentator Jack Cafferty die heutigen Chinesen als "die gleichen Rowdies und Schläger wie
in den letzten 50 Jahren". Chinas Außenministerium verlangte eine Entschuldigung. Caffertys
Klarstellung, er habe nur die Regierung und nicht die Bevölkerung gemeint, konnte die
Gemüter nicht beruhigen. Seit Ende März sammelt die chinesische Webseite "anti-cnn.com"
Beweise für Verfehlungen westlicher Medien. Jetzt erzielt auch noch ein chinesischer
Rapsong mit dem Titel "Don't be too CNN" im Internet hohe Clickzahlen.
www.taz.de/1/politik/deutschland/artikel/1/chinesische-gefuehle-verletzt/?src=SZ&cHash=0fd4b641e3
[/color]
[u]
Joe Noory - #15.1.1.1.2 - 2008-04-23 19:14 - (Reply)
You might also want to stop imagining yourself dramatically dodging spies and use a real name, make cogent opinions in a direct manner, and not copy-paste entore articles into the comments.
[/u]
[color=blue]
I don't know exactly what you are talking about here? It absolutely shift off the topic. Anyway I would like to answer your request.
first ,Your imagination of "dramatically dodging spies" could not be treated as a proof to picture me. You know your RSS-account "Joe Noory" is your real name or fake name is not for sure? I had answered such question to the webmaster of this forum . Maybe you can give me your address ,Email and verifiable voucher for check. IF not , that request make no sense at all. The post I answer to Joerg about "Real-Name" is available in this thread. I insist such request make no sense.
As an immigrant from Muslim Palestine, I understand your unpleasent recalling. When you pass the customhouse, If you don't show your GREEN CARD first ,you will be asked to leave fingerprints and meet some special treatment for Middle East Arab citizens. Something close to Terrorist or SPY Censorship.
Joe,I welcome your reply .But please show your politic wisdoms instead of arguing about some trivia things (like my real name , my citing someone's remarks). If you can not found the linkage between my citation and the thread. You can ask me for help. Frankly speaking, I get little tired of your bragging about your knowledge on US.
So many native American scholars modestly say they are not fully aware something in US politics. While you as an immigrant step up and told me something in the tune of "...all American xxxx ,all American (do) not xxxx. no one American xxxxxxxxx". You know that arbitrary allegation will not strenthen your cogency, it do drive you to the corner. Check my replys to your posts , I had point out your problem , every time get no responses from you( at least timely response).
You remember we go on with anyone topic in depth? I don't think so? Everytime you ask me for proofs , then get tire of history facts i collected, then arguing about something totally shift off our topic (like my nickname) or just play dumbness.
[/color]
[i]As an immigrant from Muslim Palestine, I understand your unpleasent recalling. When you pass the customhouse, If you don't show your GREEN CARD first ,you will be asked to leave fingerprints and meet some special treatment for Middle East Arab citizens. Something close to Terrorist or SPY Censorship.[/i]
I'm afraid you're wrong. There are several million arab americans. We are not rounded up and fingerprinted, and abused in the traditional third world fashion as you want to imagine. There is no censorship.
And if you had any familiarity with the issue, you might know that a green card isn't a residency visa, it's a work permit, and NO-ONE is required to carry an "ausweis", and the police don't run around barking "tes papiers!".
More to the point I'm not Palestinian, my origin is Lebanese. We aren't all from the place they show you over and over in the news.
Save me your fantasies. You are factually wrong enough to be called rather stupid, which if you read more carefully was something I didn't call you as you would like to think.
Unlike your fantasies, the US is a free country. People are as free to be who they are as is possible. We make this possible by being civilized and trusting, and having a deep involvement by the public in civic life. People are charitable and generous and kind in a way you are probably unable to fathom, and for every person who claims they were "rounded up" unlawfully, there are a bunch of do-gooders there to help them. But such a society does have to have rules, and have them excercised - so yes, if someone is here unlawfully, they eventually can be sent home.
I'm sorry that you live in so much unhappiness at home that you need to resent a whole nation of people, but be honest with yourself and spare me your slander.
O/T-The first time my dad took me to the bullfights in Tiajuana was also the first time I had ever crossed any border. Somehow my granddad had arranged with one of the Mexican border guards to put on a fake mustache and utter a paraphrase of one of the most famous lines in film, "Papers, papers I want to see your stinkin' papers." I thought my dad was going to have a coronary right then.
[i]Joe:
To very stupid people, the WoT is about religion or global hegemony. It isn't. It is about the state fearing the right of the individual and the free association of people because they can't maintain the civil societies that is needed for individuals to thrive in.
[/i]
[color=blue] Your points on "war-on-terrorists" is very common to ordinary westerners. I admit it stands some reasons there. But there are other attempts from Pentagon and white House strategists. Greensapn ,the ex-leader of Federal Reserve , told us something about Iraq war which was initiated in the name of war-on-terrorism. He ascribe it as something petrolum-drived.
US policy in war-on-terrorists pursue many goals. Something graceful ,soomething disgraceful. Those politicians from US think-tanks and government had great wisdoms and more profound visions than you can imagine. Do you know Taliban and Al-Qaeda was formed with great help from CIA during Afghan Anti-USSR war. Bin laden is never be a human rights advocator!
It's silly to label those "bizarre" (in your word, remember) opinion as stupid.
[/color]
Contact Us
ar-team AT atlanticreview.org
We are available for interviews, and appreciate feedback and suggestions.
Subscribe and Follow
You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW,
a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations combined with commentary and analysis.
More about us.
Follow Atlantic Review on
Facebook or on
Twitter.
Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter.
Sponsor
SUPPORT THIS SITE
or 
:Blogroll
Hot Topics
Afghanistan
Anti-Americanism
Economics
Iran
Iraq
Merkel
Polls
Terrorism
Click here for the full list of all topics.
