“There are no underground churches in China”. I know for a fact that this is untrue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_house_church
http://www.opendoorsuk.org/article_china_truth.php

I am not against China. I respect their ideology and soveringty. But I do not respect fascism and deniel of human rights. (So Weither it is really a “people’s repulic” is exactly what’s important.)

Pointing the finger at someone else’s wrong doesn’t make your own countries wrongs disapear.

In the glory days before Chinese re-occupation, Tibet was a paradise: no tv, no radio…no non-Buddhist schools, no hospitals, no postal service, no roads or trains or buses…

(Chinese ambassador to the UK) Ms Fu said in the Sunday Telegraph that Tibet is “loved” by the Chinese.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7344895.stm

Reminds me of Henry V: for I love France so well that I will not part with a village of it; I will have it all mine

You guys in American always asking for human rights, however, actually you guys never know what is human rights. Free means you have to do something in a given social frame, rather than doing every thing you like. If you like to be ‘free’, rape, robbing and even terrism are acceptable. You like to have another 9.11? Then just be free.

The Chinese aggression came as a rude shock to India. In a sharp note to Beijing on 26 October 1950, the Indian Foreign Ministry wrote:

Now that the invasion of Tibet has been ordered by Chinese government, peaceful negotiations can hardly be synchronized with it and there naturally will be fear on the part of Tibetans that negotiations will be under duress. In the present context of world events, invasion by Chinese troops of Tibet cannot but be regarded as deplorable and in the considered judgement of the Government of India, not in the interest of China or peace.

A number of countries, including the United States and Britain, expressed their support for the Indian position.

Mindlessly repeating something does not change it into something worth saying.

Maybe I misinterpreted your comment. I take your point, but no one was seeing this event as a freedom of speech test case. I didn’t think anyone had mentioned “suppression,” either.

Several commenters were, however, depicting this as some sort of pointless, attention-getting stunt (see comments 4, 16, 47, etc.). To me, that is just cynical sneering.

As to the dangerous aspect of it, look at it this way: if they had meekly and politely picketed somewhere, I’m sure they would still have been arrested, as the police in this country have a solid tradition of arresting peaceful demonstrators. So yeah, maybe that would have been dangerous enough.

But it would have had no value as PR.

That’s why doing dangerous things like this is smart, in my opinion. Knowing how to do PR for your cause makes you effective – not trendy, shallow, or conniving. Just effective.

The Tibetan National Assembly convened an emergency session in November 1950 at which it requested the Dalai Lama, only 16 at that time, to assume full authority as Head of State. The Dalai Lama was then requested to leave Lhasa for Dromo, near the Indian border, so that he would be out of personal danger.At the same time the Tibetan Foreign Office issued the followingstatement:

Tibet is united as one man behind the Dalai Lama who has taken over full powers. … We have appealed to the world for peaceful intervention in (the face of this) clear case of unprovoked aggression.

The Tibetan Government also wrote to the Secretary General of the United Nations on 7 November 1950, appealing for the world body’s intervention. The letter said, in part:

Tibet recognises that it is in no position to resist the Chinese advance. It is thus that it agreed to negotiate on friendly terms with the Chinese Government. …Though there is little hope that a nation dedicated to peace will be able to resist the brutal effort of men trained to war, we understand that the United Nations has decided to stop aggression wherever it takes place.

Sure, as the protest happened, I was in Lhasa. It was horrible! If they are really peaceful, why do they hit and even kill the common people? If there is any skyscraper, I bet the so-called “peaceful protestors” will damage it, just like in 9.11. Oh, by the way, need none plane.

Moreover, I just heard that some monasterries attacked the Olympic Games Torch in France. As is know, Olympic Game should not relate to any Political thing! You still remember the Olympic Game during World War II in Germany? What if somebody, who are asking for the free Tibet, crash into the playing ground to bomb players, you still think it is FREE and RIGHT?

Oh, My Shit!

Things like Justice are good things to strive for, but if the Chinese government was really striving to be a good democracy, then why are they still toruring prisoners? Why is there heavy regulation on religion still? You need to open your eyes and see you are being lied to by your government. I’m not very knowlegable about china, but I know people have been there and I have heard the stories of what doesn’t look like a “people’s republic” to me.

FWIW, I get irritated with activism-as-fashion-statement behavior at times, too, but, fortunately, I think there’s a lot more to it this time around.

Also FWIW, that last line of mine should have read “maybe they’ll give a crap about (insert your town here), too.” Bet y’all figured it out anyway.

I’m eagerly awaiting the Olympic torch’s visit to San Francisco, particularly after the free-thinking people of London and Paris made it clear western democracies shall not tolerate China’s unacceptable behavior.

You guys always thinking about business of others rather than yourself. Your American FREE allows a Kerean to Kill 32 common students in Virginia Tech, you still need more free instead of lives?

Y bvsly blv tht prgrssn s msrd by tchnlgcl nd pltcl chng.

Yr srcsm sms t mply tht lf bfr Chns ccptn ws mpssbl.

Thy hd thr wn mthdlgy f mntnng sccssfl scty. Jst bcs ppl dsgr wth thr chcs ds nt mn tht thy r msnfrmd r gnrnt.

Tht knd f thnkng s wht crts fls wrs nd fls ccptn.

Wh hs csd mr prblms fr th wrld, Tbt r Chn.

Abraham Lincoln help the black people free from Slavery, partially. This is the history of U.S. But I guess you do not know anything about Tibet history. Actually, Chinese re-occupation did the same thing to Tibet as your Lincoln.

The reason why Dalailama need a FREE TIBET is that he could have many slaves before reoccupation, but NOW, he cannot.

Reading these comments I see so many people just jumping on the “Free Tibet” bandwagon with abandon. It’s not as simple as “China bad/Dalia Lama good” and no matter what Richard Gere, or the Beastie Boys or a bunch of left coasters want to chant or march about, it can’t be reduced to that.

The Dalia Lama wants to bring back a theocracy. The Chinese government wants to maintain an autocratic communist state. Neither of these options represent Jeffersonian democracy at its finest. It puzzles me to see people of good conscience and education marching in lock step to this simplification of a deeply complicated international issue.

The “Free Tibet, man” crowd has always struck me as more than a little elitist in it’s assumptions, it’s high-mindedness and general down the nose gaze at the intricacies of the issue. Better to hang banners, chant and knock over olympic torches that try to understand that geopolitics doesn’t come down to good versus evil, and that that kind of reductionism is more at home in the thinking of George Bush and other irrationalists.

Climbing the golden gate bridge is dangerous, and I see that as reason enough for their arrest (Though they should only get a smaish fine and spend no more than a couple days in jails if at all.).

While their acitvism and conern about the serious situaiton in Tibet is commendable, there are less dangerous ways of doing it.

And for what? So the vast natural gifts of Tibet can be torn from the earth, the rivers and sky despoiled with smoke and blackness – all for the sake of desperately sustaining a false dream that every person in China could live at a level beyond the resources of even several planets like this one?

Any gifts of Tibetan history and culture had best be shepherded up now for safe keeping. The burning is just beginning.

I have asked on many occasions: What does China offer to the world? Fraternity? Democracy? Respect for our common environment? Some valuable spiritual teaching? An socio-economic system that truly benefits all? What?

What comes after Tibet? Suppose the genocide is finally successful, suppose Taiwan falls without a shot, suppose the Uighurs and other distinct groups under Chinese rule are also finally obliterated. Even throw in few small neighbours like Burma. What next? Will China’s population be suddenly sharply limited? Will growth cease? Will the ravenous demand for resources vanish? What bribes will the rulers of China use on the Chinese people? What bludgeons? What is coming?

“Can’t these activists think of ways to get out the message that don’t involve screwing with people’s commute?”

Hmm… can’t imagine why turnout at American polls is so low, and the country’s going to hell.

If I didn’t know better, I’d say it’s because we’re a nation of fat-asses who don’t want our comfy little lives disrupted by controversy.

Nah, that can’t be it….

“It is because protestors are devoid of any power and unmotivated to attain it, so once the idea of boycotting the Olympics came into play, they decided to act on it.”

Right. I see no motivation displayed here.

Not like the HEROIC EFFORT! and UNBENDING WILL! it took for you to mock them safely from the comfort of your chair.

“While their acitvism and conern about the serious situaiton in Tibet is commendable, there are less dangerous ways of doing it.”

Perhaps a bake sale? How about a knitting circle?

PS; ever heard of spellchecking? Or would that be too dangerous?

If you think the Dalai Lama is planning to institute some boy-loving monk-ruled theocracy in Tibet, you probably also think the Surge is working, and that not teaching kids about birth control will control teen pregnancies.

In other words, you are a credulous bumpkin.

This should cheer you up a bit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7340973.stm

George W Bush is not an option???

Then I’d have to say China, since Tibet hasn’t even existed since 1950 or so.

If you want to say that China has civil rights violations, fine. You can pick from many. But, let’s not make saints out of these Lamas. Please.

I have not willing/knowingly purchased anything made in China since the latest assault on Tibet began. It’s been easy. Saving money too since virtually no impulse buying of cheap innecessities. (that last word is just to make Teresa wince)