Also, the idea that China (one of the more polluted countries) preserving the beauty of the Tibetan region by modernizing it? The same modernization that leads to the aforementioned pollution. That’s a tough sell.

Just an observation.

Do you know what government I live in? For all you know I could be a citizen of China. I’ll be honest, I’m a U.S. citizen. But the U.S. government doesn’t even spread Tibetan freedom messages. It isn’t even a political issue here, and most U.S. citizens probably don’t even know or care about the issue. However I DISAGREE with much of what the U.S. government and military does, and I protest those things as well.

You on the other hand probably have a justification for the Chinese occupation of the Tibet region, like Kaibo, that China does good things for the region. Well guess what? The U.S. government uses the same justification for what they do all over the world. Adolf Hitler had his justifications for the holocaust. So I ask you, which one of us is brainwashed by their government?

It certainly is not acceptable for oppressors to be let off the hook without independent international observers to give the “all clear” but of course the current result for Tibetans is better than any historic records can suggest prior to Maoist PRC intervention.

The world cites the degradation of Tibetan lifestyles and cultural heritage as the reasons for independence but the Chinese have pumped millions into the region for restoration work and have deemed and acted accordingly for the culturally significant heritage as worthy of protection.

It could be argued also that the Chinese have opened up the Tibetan interior with the rail network for ulterior motives and that would be correct. They have of course got planning for development which would include demineralization of resources. Also it can be factually stated that the Tibetan landscape and people-scape will be changed forever by the resultant influx of Han Chinese and international travellers as well.

That however can’t be cited as reason enough to discredit the PRC leadership of their position or right for overseeing the Autonomous Tibetan Government because otherwise; let’s shut the door in France and across Europe, let’s close the borders in my homeland of Australia and establish an American only society in the USA, etc.

That of course according to international humanistic directives can’t be done because those borders were ordered to be open and influxive for internationalised multiculturalism for both refugee status and for integrally “open society” status.

Therefore, there indeed must be an ulterior motive for the Tibetan issue to be cited and effectually “primed” through CIA involvement and recruitment of the Dalai Lama and for the integration and incorporalisation of “His Holiness – the Dalai Lama” (holiness?) into Catholic communities around the world and ecumenically promoted by the Pope himself as worthy of all acceptance.

Even some informed Catholic Priests got their backs up over that ecumenical issue in the “Holy See”.

The Dalai Lama is not the Head of Tibetan Buddhism because his sect was feudalized and disputed between leaders or Lama’s of other Tibetan sects for centuries.

The world needs the facts as presented by Michael Parenti – not the deceitful ill-informed lies of biased media reporting.

The young Tibetans themselves have a right to be de-isolated from the rest of the world with transport and infrastructure development and to have the right to travel and to explore the world in all its beautiful intricacy.

Anyone with the sense of freedom can understand that knowledge can liberate the soul from a dark past of lies and deceit, as taught and applied under Tibetan Lamism.

I trust you read Michael Parenti.

I am opionated – he is an unbiased reporter of historical and political facts.

They are the “facts” I suggested but of course there are other writers and reporters with differing views.

I have been in the PRC for 4 years and it has opened my eyes to the west and the propaganda they too have purported to be factual.

You might also want to get the facts on Sarkozy – a converted Catholic from a Jewish lineage. He has recently made a power grab to be the self appointed “President” of the EU.

The Papalcy has had a long term battle with the PRC leadership for autocratic dominance of Catholics in the PRC and personally I find the “cultist” religious rhetoric of Catholicism to be distasteful, particularly when they are so-called “Christian” by ill-informed media around the world.

There is a distinct difference between Christian and Catholic. Even a Catholic will tell us that. Just look at National Statistical data – both are segregistically nominated.

There is an evil trilogy that is one to watch and hold any would be national or world leadership accountable for
and that is one that combines political, capitalistic and religious trilogical dominance over the masses.

That is partly what both Engles and Marx addressed in their campaigns and that is what led to the “dark ages” across Europe and has dominated Tibetan “dark ages” for centuries and also one that has been proposed by Sarkozy across the EU.

In his latest address, President Hu Jin Tao has stated that the PRC is in the beginning stages of forming this nation of China into a Socialist Republic.

Surely one can gather credentialed support of a nation’s government from the majority of its’ subjects and that is where having resided in the PRC for a lengthy period of time, there is conclusive evidence that the majority of Chinese both love and support their government.

Can the same be said about many of the goverments of the western developed nations? I daresay not!

In summary, I am not a supporter of one or another but an opinionated individualist who has researched and base my opinions on findings.

Truth must be based on evidential facts and if the latter state of humankind is better than the former state then I hope that the hand a truly loving and liberating “God” has had influence.

Humanism will always be flawed and subjectively critisized either justly or unjustly but there also needs to be governmental judicial rights and control because otherwise society is indeed unstructured and primed for disaster.

Freedom is for the subjected to serve willingly under the hand of judicial reasoning; not subjectively under enforced reasoning.

I suggest that every religion or idealistic belief structure, every capitalistic state and every political sphere has both its’ positives and its’ negatives because we the human subjects on planet earth are indeed imperfect in many ways.

Happy New Year Matymo

However you say “find out the real facts”, but what makes the info at the links you’ve suggested any more factual than the link I posted? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe any nation is without fault. Especially the USA. The search for truth and further understanding of the issue is a big part of why I posted in the first place. Thank you for responding and revealing the other side of the argument.

I will never buy a Fiat, not because of its commercial, but I have more trust in japanese cars.

作者：王小东
——在某电视台作抵制家乐福节目纪实

今天（2008年4月23日）晚上6点钟，去某电视台（为了不给那些请我去的电视台工作人员惹麻烦，我只能隐去该电视台的名号）作关于抵制家乐福的节目。这档节目由一个非常著名的电视节目主持人（为了不给那些请我去的电视台工作人员惹麻烦，我也只能隐去他的姓名）主持。

电视台请来了那个在昆明家乐福反对抵制而被砸了一矿泉水瓶的人，也请了一个在北京中关村家乐福举过牌子示威的年轻人，后来又上来了一个发起在MSN上挂红心的人。一开始是他们在那里辩论，我在控制室看电视屏幕。控制室里除了我之外，还有三个所谓的“知识分子”嘉宾，看来他们互相之间都认识，在那里以极其不屑的口气谈论抵制家乐福的行动。其中有一个大学教授是被分配到支持家乐福一方的，他老大的不愿意。我不认识他们，一边看电视，一边听他们在骂抵制家乐福的人们。

大约过了50分钟，第一阶段的节目录制完了，节目主持人叫我们上去，我们就上去了。上去了才发现我这边还有一个长得非常漂亮的女孩，后来知道是一个歌手，心里稍感到一丝不那么孤单了（因为那个大学教授明明是站在他们那边的，只不过是被分配过来的，坦率地说，与“内奸”无异。当然了，只要是公平辩论，别说他们三个，就是三十个捆到一起，也不够我收拾的，但人毕竟是怕孤单的，所以有个这么漂亮的女孩站在我这边，心理上感觉好一点）。节目主持人好像对我还挺客气，那个漂亮女孩说完了，就叫我说。我想说什么，是在看第一阶段的节目时就想好了的。我看到，那个到中关村家乐福举牌子抵制的孩子很老实，有些明摆着的歪理他也反驳不了，当时我挺替他着急。现在我有发言机会了，我想首先就是帮他呈请一些似是而非反对抵制的歪理。我开始说：反对抵制家乐福也没有什么不可以，但反对的技术含量要高一点，后面是陈述对于几条最常见的似是而非的反对抵制理由的反驳。

我在这里首先告诉大家，你们已经永远不可能从电视屏幕上看到我对于这些歪理的反驳了。但我在这里可以把这些反驳写出来。这些反驳全都不是我的发明，有的是我从网上看到的，有的是我在开研讨会时听法学专家们，如中国政法大学的成晓霞教授等讲的。

（1）驳斥“家乐福没有罪，法国货没有罪，所以不应该抵制”。我说，不管家乐福有没有过错，不管法国货有没有过错，抵制家乐福，抵制法国货都是可以的。抵制的目的在于a)表达一种意见，让它容易被该听到的人听到，b)对法国政府施加压力。针对有些人说“你们有能耐为什么不到法国大使馆去示威”的叫板，我说，为了上述两个目的，我们完全有权选择最方便的抵制对象。一个国家的A部分冒犯了我们，我们也许够不着那个A，但我们完全可以选择那个国家的B部分进行报复，以对那个国家施加压力，这就是国际法中“交叉报复”的原则。WTO就明确认可在国际贸易关系中采用这个原则，这个原则用到其它国际矛盾中也没有什么不可以。如果说，交叉报复的原则不好懂，那我就用更浅显的例子说明。我问主持人，北京奥运火炬传递与中国的西藏政策有没有关系？主持人说：没有关系。我再问支持人，金晶能不能够决定中国的西藏政策？主持人说：不能。那么，我问，他们为什么通过破坏奥运火炬传递、袭击金晶来抗议中国的西藏政策呢？可见，这是国际通行的方式，你们老说“和国际接轨”，为什么就不接这个轨呢？对于我的这个说法，那个在昆明被砸了一瓶矿泉水的人感到抓住了机会，他说，如果要是这么说的话，所有的人都可以抵制家乐福，就你王先生不能抵制，因为你跟法国那些破坏火炬传递的人是一样的。这当然又是一个似是而非，不易被这些年被所谓的温文尔雅洗了脑的人们看清楚。我把它列为（2）来反驳。

（2）驳斥“因为法国人抵制奥运火炬传递是错的，所以我们就不应该跟他们一样，不应该抵制法国的任何东西”。我说，你的这个说法很荒唐，比如说，一个人无缘无故打了你，他当然是错的，于是我就说，你绝不能打他，你打他不就也错了吗？如果是这样，那你的正当防卫的权利都被我剥夺了，你被打死都没话说了，因为正当防卫多半也是打人啊！那个昆明人说，可家乐福并不是那个袭击金晶的人。我说，你这个又是似是而非的理由，刚才那个抵制家乐福的小伙子已经说过这个意思了：现在的问题根本就不是中国的张三对法国的李四的问题，而是中国对法国的问题。

（3）驳斥“家乐福百分之九十的货都是中国货，百分之九十的员工都是中国人，所以抵制家乐福是伤害中国供货商和中国员工”。我说，首先，大多数人抵制家乐福的目的只是一种意见表达或向法国政府施压，并没有想整垮家乐福，所以“伤害中国供货商和中国员工”说并不成立。另外，就像很多帖子说的那样，即使真的是把家乐福整垮了，中国有的是其它大型连锁超市，中国的供货商可以到那里去卖货，中国的员工可以到那里去就业。

如果我可以这样把道理讲下去，对方也同样的以道理来反驳我，那么一切就都太好了，大家就可以等着看这场精彩的辩论了。然而，我还没有说上两句，对面那个剃了个光头，看上去十分凶狠的家伙（我好像听见他们，包括主持人，叫他“华杰”，好像说是个搞电影的，跟电视台的这些人都很熟）就开始向我叫骂了：你这是讨政府的好！你们就干抵制家乐福，别的你们敢抵制吗？这个颇为凶狠的光头最为精彩的一句就是： 现在大多数人都爱国，爱国是强势，你爱国是站在强势一边，作为知识分子，你爱国是你的耻辱！他反复地在叫骂这几句，我几次停下来，几次开始，我看着主持人，这位极为著名的电视节目主持人毫无反应。我终于明白了，我想说的这些道理，虽然法学专家们明白，虽然爱上网又关心时政的网友们明白，但电视机前的许多观众很可能并不知道，而 他们害怕，他们极为害怕电视机前的观众明白我说的这些道理。所以他们干脆把局给搅了，让我讲这些道理的画面根本播不出去。既然如此，我也不客气了，我今天所能做到的，只是要让在场的二十几位观众知道，这些所谓“自由派”的流氓，并不时那么占理，我不能温文尔雅，因为如果我温文尔雅，那连在场的观众也只听到了抵制家乐福是在讨政府的好，知识分子赞同抵制就是在既讨政府的好又媚俗，爱国是知识分子的耻辱。于是，我也大声地反驳。

我在中国和世界其它国家——许多欧洲国家，中东国家、美国、澳洲——无数的电视台做过嘉宾，在某些电视台作过多期辩论会节目，得到过无数好评，就在前天晚上，我还在自己家里接受了西班牙一家电视台和今天某电视台同一个主题的采访。我在与电视台合作时，一个基本的原则就是在尽可能独立表达自己的观点的同时，配合电视台的工作人员，不坏他们的事。因为我知道，做一台电视节目和我自己写一篇文章不一样，它里面凝结着许许多多人的劳动，我不能因为自己一时的痛快，就坏掉这么多人的劳动。然而，这次当我看到电视台的节目主持人和其他工作人员对于那个光头狠角色明显地破坏这台电视节目的做法无动于衷时，我认为自己也就没有必要为了维护这台节目而操心了。我确实很愤怒，我看到了这些口称“自由”的人，其实是一群心理极其阴暗，玩弄阴谋鬼计的人类渣滓。他们害怕真理，所以绝不会让你把真理说出口，决不肯让被他们愚弄的公众知道这个世界上还有其他的道理。 自由主义是骗子、恶棍的最后的避难所——这句话应该这么说才对。

（4）驳斥“大多数人爱国，知识分子爱国就是傍强势，所以爱国就是知识分子的耻辱”。在现场，我的反驳已经不可能以平静的口气说出，我只能喊叫。在这里我可以平静地写出我当时喊叫的那些话：你们不是讲要民主吗？民主难道不是多数决吗？要是按照这个道理，那民主决策不就是傍大款，不也是一种耻辱吗？世界上竟然能有这样无耻的逻辑！这就是这些所谓的“自由派”既愚蠢又无耻再加上流氓的逻辑。

（5）驳斥“抵制家乐福起不了什么作用，法国总统的道歉，主要还是那二百亿欧元”。这不是那个光头流氓自由派讲的，这是他们那一方一个相对还懂点礼貌的人讲的。他是针对我说：“抵制家乐福起到了给法国政府施压的预想作用，法国总统不是给金晶写了道歉信，并由国民议会议长亲自送来了吗？”对于这个问题，我的回答是，那二百亿欧元的订单早就给他们了，不是也没有能够制止他们包括政府在内的支持藏独，破坏奥运火炬传递吗？法国总统的道歉信来得何其晚也，完全是在中国各地群众抵制家乐福之后，《纽约时报》也评论：法国总统的这次“叩头”是因为法国在华商人的施压。如果没有中国民众的抵制，这些商人会向他们自己国家的政府施压吗？

我想澄清的几个问题基本讲完了。最后我要讲一讲在这个过程中其他的感受。我认为那个到中关村家乐福门前举牌子的年轻人很面。他一言未发，可能是被这种场面吓住了，有可能还在心里埋怨我这个“义和团”给他丢了脸（那个光头流氓自由派就在喊：你是民族主义的耻辱，我回答：你是人类的耻辱——这个流氓自由派实在是太卑劣了，说他是阿米巴虫都高抬了他，都是对阿米巴虫的一种侮辱）。我想告诉那个年轻人，如果你这么想，那你就错了，你就上了套了：他们告诉你，抵制家乐福的都是“义和团”，都是“愤青”，所以你就特别怕别人把你看成这样，你就特别要作出儒雅的样子，你把自己的手脚都捆起来了，他们就怎么耍流氓都可以了，这就是他们想要的。我告诉你，你完全用不着这样自卑，今天中国的“义和团”，今天中国的“愤青”，多数出自中国乃至欧美的名门大学，流氓自由派们没有任何理由自以为自己有什么知识上、智力上，道德上，乃至文化修养上的优势可言，他们之所以还能摆出这幅架子，只不过是他们还占据着话语霸权，而这个话语霸权，恰恰是他们在装蒜指责的政府给予他们的。我们用不着有任何知识上、智力上、道德上，乃至文化修养上的自卑。

我并没有忘了那个长得非常漂亮的年轻女歌手，虽然我没有记住她的名字。当然，她在讲道理方面不可能比得上我这个久经考验的老战士，但她的美貌，如果这个节目能够播出来的话，一定会给她的话增加说服力。但最重要的还不是她的美貌，而是在那样一种矮化抵制家乐福的中国人的氛围下（其实，我在控制室看得很清楚，在我们这些所谓的“知识分子”和这位女歌手还没有上场的第一阶段，这个节目的这种氛围就已经定了调子了），她勇敢申明了自己支持抵制家乐福的观点。不要以为在现在所谓“爱国强势”的情况下，这一点很容易做到。这一点并不容易做到，因为即使是在今天，也很难就说有什么“爱国强势”，而在当时那个小环境的氛围中，爱国明明是弱势，甚至被那个光头流氓自由派明确地骂成是“耻辱”。对照一下那位曾经勇敢地在中国存家乐福据爱国牌子的小伙子，在第二阶段，他没敢站出来发一言，我们就更知道这位女歌手的勇敢了。我曾非常反感“阴盛阳衰”的说法，但在最近我曾参加的一系列与那些汉奸（这个词一点也没有冤枉那些流氓自由派）的辩论中，我反复地看到女孩子非常坚决勇敢，而男孩子却畏首畏尾、瞻前顾后。中国的小伙子们，你们总不能老是让我们这些老头子带着女孩子冲锋陷阵，你们却躲在后面吧！你们要站起来啊！

然而，我这个老战士也还没有死。老战士永远不死，他只是逝去。

I want to justify the Chinese people’s action. During this wave of global criticism against the Chinese, it seems that censorship or autocratical sovereign are monopolies of China. Well, it is NOT! No offense to the American people for the following examples. Bush government started war on iraq while 63% Americans prefered to seek a diplomatic solution to the problem. Americans that criticise the war are sometimes considered unpatriotic, some even lost their jobs because of their anti-war view! These things happen in the pro human rights USA, too! I don’t like being kept in dark by the government, but thats what governments do in every country!!! Criticising China to such an extent is stupid.

Let’s don’t forget patriotism. It is dignified thing for people to be patriotic about their own country. So does the Chinese! They love their country and don’t want part of their land be separated. That’s why they are trying to make a sound!

I read this in the news and just have to laugh at this:

Niquet said she expected Levitte to express “France’s incomprehension” that a “very violently anti-French” protest movement would be allowed to swell in China.

What does the French want? Freedom of expression but anti-french protest not “allowed to swell”?

France has had many billionaires in their countries gaining riches from selling regular products from soap ,shampoo and bags for IMMORAL profits.

Their public relation people should get a medal for brain washing.

Gaining knowledge from last jewelry show in switzerland french dealers has spoken again and again that their main income producing countries are the emerging market, china and russia, while looking for business in america is getting EXTREMELY difficult.

Thus I say anti france sentiment in China should really be a cause of worries for the france leaders.

(China has contract deal to buy france air bus worth 4 billion usd)