China arrests peaceful and nonviolent Pro Tibet Protestor

[THX_1138]

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 41 minutes ago

BEIJING - Scores of people have been arrested in a traditionally Tibetan area of western China following public calls for the return of Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, reports said Friday. Police and army reinforcements were sent to the town of Lithang in western Sichuan province following the incident Wednesday at an annual horse festival that attracts thousands of people, according to the overseas monitoring group International Campaign for Tibet and the U.S. government-supported Radio Free Asia. The reports said a local man, Runggye Adak, was detained after he climbed onto a stage erected for Chinese officials, grabbed a microphone and asked the crowd if they wanted the Dalai Lama to return. Hundreds responded with a roaring yes, the reports said. A crowd later gathered a detention center to appeal for Runggye Adak's release. Officers fired warning shots to disperse the group. RFA said about 200 Tibetans were detained following the protest, but gave no indication of whether they were still in custody. International Campaign for Tibet said additional arrests were reported, but gave no figures or estimates. A woman who answered the telephone at Lithang's police station confirmed the protest had occurred, but hung up when asked for details. "Everything is now back to normal," said the woman, who like most Chinese police officers refused to give her name. The Dalai Lama fled Tibet for India in 1959 amid a failed uprising against Chinese rule. Tibetans remain strongly loyal to the Buddhist leader, despite persistent efforts to demonize him by Chinese authorities. China claims Tibet has been its territory for centuries, but many Tibetans say they were self-ruled for most of that period. Reports said Runggye Adak's outburst came either during or just before Chinese officials spoke about the 80th anniversary of the founding of the People's Liberation Army, which in 1950 marched through the Lithang area on its way to occupying the entire region. "If we cannot invite the Dalai Lama home, we will not have freedom of religion and happiness in Tibet," RFA quoted him as saying, in a report filed from neighboring Nepal, to which many Tibetans flee on their way to the seat of the Dalai Lama's government-in-exile in Dharamsala, India. Runggye Adak, 52, also called for the release of 18-year-old Gendun Choekyi Nyima, picked by the Dalai Lama in 1995 as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama, Tibet's second-highest leader, RFA said. The boy disappeared soon afterward and has reportedly been in Chinese custody since. China says he is living a normal life but had not given details of where he is or what he is doing. Having rejected the Dalai Lama's choice, Beijing installed Gyaltsen Norbu, 16, as the 11th Panchen Lama in 1995. The International Campaign for Tibet said calls were also made for the release of Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche, a senior lama from the area who attracted thousands of followers before authorities sentenced him to life in prison in 2002 for allegedly promoting Tibetan independence and involvement in bombings that killed one person.

[THX_1138]

Fcuk you China!

[CC1981]

I wonder if in an eventual democracy situation in China, Tibet and Turkestan will break way from China/opt for independence. I can't be sure but there have been lots of reports of peasant unrest in China off late and that is the herald of doom for any communist political structure- if the peasants get mad at you, commies are f*cked. So it seems like democracy in China might happen in not so distant future (ie, perhaps in the next 50 years).

[Donny]

THX, any chance you could edit your post to make it readable for these old eyes ?? Like cutting out the code and making spaces between paragraphs ? Thanks. :regular_smile:

[varun]

THX' date=' any chance you could edit your post to make it readable for these old eyes ?? Like cutting out the code and making spaces between paragraphs ? Thanks. :regular_smile:[/quote'] lol, I think I suffer from the same problem. Luckily I'm the mod and so I can clean up other ppl's copy/paste mess. Back on topic, All this repression is going to give way to a broken up china if they keep going on like this.

[varun]

I wonder if in an eventual democracy situation in China' date= Tibet and Turkestan will break way from China/opt for independence.

I tend to believe that'll be a very likely scenario if China were to go democratic now.

[sandtest]

If we recall history, China is imperialist and colonist-- brutal occupier of Tibet and whole world without any doubt should have supported Tibet to free herself from Dictatorship of Chin-commies. Around 1913, the then Dalai Lama declared Tibet independence issuing stamps, national symbol and other things in line with a modern sovereign state. Interestingly, Outer Mongolia became independent almost during same time-- initially although it was linked to Soviet Union for few decades--- but then again became a democracy in 1992. Then came issue of of Inner Mongolia--- Chin-commies once again played their cards well and "shown" this as demography with majority of Han ethnicity and thus they annexed Inner Mongolia and brought it under occupation of China pretending that it's still an "autonomous" state. We have no business with China-Mongolia occupation-- but definately our spinelsess current government should be forced to protest at all international platforms for Chinese occupation of Tibet. This is because, Tibet's independence was recognized by neighbors such as British India with whom she has treaties and relationships during those time. Tibet continued as independent state for three decades. Therefore entry of PLA (Chin-commies brutal army with "noble" name) in 1949 -- according to UN Law should be an act of aggression into another sovereign territory. The continued occupation and exploitation thereafter bears all the marks of a classic colonial enterprise.....it desrves all condemnation that Chinese--- the hypocrite commies who claimed the communist ideology --- were and still is a land Empire with adjoining colonies. :angry_smile::angry_smile:

[sandtest]

A lot of Tibetans are not following the path of violence because their reverence of Dalai Lama and non-violence teachings. But I must admit that after departure of Dalai Lama, Tibetans--for their liberation has to take-up weapons against Chicommies occupation. Though I am very sure that as usual our spineless and idiotic governments under Communist pressure will not support them politically.

[Gaurav]

I don't think China is going to implode any time soon. It is wishful thinking on our part.

[CC1981]

I tend to believe that'll be a very likely scenario if China were to go democratic now.

Why ? In a democratic transition, especially from an autocratic platform, it is not uncommon for parts/regions of a country to demand referendum for independence/assert independence on historic/cultural grounds. This has happened in 1800s Europe and in the fall of soviet union saga as well. So a democratic referendum/cultural assessment for independence is not out of the cards in a democratic China. There are two major factors that contend against 'intact China' arguments in this scenario: 1. From what we can tell, the majority of tibetan and turkish population in China do not want Beijing's rule and there is significant discontent about the Chinese rule in these areas. 2.The nature of Chinese claim to their territorry is completely different than in most democratic nations, especially India. While Indian notion of unity exists from a common cultural ground ( and this makes a possible integration of Nepal and Bhutan into India, should their people wish it, a moral possibility), China's notion of 'Chinese nation' rests solely on the maximal extent of their conquests, held under the Qing Dynasty. Chinese influence in Turkestan has a very ancient history but most of it is through sporadic and short-held control of Turkestan and long periods of Turkestan's seperation from China. The extremely impressive Tang Dynasty(618-907 AD period)held sway over much of what is China,central Asia, South-east asia, Koreas & Siberia today, though much of the territorry outside of Traditional China and Chinese Turkestan existed on varying degrees of vassalage, some (like the far reaches of Central Asia and South-East Asia being nominally vassals (ie, pretty much vassal only in 'name'). After 900 AD, Tang dynasty suffered some catastrophic decline in the region and China did *not* hold sway over Turkestan and Tibet till the Rise of the Mongol power and Genghis Khan & his descendants conquering pretty much most of Eurasian supercontinent, almost 350 years later. It is important to note that though the Yuan dynasty((Mongol-breakaway dynasty)) was very much adopted a lot of Chinese beurocracy and culture in the courts, it remained very much a Mongol empire, even after the '4-way partition' of Mongol Empire, with its rulers pledging ultimate loyalty to the Mongol council of Karakorum. After the short-lived Yuan dynasty, which lasted less than 100 years, China did not control Tibet or Turkestan till the rise of the the Kangxi emperor 300 years after the Mongols. From 1850s onwards, Chinese power declined steadily and they lost effective control of Tibet & Turkestan again, which was again ressurected in the 1920s/30s by the communists. So effectively, to the Turks & Tibetans, Chinese rule starts sometime in late 600 ADs, ends around 900 AD and then starts again in 1650s and lasts till late 1800s and restarts again in 1940s. Since China's claim to Turkestan and Tibet come from a fundamentally 'conquisitory' nature AND the regional population is unhappy with subjugation to Beijing, it is feasable that they may break away if they get a say in the matter.

[varun]

Why ? In a democratic transition, especially from an autocratic platform, it is not uncommon for parts/regions of a country to demand referendum for independence/assert independence on historic/cultural grounds

Oi CC, I was agreeing with you there :P . I said likely, not unlikely

[CC1981]

Oi CC' date=' I was agreeing with you there :P . I said likely, not unlikely[/quote'] Doh...your avatar = me, right now. :angel_smile:

[CC1981]

Btw, i can accept China's claims to Inner Mongolia and the north-western area known as 'Manchuria'. Even though traditionally, for most of China's thousands of years old history, 'China' has referred to the area starting just below from the Yellow River(Huang He) and streching to the seas in two direction and up to the edges of the tibet plateau in the fourth. A few times it has expanded into empires penetrating deep inside Turkestan,Mongolia and the northern areas but for most of its history, the abovementioned defition is what was "China". Now, in case of Inner Mongolia & Manchuria,China has held control over these areas in far longer stretches than in Turkestan or Tibet. Plus it was the Mongolians and the Manchus who barged in, estabished empires encompassing China and made great efforts to integrate themselves inside the Chinese society. It is a bit like how the Jats arrived through the Kushan migration and invasion event but integrated completely into the fold and became 'indian'. This is not just about history being 'reset' to a previous era for the sake of 'suiting one's purpose' but rather, delving into history to give reason (if possible) behind current day events/mentality. Most manchus and inner-mongolians see themselves as Chinese and have hardly any wish to seperate from the nation due to the proper reasons. ( IMO,a credible demand for independence MUST involve two things : 1) majority desire to become independent 2) A different enough cultural and ethnic identity to justify a seperate nationhood) So in a scenario where China goes democratic and every other province/area demands independence, i'd support Beijing's claims to all these lands except for Tibet and Turkestan, where my support goes to the other side.

[sandtest]

Btw, i can accept China's claims to Inner Mongolia and the north-western area known as 'Manchuria'

India too has no problem with Inner Mongolia--whether it's Chinese or independent not our problem. But definately Tibet should be an area of concern for us...not only that Tibetans are Dharmic(read Budhism) but the very fact that we will be having considerable leverage over Chincommies to play Tibet card whenever they take overly negative stand in Kashmir due to Aksai under their control. But problem is we have spineless government in centre surviving at the mercy commies...these communists prefer China over countries own interest. And the things are only getting worse.....recently India refused Tibetans for protesting Beijing Olympics. i mean why the fack we care communists, we should provide Tibetans a platform from where they can protest and show the world that they need a seperate team to represent in Olympics as sovereign Nation. At least this will bring immense media attention.....but facking government everytime bows down to communist pressure...:mad:

[CC1981]

But problem is we have spineless government in centre surviving at the mercy commies...these communists prefer China over countries own interest.

Single biggest reason why i've never voted communist and never will vote one. They really got their heads up their ar$es.

i mean why the fack we care communists, we should provide Tibetans a platform from where they can protest and show the world that they need a seperate team to represent in Olympics as sovereign Nation.

The answer is simple : China is too powerful at the moment. Its not just about pure military, its about the strings China can pull with its economic weight too, ya know. Right now, the whole world is in a bit of 'appease China' mode because China is pretty much the factory of the world. And many in the west sees the terrible reality of making a militaristic communist china so powerful, which is why all of a sudden ( read: Bill Clinton onwards), the Americans and the EU has been a whole lot friendlier towards India. Ideally, i'd prefer an independent tibet with strong military garantee form India but in reality, a much more workable solution would be partition of tibet if it ever came down to that.

but facking government everytime bows down to communist pressure

This is why India is f*cked- our government is simply too weak and too devolved in power to do anything. At the very least, we should try and promote SAARC as much as we can, since a strong subcontinental link is critical to India's overall future.

[sandtest]

Ideally, i'd prefer an independent tibet with strong military garantee form India but in reality, a much more workable solution would be partition of tibet if it ever came down to that. .

I agree, some "extra" senile strategic thinkers believe that Tibet is fully in the claws of Communist China for a long time and thus it is a lost cause. However, a few in India still believe that India should be ready to change the equation as and when a disruptive opportunity presents itself --- And nurturing, bringing forward a successor to Dalai Lama should be initiated secretely by India in this regard. IMHO-- after Dalai Lama there won't be any true, influencial leader for Tibet cause who can provide India a startegic leverage. All they have are highly mediocre Richard Gere's with no or very little political and heritage credibility in this field. I strongly believe that disruptive things just happen and they can be even "engineered" sometimes. Otherwise who would have thought that the King of Nepal the higly revered man who commanded respect from all sections of society and rightfully belonging to the ascendence hirarchy --will be wiped out along with his full family in one "silent" night by an intoxicated crown prince?? And those Maoists pigs with support of Chincommies and moral support of western theologians and evangelical supporters will next "eliminate" the only Hindu Kingdom itself. These evangelical vultures are now now actively eating away Nepalis Dharma and converting them with will....this was never possible under King Gyanendra.:angry_smile:

[CC1981]

And those Maoists pigs with support of Chincommies and moral support of western theologians and evangelical supporters will next "eliminate" the only Hindu Kingdom itself.

I actually have no problem with the only hindu kingdom being eliminated- i am secular, so i prefer secular democracies like India/US/Canada etc.

However, a few in India still believe that India should be ready to change the equation as and when a disruptive opportunity presents itself --- And nurturing, bringing forward a successor to Dalai Lama should be initiated secretely by India in this regard. IMHO-- after Dalai Lama there won't be any true, influencial leader for Tibet cause who can provide India a startegic leverage

IMO, India's leverage is water-rights issue and China's clear violation of water treaty protocols by planning to dam the Brahmaputra in Tibet. That is an event which India can play far more efficiently than Tibet's rights scenario- only time Tibet's rights scenario is a viable option is when China transitions to democracy and different regions would want indepenence ala Soviet Union.

These evangelical vultures are now now actively eating away Nepalis Dharma and converting them with will....this was never possible under King Gyanendra

I agree...but at the same time, Nepal kinda screwed itself over their even more backwards interpretation of Hinduism and particularly the 'devi' cult happening where they put incredible pressures on a child to play a God that millions worship.

[sandtest]

I actually have no problem with the only hindu kingdom being eliminated- i am secular' date=' so i prefer secular democracies like India/US/Canada etc..[/quote'] Now that western brand of "secularism" is what I will call a result of western media-psy-ops which has been fed in our minds so deeply that we never care to explore Hindu Dhrama and what really a Hindu Rashtra means and how it can possess a threat to any other belief. Well, the topic is Tibet and if I will start giving discourse about Dhrama, it will be dragged in different context...may be some other time we will discuss religion and how it is different to Dharma. All I will say is Dharma can NEVER be communal --- Because its SANATAN. Now coming back to Tibet issue and why it is important is for obvious reasons. Tibet is not given much importance by West as compared to Taiwan is because although West pretends to be "secular", their top policymakers and intelligence agencies think in "deeply" religious way to propagate their own religious supriority and salvation only through Jesus cr@p. This is a world known fact that Tibetans under Dalai Lama have deep roots in Budhism and if Tibet is allowed to free herself from Atheist-communist Chinese it will become another influencial school of thought in Dharma fold....voluntarily conversion of western celebrities like Richard Gere has only alarmed them to the extent that if Tibet will become free to practice and preach Dharma, then America's method of own soul-harvesting and conversion-gatherings in North-East India and adjoining areas will become dead. In Tibet issue there is a lot to be learn and seen by Indian patriots and we must understand that if Islam is a visible poision then Evangelical Christianity is a slow-poison, so we have to be careful with later when we are dealing with Amreeka bahadur.

[CC1981]

Now that western brand of "secularism" is what I will call a result of western media-psy-ops which has been fed in our minds so deeply that we never care to explore Hindu Dhrama and what really a Hindu Rashtra means and how it can possess a threat to any other belief.

If you were aware of your own history, you'd know that it is not western brand of 'secularism' but very much an indian brand of secularism that was destroyed through certain invasions. Ancient India wasnt a hindu society -it had evolved past the hindu society of mahabharat/ramayan and was a secular mix of hindus,jains,buddhists, carvaka and many other schools of thought. And yes, i am opposed to the concept of a hindu rashtra. Just as much as opposed to the idea of a christian/muslim/jewish rashtra. That is a rather medieval mode of thinking that i'd like to put behind us.

In Tibet issue there is a lot to be learn and seen by Indian patriots and we must understand that if Islam is a visible poision then Evangelical Christianity is a slow-poison, so we have to be careful with later when we are dealing with Amreeka bahadur.

True. But hinduvta of the RSS/Shiv Sena/VHP type is just another brand of poison. You don't fight poison with poison.

[sandtest]

Ancient India wasnt a hindu society -it had evolved past the hindu society of mahabharat/ramayan and was a secular mix of hindus,jains,buddhists, carvaka and many other schools of thought. .

You have unknowingly mentioned a very important aspect here that validates the evil lying within Judeo-Christian-Islamic faiths and ground reason for conflicts/riots in India in 20th Century. During ancient India not only there were Jains, Budhists but within Hinduism there were many darshans -- philosophies differring with each other. For example say -- (1) Sankhya by Kapil (2) Vaishehshik (3) Nyaya (4) Yog Darshan (Patanjali) (5) Uttar and Purva Mimasa (6) Charvak Mat etc. Not only above, the Sagun Bhakti followers like Shaivites (Shiva bhakti) and Vaishnavaites (Vishnu Bhakti) differred a lot with each other. But stil there were NO RIOTS/ VIOLENCE although we were having faiths as diverse as Hindu pantheon with all it's darhans and bhakti movements and parallel systems like budhists, jains. Question is--- were they "fighting" with each other when they differred ? Yes, definately they were fighting with each other-- through debates, through lengthy philosophical discourses, arguements and counter-arguements from various darshans. For example Advaitins use to challenge Budhists in open debate about their darhsan/belief and the one who is defeated use to accept the darshan/philosophy of other. But things changed rapidly after invasion of Islam-- because foundation of this self-righteous religion is based on violence and invasions. That is why I said "countries" like Tibet needs to be protected because they are very much in the Dharma fold. Co-existence of Hindu and Budhists school of thoughts will only strengthen Dharma while co-existence of Islamic and Evangelicals in India will weaken Dharma. If this doesnot become clear to ordinary modern Indians i.e. we commons then we are to blame ourselves.

True. But hinduvta of the RSS/Shiv Sena/VHP type is just another brand of poison. You don't fight poison with poison.

When RSS came in existence do you have any idea? Of course you have reasons to hate RSS-- because media psy-ops and some Sangh leaders own behaviour has totally confused modern Indians, result is loss of support of next generation youths. Needelss to say at the end Dharma is loosing. Anyway, IMO, RSS came in existence after Hindus realized that treating Poison of Islam / Evangelics with noble honey of Dharma is NO MORE POSSIBLE. It came in existence at the near ending of British empire. Since Islam / Evangelics are 180 degree opposite to noble Budhism, Jainism etc. of pre-Islamic times. Islamists cannot be satisfied by debating philosophy because Islamists like religions are based on "fearing" Allah. There very concept of belief lacks any philosophy. Therefore, treating poison with poison should be given a chance. Hinduism is free to evolve -- it takes forms time to time to protect Dharma. Do you see RSS from the image of people at present running the organization??...if that is the case then your unedrstanding is OK. But if you feel that ideology of RSS is flawed then we should agree to disagree. Although I am strongly against present day "self-proclaimed" Hindu protector-leaders of Sangh Parivar for some very different reasons NOT beacuse they are against evil of Islam and Evangelicalization but for some very different reasons.