Jason Ding said:

http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=2732

Here is the article about

How Repressive Is the Chinese Government in Tibet?

Scholar tells skeptical audience that claims by Tibetan exiles of Chinese cultural discrimination are greatly exaggerated.

Jason Ding, just to clear some air of falsity thrown into this forum for your information and the benefit of other readers.

There is a series of wild unfounded assertions, incomplete truth and a generous splash of self-deluding lies thrown in by Foarp particularly in the area of law and history. I will show you only some of the most ridiculous ones.

“As to why China was so willing to negotiate in 1951, at that point the invasion of Tibet was due to come before the UN security council, there were fears that a UN intervention force would be dispatched to Tibet as they had been to Korea the year before”.

Wow, this is good story telling. Foarp got very short memory and little touch with history and reality. Jason Ding, you really need to go to the internet and check up on Non-Aligned Movement and Korean War to fish this lies out that …. there were fears that a UN intervention force would be dispatched to Tibet.……… Two facts here. India got its independence from Britain in 1947 after peaceful civil disobedience nation wide. After achieving independence, India sought to distance itself away for Britain by taking the lead to forging a non-alignment movement among newly independent former European colonies in Asia, Africa and Latin America.. This led to the founding of the Non-Aligned Movement was found in 1955.

This Non-Aligned Movement include India and China which stated in the Havana Declaration of 1979 is to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries” in their “struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, Zionism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics.”^[1] They represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations's

Do you remember, Jason Ding, that it was the same year as the Bandung (Indonesia) meeting when the former US Secretary of State, Foster Dulles, refused to shake the friendship offered hand of late Premier Zhou En-Lai?

With the war raging in the Korean Peninsula and the 3^rd-rate military of the PLA smashing the living daylight of US-led and UN forces in Korea sweeping down to below the 38 parallel, how could the United Nations in those military crisis of reeling defeats contemplate another invasion of Tibet fighting the Chinese in the manner Foarp said…fears that a UN intervention force would be dispatched to Tibet??? In any case, with India as a non-aligned nation, how could the UN dispatch forces into Tibet when its political independence and non-alignment preclude the use of its vast land and air space for foreign forces to access and apply as a staging base to attack China’s forces in Tibet???

Foarp’s assertion demonstrated his near total ignorance of factual history and near complete detachment from reality.

“I also do not support soldiers opening fire on and beating peaceful Tibetan protesters, which according to the Tibetan side is how the riots started.”

This is a wild assertion. Chinese government AND foreign tourists were all caught by surprise. Pelosi went to visit Dalai Lama in Dharamsala a few days after it broke out. She got nothing to do in the US and the Democrats in turmoil in US Presidential nominee election? Dalai Lama met Sarkozy, Merkel and Bush in the months preceeding? All strange co-incidence? Chinese soldiers opening fire and beating peaceful Tibetan protesters? What did the foreign tourists mobile-phone camera showed and flashed to the world? In this age of mobile phone camera, how could the demonstration took place and protestors beaten and shot without foreign tourists capturing these ugly scenes on camera evidence? Foard didn’t say that it is foreign tourist says Tibetan protesters were beaten and shot – only that it is an allegation of “Tibetan side”. So if the Tibetan side says, Chinese Government used hydrogen bomb and blown up the Potala Palace, it MUST BE TRUE????

“British settlement of Ireland made Northern Irish Catholics a minority where they had previously been the majority, the result has hundreds of years of violence in Northern Ireland which has only recently been ended”

Incomplete truth. If Britain loved human rights of free choice and not occupying foreign land by force, why hasn’t the British resettled the Protestant back to British mainland? Why Britain attacked Falkland in 1982 to re-conquer and imposed its military occupation of that island? Populating foreign land provides legal legitimacy for occupation – a valid justification for Britain only in northern Ireland and Falkland but not for China??

the 1956 revolution in Hungary……Many Hungarians had been lead to believe they would receive support from the US - they didn't. Many Tibetans also believe this…..”

incomplete truth. Foarp didn’t tell you the world is not stupid. The West stirred up Alexander Dubczek to seek and stir up independence from Soviet orbit. When the Russian military transport planes land in Prague airport with tanks and armoured cars, the West kept silent, no more human rights cause exists for military intervention and rescue by NATO. The same goes for Polish experience in World War 2, the British Government encouraged the Polish to confront the Germans, and when German tanks rolled across the border, the British looked the other way. Polish resistance fighters will never forget history and British hypocrisy. I am sure the Dalai Lama is not that stupid to think CIA, Nato will come to his rescue. If Tibet is of any significance value to them, they would have intervened in 1958 when China was desperate poor and unable to resist foreign intervention.

“.. forcing them to live in camps where there is little in the way of work, education or anything else….. “

This a complete fiction of lies. Every foreigners who visited Tibet knows conditions there are far better than much poorer provinces of China, including the poorer outlying areas of prosperous Guangzhou Province. Tibet is mountainous place with little arable land but farming is thriving and prosperous.

“When one has known the scorpion (meaning China) the frog (meaning Britain) is divine”…..I'm not trying to claim that there were any good motives in the invasion”

Incomplete truth . Forget the non-existent good motive/s, if Britain have no bad motive, why are you invading a barren mountainous land tens of thousand of miles from British homeland? If British invasion has any good motive, why didn’t they stayed back and be that good “frog” to modernize Tibetan civilization in the name of human rights and salvation instead of conquests and attempted enslavement of that culture?

“likewise the forces which liberated Kuwait and the Falkland Islands were also called 'invasion force”

Old familiar stuff of logical fallacy lies - Mixing false with truth to conceal falsehood. Kuwait was occupied by Iraqi invasion FIRST, so that is arguably “liberation” by US-led forces. Falkland is British colonization of land over 12,000 miles in the South Atlantic which has NO connection with British history, people, culture and not even linked by a seabed – quite simply occupation by colonialist British. The Argentina quite correctly took it back by force. And the British invaded again to reinforce its occupation and colonization of foreign territory. It is the same as British colonized Australia but Australia got its independence slightly over 200 years ago. The British just refused to let Falkland go because it is geographically linked to Argentina by a seabed

“In the UK we created the common-law system, where law (at least theoretically) is supposed to be built up over generations by the decisions of the courts and with the consent of the people - and in any just law system the law can only be developed with the consent of the people.”

Jason, this is the biggest hoax sold in this forum by Foarp. Let me teach you and this forum a bit of English law without telling you how knowledgeable I am of this subject other than my disclosure in the earlier part of this forum which is carried over to this page. You noted that Foarp says…….COMMON LAW SYSTEM…..where law (at least theoretically) supposed……..over generations by the decisions of the court AND WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE…. Jason Ding, I say OMG!!! Common law needs to consent of the people???? And then he used this as the basis of support argument if the CCP has the consent of Tibetan to allegedly deny them of their traditional farming husbandry… such action would perhaps., Foarp insinuated…possibly violated UK’s common-law system??? What a hoax of a joke!! Common Law as practiced in Britain and the Commonwealth including, Canada, Australia, India, Parkistan, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, even Hong Kong etc.” HAS NEVER BEEN FOUNDED ON THE CONSENT OF PEOPLE”. Foarp is fooling you knowing that you as a Chinese has not knowledge of British legal system like many others in this forum. Foarp dares NOT assert that his claim is true.. he covered his lies with this qualifier…. where law (at least theoretically) supposed….So what is the truth?? The truth is that British Law system has two branches – a) statutory law (or sometimes called Parliament-enacted law) and Common law doctrine (Judge-made law) which encompass equity law to ameliorate the harshness of common law decisions. One good example is the Foss v Harbottle rule 1843 decision. Another one is Donhue v Stevenson 1932. You can check the details on the internet. Basically this are judge-made decision WITHOUT CONSULTING AND GETTING THE CONSENT OF PEOPLE. Which lower level courts either follow the same legal logic or principle or higher courts on appeal will reverse a disputed decision made in the lower level court. These common law are evolving ALL THE TIME AND EVEN TODAY. Imagine if the courts to make common law decisions has to consult and to receive the consent of the people as Foarp alleged and be so applied in Tibet, how ridiculous would the outcome be? Do British judges, in the highest court of their land, asked 60 million (now??) Britons to hand down a legal decision? By the time the common law system ( if this is the way common law evolved in Britain as Foarp imagine it to be), the offending party would have died of old age, where is the justice for the victim in Tibet if applied to China and Tibet??

Foarp conned you and this forum.

That is why I did not want to participate and watched on the sideline, how much more hoaxes of falsehood he will claim AFTER CLAIMING THAT BRITISH DEMOCRACY HAS FREE INFORMATION ACCESS when the truth is that they have statutory law enacted in parliament called Freeom of Information Act 2000, PROHIBITING information access instead.

Foarp should have been the person setting up a new website called http://www.anti-reality.com The whole world will laugh at his great sense of humour and ignorance of reality.

Jason Ding said:

@Lee,

Thanks for rejoining.

“Jason Ding, just to clear some air of falsity thrown into this forum for your information and the benefit of other readers.”

The purpose linking to this website is to let them know that not even Chineses questioned about the “culture genocide”, also other foreign researchers denied that too. I didn't agree all of points. The real problem is that every single proof from Chinese will be labeled as untrustful source. If I quote the opinion from Westerners, they may feel convicible.

Most of Foarp's points I didn't agree with because it's not truth. I need to find the convicible source and evidence to show him. That requires me to increase more knowledgable so that I can express well.

I really appreciate your rejoin.

The cultural genocide is another hoax. Foarp admitted that more Protestants moved to Northern ireland, catholic became a minority. Isn't that cultural genocide too by the British Protestants, by Foarp's (and others who agree with him) definition? Why is Britain entitlted to cultural genocide and decrying everybody else especially China? It is hypocrisy double standards. You cannot reason logic with narrow-minded zealots who post lies and falsehood to support their fabricated and exaggerated claims to defile China's reputation. That is why I don't want to debate with him directly. It is useless!!! BTW, I wrote Donghue v Stevenson 1932, it should be Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 legal case of common law decision and doctrine just in case you search for the net information and cannot find in one go. Foarp lied to you about British law because he knows you got no knowledge of this subject. But I graduated with the “Doctor of Philosophy” from the world's acclaim “University of Society”. Fortuntely this university exist everywhere in the world - you learnt in the world of hard knocks of real life experience, hahahaha.

I am glad you realise thast Foarp's statements and claims are often not true. Some so childish of lies… like law-making decision must consult people for approval in common law… what a comical lie. Even an idiot would know it is a hoax

@Foarp,

“We have the accounts of eye-witnesses. More than that we have common sense, which tells us that Buddhist monks are unlikely to suddenly march out of their monasteries and start attacking people, we also have the photos of monks killed by gunshot wounds.”

Until now, I could see 2 photos about the death of Tibetan. Those were provided by Tibetan exile. Whether it's true or not, you could not tell. But those 2 pictures showed the events which were not in Lhasa.

But Tibetan exile claimed for 120 deaths, why no further pictures. But on their website, you may still find lots of demostration photos. If they said they the photos were prohibited by government, how could those demostration photos come out?

If you have more photos more than Tibetan exile have, please show us.

@Foarp,

You know Chinese. I put my complaint to spiegel and deutsche welle as following with the link. I wonder whether you appreciate such kind of reports?

中国承认西藏事件中有一名藏人死亡

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Jason Ding <dingdongming@gmail.com>
Date: 2008-4-30 18:51
Subject: SPIEGEL: The Tibetan is the police who was shot to death by Riots in Qinghai(OPEN YOUR EYES WHEN READING CHINESE MEDIA)
To: onlineabo@spiegel.de

@Lee - I fail to see the relevance of any of the things that you have written about the non-aligned movement (a movement that is now a total dead letter) - especially given how India (the country you seem to be praising as China's ally) is actually the country that gives shelter to the Dalai Lama, includes Arunachal Pradesh in its territory (an Indian state with a population of tens of millions which China claims as its own), and with which China has fought a border war.

India has acted as a base for UN forces in the 1971 Bangladesh war, as well as forming the backbone of many UN peace keeping forces. It has also been a base for US forces, especially during the period when the Indians lived in fear of a Chinese invasion.

That the riots started with a peaceful protest by Tibetan monks to mark the anniversary of the 1959 uprising where the police attempted to arrest some of the monks is actually a fairly uncontroversial issue. Chinese sources which try to suggest that monks suddenly ran out of their monasteries and attacked people without any provocative incidents happening before that is something that very few people outside China believe.

“If
Britain loved human rights of free choice and not occupying foreign
land by force, why hasn’t the British resettled the Protestant back to
British mainland?”

A ridiculous point, Ulster protestants have lived in Northern Ireland for more than 800 years, it is far too late to start re-settling them - but anyway, this has nothing to do with Tibet.

“this are judge-made decision WITHOUT CONSULTING AND GETTING THE CONSENT OF PEOPLE.”

Obviously you didn't study law at 'society university', and have never heard of the concept of 'jury nulification' - but likewise, this has little to do with Tibet.

“Every foreigners who visited Tibet knows conditions there are far better than much poorer provinces of China”

Strange that 'Every foreigners' do not report this, or even the majority of foreigners.

“why didn’t they stayed back and be that good “frog” to
modernize Tibetan civilization in the name of human rights and
salvation instead of conquests and attempted enslavement of that
culture?”

Why indeed, but you forgot my next point which was “Why would China wish to repeat British mistakes?”

“Old
familiar stuff of logical fallacy lies - Mixing false with truth to
conceal