Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Chinese Delegates walk out of Greens Conference following Gormley's remarks on Tibet
Options
Comments
-
anyway, any database or source may lead to another debate over whether it autoritative enough. Ileninbenjamin wrote: »fair enough but it's not unreasonable to ask for survey's of tourists satisfaction or something similar, even blogs etc. we make that type of thing all the time here (like this). more importantly i assume you have some sort of source to back that up, it isn't purely anecdotal is it? The charter of this forum clearly states you need to provide sources for what you state as fact, otherwise its just an opinion.
will leave it here, back to the main point John Gormley chose a wrong occasion to talk about his opinion on the Tibet issue as the government has already held the same opinion on it. All China wants is a politics-free Olympic game, coutries around the world should support China rather then against, because on a greater scale there will not be politics-free Olympics from this one on, and that will be a sad thing to see.0 -
China is a disgrace. Free Tibet.0
-
anyway, any database or source may lead to another debate over whether it autoritative enough. I
will leave it here, back to the main point John Gormley chose a wrong occasion to talk about his opinion on the Tibet issue as the government has already held the same opinion on it. All China wants is a politics-free Olympic game, coutries around the world should support China rather then against, because on a greater scale there will not be politics-free Olympics from this one on, and that will be a sad thing to see.
I think that Gormless didnt think it through fully but that does not excuse the chinese ambassador for walking out. Its a gesture that reflects badly on himself and his country. I'm no fan of the DL but at least he has open ears and is ready for discussion.
Edit: BTW I'm very happy to see some Chinese posters on boards, the more the merrier lads!0 -
Of course it's unreasonable to expect you to prove everything you say. If you say you're having a nice day, nobody asks you to prove it. But what we do ask is that you don't base your arguments and discussions on things that are impossible to prove. That's fair, right?with respect, by your way of thinking, everything has to come with a proof, I am sorry this time as I can't ask everyone of them signing a sheet of paper of their satisfaction score, but in China, the Chinese, all know and foreigners are really treated with great amount of respect, friendship and love, in a lot of circumstances they are treated even better than the Chinese. See it in your own eyes rather than the LCD. Seeing is believing!
That's because everyone, even people in Tibet with different opinions to you, is human. This means that they have human rights. When you mess with these rights, you can't expect a world which cares about them to turn a blind eye. The UN has no legal authority to intervene, but don't expect people, or the media, to just sit back.when western is doing something wrong the Chinese government always choose not to express opinions on because it is western's own internal affair and does not want to be nosy, but on the other hand the Chinese does not have the same respect in return, so who is wrong here?
That's not because of a bias or a prejudice, that's because good news isn't news. When was the last time you heard a news channel saying "Today, no planes crashed around the world" or "This just in: no monks were harmed in China today"? That's not how news works. So when China, or any other country, does a good thing, the news doesn't care. When it does something bad, it sure as hell does.Here is another one, every country has problems but the western media are focusing and only focusing on the cons, just hold for 5 minutes, when can you last remember BBC or CNN report a single piece of good thing about China
You and your pals seem convinced that "western media" is on some dark, secret purpose. This is a crazy claim, and I don't see how you have come to that conclusion.0 -
I think that Gormless didnt think it through fully but that does not excuse the chinese ambassador for walking out. Its a gesture that reflects badly on himself and his country. I'm no fan of the DL but at least he has open ears and is ready for discussion!
I think he walked out because Gormless said Tibet is a long surpressed COUNTRY. The conflict is on whether Gormless has the right to make the judgement that China invaded Tibet.
It is like saying to the Brits :"you barstard get out of NI", then ask for a negotiation. There is no basis of discussion here, especially when Chinese actually firmly believe Tibet is part of China.0 -
Advertisement
-
I think he walked out because Gormless said Tibet is a long surpressed COUNTRY. The conflict is on whether Gormless has the right to make the judgement that China invaded Tibet.
It is like saying to the Brits :"you barstard get out of NI", then ask for a negotiation. There is no basis of discussion here, especially when Chinese actually firmly believe Tibet is part of China.
There is a basis for discussion as the DL is there with open ears. There are people being killed in the region at the moment and the ambassadors (or anyones) take on sovereignty shouldnt have any impact on what matters more. To walk out is to say to everyone that he cares more about history, pride and semantics than peace and life and that he is intolerant of ignorance.
He did not do himself or his country any favours by being so hard-nosed.0 -
Jim_Are_Great wrote: »what we do ask is that you don't base your arguments and discussions on things that are impossible to prove.
That's because everyone, even people in Tibet with different opinions to you, is human. This means that they have human rights. When you mess with these rights, you can't expect a world which cares about them to turn a blind eye. The UN has no legal authority to intervene, but don't expect people, or the media, to just sit back.
Ok, the first part, you contradict yourself here.
And you "fact", how do you know that? From BBC I guess.0 -
Jim_Are_Great wrote: »That's not because of a bias or a prejudice, that's because good news isn't news. When was the last time you heard a news channel saying "Today, no planes crashed around the world" or "This just in: no monks were harmed in China today"? That's not how news works. So when China, or any other country, does a good thing, the news doesn't care. When it does something bad, it sure as hell does.
You and your pals seem convinced that "western media" is on some dark, secret purpose. This is a crazy claim, and I don't see how you have come to that conclusion.
Why the hell everything happens in the China are bad things, that's struggle to understand isn't it?
Or do you think the western media represent your attitute, we should just worry about the bad things? Well, if you choose so I am afraid the Chinese are caring about love and live the life with great things to look forward to?
In fact, the whole world should love each other instead of criticise, isn't it?0 -
I think that Gormless didnt think it through fully but that does not excuse the chinese ambassador for walking out. Its a gesture that reflects badly on himself and his country. I'm no fan of the DL but at least he has open ears and is ready for discussion.
Edit: BTW I'm very happy to see some Chinese posters on boards, the more the merrier lads!
It is also a bad gesture that invite an ambassator to the party conference and lecture him the boundry of his country.
In China, they won't treat an ambassator that way.0 -
Capital Slow wrote: »If you think like that, you better think again.
Did you see the 6.1 news, if you didn't watch it the 9 o'clock one.
Oh, in case you miss that as well, here is the figure Ireland export €5billions:rolleyes: to China each year and import only €2billion, we can spend the 5 elsewhere, obviously Ireland is not the only country in the world produce software and potatoes, we can get on with it without buying from you, but your economy will not be:(.
I think you got it mixed up. Ireland imports €5bn from China, and exports €2bn to China.
Leaving Ireland with the balance of payments defecit of €3bn with China. That's about €750 per person, per year, sent to China with a one way ticket.
I for one, would love an excuse to spend my €750 annual share of this in Japan. They make some nice stuff there ...0 -
Advertisement
-
I think you got it mixed up. Ireland imports €5bn from China, and exports €2bn to China.
Leaving Ireland with the balance of payments defecit of €3bn with China. That's about €750 per person, per year, sent to China with a one way ticket.
I for one, would love an excuse to spend my €750 annual share of this in Japan. They make some nice stuff there ...
Sorry, Captain Slow was banned by your so-called freedom of speech society here.
So I answer this one for you, he might got that figure wrong, but in gross term and talking about stopping a 2billion trade each year, Ireland suffers a lot, trust me.
And here is the funny bit, where do you get the €750, btw.............................. Oh, I get it it is €3,000,000,000/4,000,000 people, so you what you want to say is sending everybody to China:D. (and one way ticket as well). In that case, John Gormley will be really happy when he gets on the plane, he will probably say, look, our Green party will make Ireland really Green now, cause nobody is here anymore.
BTW, if you want to know, China has 1.3 billion people, so about €2.3 per year, I think they can survive without that.0 -
The job of an ambassador is to hear communications from the country that he is assigned to.It is also a bad gesture that invite an ambassator to the party conference and lecture him the boundry of his country.
In China, they won't treat an ambassator that way.
According to RTE, John Gormley's office had advised the embassy of the content of the speech. The ambassador says nobody told him.
To add to the miscommunication, outside the conference, the ambassador made a statement to RTE through an interpretor. This indicates that he does not speak good English. He was invited to speak on radio this morning to discuss Mr Gormley's statement that his embassy was aware of the content of the speech, but declined the invitation. Thereby missing an opportunity to put China's point of view on our national media and giving the Irish people the impression that he is afraid to defend his position.
I put it to you that the ambassador deliberately went to the conference, planning to walk out in a very public manner and that he has missed a valuable opportunity to be heard on an important morning news show.
Your media relations are a disaster.0 -
This is the first thing I thought. The event seemed so stage-managed (though badly stage-managed) that it had to have been an orchestrated manouevre by the Greens, Government and Chinese embassy.I put it to you that the ambassador deliberately went to the conference, planning to walk out in a very public manner and that he has missed a valuable opportunity to be heard on an important morning news show.
It might make sense in these terms: Irish Government rebukes China's human rights violations in Tibet, but doesn't want to harm Sino-Irish trade relations. "It wasn't us, Ambassador, it was those crazy Greens!"
It's one of those things where a party leader was speaking to the membership, but it just happens that he's a Minister in the Government, too.
The world of diplomacy is so nuanced, it's all code the way it went down.0 -
...and, more worryingly, by RTE!! The cameraman was already positioned at the ambassador's seat when Gormley mentioned Tibet. The man didn't seem to get the message the first time so the TV picture cut away to Gormley again, only to return again to see the ambassador getting a nudge from his translator. You could almost hear the TV cameraman telling him to haul a$$.This is the first thing I thought. The event seemed so stage-managed (though badly stage-managed) that it had to have been an orchestrated manouevre by the Greens, Government and Chinese embassy
Ironic really, when you consider that RTE journalists have recently been reporting on how carefully managed the media coverage has been in China of the journey of the olympic torch.0 -
You could be on to something there. Sounds very plausible - the govt wants to send a message but doesn't want to take a position.
What you say about where the cameraman was positioned (I haven't seen the clip yet) would strengthen that theory that RTE knew Liu Biwei would be walking out. If true, that means that he had been told about the contents of the speech and lied about knowing because he thought that indignance was more appropriate than planning to walk out.
Maybe he was ashamed to own up to going to the conference with the sole purpose of walking out when Gormley said what he said. I've no idea why he would be ashamed of that, it's a common non-violent protest. In fact the ambassador probably enjoyed exercising his right to non-violently protest about something on which he had an opinion.
He's lucky that he doesn't live in a totalitarian state which forbids minority points of view.
The old guard of Irish politics probably identify quite strongly with Tibet and may even consider the Chinese attitude that 'Tibet was always a part of China' an affront to their memories and intelligence.
For example, when Frank Aikan said this to the UN General Assembly in 1959:Looking around this assembly, and looking at my own delegations, I think how many benches would be empty in this hall if it had always been agreed that when a small nation or a small people feel in the grip of a major power no one could ever raise their voice here; that once there was a subject nation, then must always remain a subject nation. Tibet has fallen into the hands of the Chinese People's Republic for the last few years.
For thousands of years, or for a couple of thousand of years at any rate, it was as free and as fully in control of its own affairs as any nation in this Assembly, and a thousand times more free to look after its own affairs than many of the nations here.later in the same speech wrote:The sympathy of the Irish people going to the victims of imperialism is nothing new. It goes out to the people of Tibet in their present suffering as it did in the past.
We also had the unsuccessful efforts of Mary Robinson to meet with the Panchen Lama in 1998, the young man that appears to have been abducted by the government of China, even though they have changed their story on him several times (He is with his family in, he is with us for protection from the Tibetans, he is with his family, he is under our care...)
The behaviour of the Chinese is doubleplusungood.
By the by, did the Chinese ambassador go to the Green Party conference last year, or is this a recent interest of his?0 -
-
The job of an ambassador is to hear communications from the country that he is assigned to.
According to RTE, John Gormley's office had advised the embassy of the content of the speech. The ambassador says nobody told him.
To add to the miscommunication, outside the conference, the ambassador made a statement to RTE through an interpretor. This indicates that he does not speak good English. He was invited to speak on radio this morning to discuss Mr Gormley's statement that his embassy was aware of the content of the speech, but declined the invitation. Thereby missing an opportunity to put China's point of view on our national media and giving the Irish people the impression that he is afraid to defend his position.
I put it to you that the ambassador deliberately went to the conference, planning to walk out in a very public manner and that he has missed a valuable opportunity to be heard on an important morning news show.
Your media relations are a disaster.
Here, we should talk something we do know but not something we don't, right? So I wonder where did you get the Mr Liu do not speak good English from, isn't it your own assumption? Just to let you know, almost every ambassador of China was from the ministry of foreign affairs, work up the rank through Translator, Secretary of Foreign minister, assistant of minister and deputy before heading for ambassador. Just in case if you are still not convinced, I was in the Diversity Council of Citigroup Ireland meeting back in March where Mr. Liu addressed the audience in very good English. Another piece of knowledge for you, each Head of Chinese ministry and the higher ranks of the government are very well educated and speak multi-languages, but they never speak it with foreign leaders, or maybe saying "hello" at most, when they are in summit or discussion, they will and only speak Chinese because its integrity and self-esteem, because there is a job called translator. So, next time if you see a translator, don't be amazed. BTW, there is job of advisor.
To your second part, why has he to go when he was invited that less than 24hrs earlier he was unfairly treated by your government minister? Is the media trust worthy? No.0 -
Denis Irwin wrote: »The Ambassador walked out soon after Gormley said the Chinese govt. should speak with the Dalai Lama. Who as we all know from that bastion of press freedom that is Chinese state TV is an evil man.:rolleyes:
The Ambassador walked out soon after Gormley said Tibet is a country, not part of China. Tibet never recognizes as a country by any other countries or organizations. Please check today's Irish Time.0 -
Hi pklq, and welcome to boards.
As always, there is the official Chinese line, which you have dutifully repeated, and then a different view on the same history.Tibet never recognizes as a country by any other countries or organizations.
http://www.rangzen.com/history/views.htm#donot ... from which the content underneath was copied.
International law states that recognition can occur by explicit or implicit acts including treaties, negotiations, and diplomatic relations. Mongolia and Tibet signed a formal treaty of recognition in 1913. Historically, Nepal and Tibet had peace treaties.
Tibet's independence was also confirmed at the Treaty of Simla (1914) which was concluded by Tibet and British India. In 1949, Tibet maintained diplomatic, economic, and cultural relations with such countries as Nepal, Sikkim, Mongolia, China, British India, and to some extent, Russia and Japan.
Further, Nepal maintained an Ambassador in Lhasa and told the U.N. in 1949 that it conducted international relations with Tibet. In fact, Britian, Bhutan, India, and even China also maintained diplomatic missions in Tibet's capitol, Lhasa. The Tibetan Foreign Office conducted talks with President Franklin D. Roosevelt when he sent representatives to Lhasa to discuss the allied war effort against Japan during World War II.
In 1950, El Salvador formally requested that China's aggression against Tibet be placed on the agenda of the U.N. General Assembly. The issue was not discussed. However, during four U.N. General Assembly debates on Tibet (1959, 1960, 1961, & 1965), many countries (e.g., Philippines, Nicaragua, Thailand. United States, Ireland) openly stated that Tibet was an independent country illegally occupied by China.
In fact, the U.N. passed three resolutions (1959, 1961, & 1965) concerning Tibet stating that Tibetans were deprived of their inalienable rights to self-determination.
Even Mao Zedong during the Long March admitted that Tibet was an independent country when he passed through the border regions of Tibet remarking, "This is our only foreign debt, and some day we must pay the Mantzu (sic) and the Tibetans for the provisions we were obliged to take from them."
Tibetans clearly constitute a people under international law, as described, for instance, by the UNESCO International Meeting of Experts on Further Study of the Concept of the Rights of Peoples. They are a distinct people and fulfill all the characteristics of this concept: commonality of history, shared language, culture, and ethnicity.0 -
Because instead of explaining his actions himself, he spoke through an interpretor. Also, RTE pictures show him using an interpretor while he was waiting to be offended by Mr Gormley. And because of his refusal of air-time on our national radio.So I wonder where did you get the Mr Liu do not speak good English from, isn't it your own assumption?
Because it's his job to put the case of the Chinese people. Because he was offered an opportunity to speak on an important radio show with a large mature audience.why has he to go when he was invited that less than 24hrs earlier he was unfairly treated by your government minister? Is the media trust worthy? No.
What do mean by implying that our media is untrustworthy? If he speaks in English, live on radio, nobody could edit or censor what he would say or mis-translate.
This is not China. We don't do that sort of thing here.0 -
Advertisement
-
I wonder why he made a big scene instead of sending a diplomatic note to the government?
It seems to me that China is mostly interested in communicating its anger with world.
I wonder that why Daila Lama leads his followers to make violence to those innocent people as he is a master of Monks. why he can not speak to chinese government directly? or even to pick up goverment offices to instead of those poor people? or he can ask USA, GERMANY, FRANCE AND UK these powerful conturies to hlep to talk to chinese if he thinks he has rights.
the things he has done just exactly as Ben.Laden. Killing, burning will never be excepted whatever how much rights he has.
and nobody will believe that chinese government will give Tibet out to him by all of words from europe and USA or by theaten of not attending to Beijing Olympics.
stop killing and burning and any kind of vioences. give a peace to the people whatever where they live.0 -
I'll defend his right to walk out. As long as he respects my right to consider him petulant and, in the case of Tibet, wrong.
he has rights to walk out since Mr (green) has said, Tibet is a contury but not a part of china. I am sure you will do same or even worse if I say cork cork is not belong to Ireland.
but I wonder that why north ireland can not be independent? exactly it was a part of Ireland. even can not get it back but why they are not independant as the situation we knew which it had so many violence over years, those peole who live there had terrible time, ireland just beside of it, why did not give some help? but seems here a lot of people are very interested to Tibet events? what reason to make your hands such far to reach other contury's interial problems?0 -
First, you have not answered the core question which is why, if your embassy knew in advance of what would be said, your ambassador decided to attend and pretended to be surprised and offended, and why he has avoided answering reasonable questions about his behaviour while a guest of this country.he has rights to walk out since Mr (green) has said, Tibet is a contury but not a part of china. I am sure you will do same or even worse if I say cork cork is not belong to Ireland.
Is it normal for your party members to attend other people's political meetings and cause disruption?
Because when we we an 'internal problem' of the British empire, we needed help too.what reason to make your hands such far to reach other contury's interial problems?0 -
To start off, let me state that I have very little knowledge about the situation in Tibet. This is partly due to me not paying it as much attention as other matters at the moment. It may also be due to the Chinese government restricting reporting on the subject. It may even, as our Chinese friends here suggest, be due to a bias of Western media, although I do not personally believe that independent broadcasters or even broadcasters run by states who would desire to keep good economic relations with China would be biased against the country. For whatever reason, I am not very informed. Therefore, I am going to comment on this particular incident, as I see it.
Is this not what Minister Gormley urged the Chinese government to do? To speak to the Dalai Lama? Yes, I understand that there may have been offence taken to his use of the word 'country,' but the point stands that the Chinese government still refuses to enter into dialogue, and there are posters on here from China staunchly defending that stance. So you don't want the government to talk to the Dalai Lama but you want the Dalai Lama to talk to the government?I wonder that why Daila Lama leads his followers to make violence to those innocent people as he is a master of Monks. why he can not speak to chinese government directly?
First of all, not everyone in Northern Ireland wants to be part of a united Ireland. Not everyone in the Republic of Ireland wants to see a united Ireland, and not everyone in Britain (in fact I would imagine very few people) want to hold on to Northern Ireland. What the majority of people want is an end to violence. For years, this seemed unachievable because the various sides would not enter into dialogue. When they finally did, and admittedly it took several attempts, the violence ended, and now people are looking to a brighter future.but I wonder that why north ireland can not be independent? exactly it was a part of Ireland. even can not get it back but why they are not independant as the situation we knew which it had so many violence over years, those peole who live there had terrible time, ireland just beside of it, why did not give some help? but seems here a lot of people are very interested to Tibet events? what reason to make your hands such far to reach other contury's interial problems?
Ireland did do quite a lot to help when the Troubles broke out. Over the course of the last 30 years there have been numerous talks, agreements, cross-border police operations, etc., all of which led to the more peaceful situation we have today.
When there is a question of human rights abuse, any country that believes in human rights has a duty to speak out. These rights transcend political boundaries. I am not saying an abuse of human rights has occurred, why it has occurred, or taking sides in any way, but questions have been raised. Do not make comparisons with the US or Britain invading Iraq. All Minister Gormley did (if you take his unfortunate use of the word 'country' out of the equation) is appeal for dialogue that may help see an end to violence. Is that a problem for the Chinese people?0 -
but I wonder that why north ireland can not be independent? exactly it was a part of Ireland. even can not get it back but why they are not independant as the situation we knew which it had so many violence over years, those peole who live there had terrible time, ireland just beside of it, why did not give some help? but seems here a lot of people are very interested to Tibet events? what reason to make your hands such far to reach other contury's interial problems?
you obviously haven't a notion about the history of the republic and the affairs in the north (we gave up our constitutional claim to the 6 counties in a contribution towards the peace process, why can't China make a similar gesture for the good of all the people in Tibet?), and accordingly you obviously have no understanding of why many Irish as such are sympathetic to Tibetan separatists (which has been mentioned numerous times in this and/or other threads so i wont go into it here).0 -
Because instead of explaining his actions himself, he spoke through an interpretor. Also, RTE pictures show him using an interpretor while he was waiting to be offended by Mr Gormley. And because of his refusal of air-time on our national radio.
Because you did not read my thread before talking, I said all the Chinese head official using our own language rather than others in dipolmatic talk.
Same as the French president will never speak English in the Summit, do you still not get it, suggest the Irish officals should do the same, well, if they can.Also, RTE pictures show him using an interpretor while he was waiting to be offended by Mr Gormley. And because of his refusal of air-time on our national radio.
What do mean by implying that our media is untrustworthy? If he speaks in English, live on radio, nobody could edit or censor what he would say or mis-translate.
Because your media is biased, as not showing any interest in our protest, for which we did invite RTE to come along and see our protest, did they come? Do we need to notify the journalists the protest just because it is on saturday in case it is their day off? Isn't it their job to be there at first scene?This is not China. We don't do that sort of thing here.
Because the Irish people has been told what was happening in China in the last 50 years by BBC, you have become single-minded, his live talk wouldn't change anything.Because it's his job to put the case of the Chinese people. Because he was offered an opportunity to speak on an important radio show with a large mature audience
Because it is not your job to define his job, period.0 -
Firstly can we stop refering to Minister Gormley as Gormless/Mr(Green),It represent the Chinese anger against the western biased media and press. Cause 99% people who is making a accusation about China hasn't been and lived in China and what they "know" about it is all through those media.
Chose someone who has been there and talk to them see what they say!
Sorry for dragging this back up
And so you fight fire with fire- if you point out facts to us we will listen (Well...I speak for myself) Now as for the video of 'dissatisfaction' it sounds more like a spoilt child, is there any need for all the explicitives? As for some of the facts they use- well it's just a bit ridicules no?
All in all we are yet to ad0 -
The Dalai Lama has said that he will resign if he violence in Tibet becomes endemic.
http://www.necn.com/Boston/World/Dalai-Lama-to-resign-if-violence-spreads-in-Tibet/1208172743.html
He also said that he wanted Tibet to be part of the Peoples Republic of China and stood ready to find a solution with the PRC government.
In the past he also backed China's right to host and enjoy a trouble-free Olympics.
You can be sure Xinhua had a different take on this, if they even reported it at all.
Funny thing is that the people with the worst, most repressed media and communications anywhere on Earth that only ever parrots the CCPs party line, are the ones most vocal about accusing all Western media of "bias" and demanding "fairness."
Funny also that the people most vocally condemning Western people's lack of knowledge of China's history themselves fail miserably when attempting to compare Tibet's history to our own. I need only refer to the "Tibet WAS, IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE, Part of China" video, which asserted that, among other things, Quebec, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, only being held grudgingly on by Canadian and British slavemasters.
Well, Quebec had two referenda about independence, they chose to stay with Canada. Northern Irelad - only a miniscule number of people, most of them in the almost unheard of "Ulster Third Way" group want NI independent of both Britain and Ireland. With Ian Paisely (Jr) and Martin Mc Guiness now sharing power in an NI executive answering to the Queen, NI will go down the U3W route 12 minutes past never. Scotland may well also have a referendum on its future, the Scottish SNP which has some seats in a devloved Scottish Assembly are looking for one. The Texas example is also a joke and shows no understanding whatsoever of American history.
Between the large numbers of Chinese people on this board accusing Westen media of "bias" and the cluelessness of some who write of history, I am finding it hard not to break out laughing.
Oh and, if its true that the PRC is moving large numbers of Han Chinese people into Tibet, then I'm sorry to say that we in Ireland know all about that as the Britsh Empire had a similar policy in Ireland.
Here in the West we have a saying "He who lives in a house made of glass, should not throw stones." Heed this message well.0 -
To start off, let me state that I have very little knowledge about the situation in Tibet. This is partly due to me not paying it as much attention as other matters at the moment. It may also be due to the Chinese government restricting reporting on the subject. It may even, as our Chinese friends here suggest, be due to a bias of Western media, although I do not personally believe that independent broadcasters or even broadcasters run by states who would desire to keep good economic relations with China would be biased against the country. For whatever reason, I am not very informed. Therefore, I am going to comment on this particular incident, as I see it.
Is this not what Minister Gormley urged the Chinese government to do? To speak to the Dalai Lama? Yes, I understand that there may have been offence taken to his use of the word 'country,' but the point stands that the Chinese government still refuses to enter into dialogue, and there are posters on here from China staunchly defending that stance. So you don't want the government to talk to the Dalai Lama but you want the Dalai Lama to talk to the government?
First of all, not everyone in Northern Ireland wants to be part of a united Ireland. Not everyone in the Republic of Ireland wants to see a united Ireland, and not everyone in Britain (in fact I would imagine very few people) want to hold on to Northern Ireland. What the majority of people want is an end to violence. For years, this seemed unachievable because the various sides would not enter into dialogue. When they finally did, and admittedly it took several attempts, the violence ended, and now people are looking to a brighter future.
Ireland did do quite a lot to help when the Troubles broke out. Over the course of the last 30 years there have been numerous talks, agreements, cross-border police operations, etc., all of which led to the more peaceful situation we have today.
When there is a question of human rights abuse, any country that believes in human rights has a duty to speak out. These rights transcend political boundaries. I am not saying an abuse of human rights has occurred, why it has occurred, or taking sides in any way, but questions have been raised. Do not make comparisons with the US or Britain invading Iraq. All Minister Gormley did (if you take his unfortunate use of the word 'country' out of the equation) is appeal for dialogue that may help see an end to violence. Is that a problem for the Chinese people?
I wonder what is human rights in your people's sence? I have been this country over 7 years, until now, I do not feel that I have fully human right in this country and treated fairly as other people who doing exactly job as me, I even have no pension still after I work in the company for 2 years. my boss ever said to me that your are making much more money then in china when I asked for more salary. I could find another job, but I know everywhere could be same. you might say, why don't you go back to your own country, the reason I am here becuase I am making much more money then in china as my boss said. so does it mean that is I should be treated worse then other european colleagues even work harder then them? I am sure most of people know chinese are good worker, but have you ever heard that they have got better salary then others? is that difficult to treat chinese fairly by you? or is that more difficult for you to help chinese here then far in Tibet?For the case of Tibet, there is nothing can aruge more, because you will not believe any opposite words when talking about human right. the only way I can make you believe which is by visiting Tibet, as 10 or more Tibet, ask them what exactly they think about and what they hope to get.0 -
Advertisement
-
First, you have not answered the core question which is why, if your embassy knew in advance of what would be said, your ambassador decided to attend and pretended to be surprised and offended, and why he has avoided answering reasonable questions about his behaviour while a guest of this country.
Is it normal for your party members to attend other people's political meetings and cause disruption?
If Mr. Gormley said he has informed our Mr. Liu, what about Mr. Liu said he was not informed? And why Mr. Gormley said "there will be trouble, there will be trouble" after the conference, when he did not realise the micro phone is still on. BTW, I am not making this up, the clip was played in your 106 breakfast show.Because when we we an 'internal problem' of the British empire, we needed help too.
Then sort out you own problem before pointing finger at others.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement