Chinese Delegates walk out of Greens Conference following Gormley's remarks on Tibet

Tomas_V

Pro C wrote: »

his live talk wouldn't change anything.

I disagree, I think he made a big mistake in not talking personally to the Irish people. We like to hear people's voices. There was a chance he could have persuaded some people of how reasonable Chinese people are.

But maybe China is not ready for dialogue with anyone? Just shouting, mud-slinging, disrupting political meetings and insults? When we learned to speak reasonably with our opponents, life improved a lot here.

Pro C wrote: »

Because it is not your job to define his job, period.

So, what IS his job?

Breezer

Pro C wrote: »

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.

Ireland spent a good year or more fighting for Irish to be recognised as an official language of the EU. Prionsias de Rossa MEP has used Irish in Europe. Enda Kenny frequently speaks in Irish on our national media, as do Eamon Ó Cuív and Mary Hanafin. Bu are we discussing Ireland and the Irish language, or are we discussing Gormley, the Chinese ambassador and Tibet?

I understand that the Chinese are a very patriotic people, and you have every right to be, with thousands of years of history and culture behind you. However, if you are afraid your views being misrepresented in any way, speaking through an interpreter seems like a strange option, and refusing to speak live on air, where there no possibility of bias, to clarify your position, is even stranger.

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.

I think most Westerners would disagree, arguing that refusing to say anything suggests he has something to hide. I am not saying he does, I am merely saying that logical argument and presentation of facts provides a much more convincing case than yet more stony silence from China. You want us to see that you are in the right, why not tell us and show us?

Because it is not your job to define his job, period.

What then, in your opinion, is the job of an ambassador?

yen

Tomas_V wrote: »

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?

Because when we we an 'internal problem' of the British empire, we needed help too.

I have answered question clearly to you, my ambassador walked out because your Mr Gormely has recognized Tibet is a country but not a part of china. what will you feel when someone say to you that your sister was born by your mother's lover but not your father? it's a contemptuous. what reaction you will have? if you are gentleman then you will just walk out, if you are grown up in finglas you might just hand a knife to kill the person who said that.
as I know, my ambassdor attend the meeting becuase was invited and it was informed just within 24 hours which is unrespectly for a formal meeting. he just performed as a gentleman and attended the meeting but
regretfully he walked out becuase the country he present was not respected as should be.

leninbenjamin

yen wrote: »

what will you feel when someone say to you that your sister was born by your mother's lover but not your father? it's a contemptuous.

i'm sorry but can you clarify how that analogy is of any relevance to this debate?

edit: and for the record i wouldn't give a sh*t. my father would still be my father, my mother still my mother, my sister my sister and my dog would still be my dog...

Pro C

Breezer wrote: »

Ireland spent a good year or more fighting for Irish to be recognised as an official language of the EU. Prionsias de Rossa MEP has used Irish in Europe. Enda Kenny frequently speaks in Irish on our national media, as do Eamon Ó Cuív and Mary Hanafin. Bu are we discussing Ireland and the Irish language, or are we discussing Gormley, the Chinese ambassador and Tibet?

I understand that the Chinese are a very patriotic people, and you have every right to be, with thousands of years of history and culture behind you. However, if you are afraid your views being misrepresented in any way, speaking through an interpreter seems like a strange option, and refusing to speak live on air, where there no possibility of bias, to clarify your position, is even stranger.

I think most Westerners would disagree, arguing that refusing to say anything suggests he has something to hide. I am not saying he does, I am merely saying that logical argument and presentation of facts provides a much more convincing case than yet more stony silence from China. You want us to see that you are in the right, why not tell us and show us?

What then, in your opinion, is the job of an ambassador?

The fundemental reason we have such a debate is that the logic of our argument, of our thinking and of the way we are presenting ourself are vastly different. That's the difference between the east and the west.

Or put it simply in another way, we think -20 degrees in the winter is not that cold as we used to, but you will cause you never experienced that.

The point is our value, measurement system are so difference that we realise the fact that it is not a right thing to issue our opinion or measure your doing right or wrong based on our value, but you did not.

Pro C

SeanW wrote: »

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.

Yeah, wonder if DL was or is that great, why he need to hide his ass with anti-China fundings.

Here is another part, how many people ever seen the photo of that the guy stand in front of the tank in 6.4, many, but how many saw what happens after that, many of you draw quick conclusions, and BBC cut the footage right there without showing the rest. If you are one of the clueless about the western biased media, watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo

What is BBC trying to hide?

Grudaire

Pro C wrote: »

Yeah, wonder if DL was or is that great, why he need to hide his ass with anti-China fundings.

Here is another part, how many people ever seen the photo of that the guy stand in front of the tank in 6.4, many, but how many saw what happens after that, many of you draw quick conclusions, and BBC cut the footage right there without showing the rest. If you are one of the clueless about the western biased media, watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo

What is BBC trying to hide?

Not this "f***"ing link again,

Have you even watched it?

Breezer

Pro C wrote: »

The fundemental reason we have such a debate is that the logic of our argument, of our thinking and of the way we are presenting ourself are vastly different. That's the difference between the east and the west.

Or put it simply in another way, we think -20 degrees in the winter is not that cold as we used to, but you will cause you never experienced that.

The point is our value, measurement system are so difference that we realise the fact that it is not a right thing to issue our opinion or measure your doing right or wrong based on our value, but you did not.

I am well aware that Chinese people view many things differently to Western people. A few years ago, I became well acquainted with a Chinese man living here in Ireland, and he explained some of these things to me. I know that pride in one's self and one's country are very important to your people, and that something an Irish person might laugh off, a Chinese person might find deeply offensive.

However, I don't think your analogy about the temperature is a particularly good one. The point I was making was that the Chinese want us to understand their point of view. If they won't put that point of view to us, and won't let our media see and report back to us, then we are not going to understand it. Whatever China thinks about revealing facts, it must understand that if it wants good relations with the west then facts need to be revealed, because that is how the west operates. Simply marching out of meetings and then refusing to say anything will get China nowhere.

yen

Breezer wrote: »

Ireland spent a good year or more fighting for Irish to be recognised as an official language of the EU. Prionsias de Rossa MEP has used Irish in Europe. Enda Kenny frequently speaks in Irish on our national media, as do Eamon Ó Cuív and Mary Hanafin. Bu are we discussing Ireland and the Irish language, or are we discussing Gormley, the Chinese ambassador and Tibet?

I understand that the Chinese are a very patriotic people, and you have every right to be, with thousands of years of history and culture behind you. However, if you are afraid your views being misrepresented in any way, speaking through an interpreter seems like a strange option, and refusing to speak live on air, where there no possibility of bias, to clarify your position, is even stranger.

I think most Westerners would disagree, arguing that refusing to say anything suggests he has something to hide. I am not saying he does, I am merely saying that logical argument and presentation of facts provides a much more convincing case than yet more stony silence from China. You want us to see that you are in the right, why not tell us and show us?

What then, in your opinion, is the job of an ambassador?

First of all, I think need to make 2 things clear, tibet case and olympics.
tibet case is a political event. Olympics are sports which spread peace and friendness. I donot think 2 things should be mixed or confused together. from media and politicans obviouly make 2 things connected as most of people said refuse to go to beijing for OLY if chinese do not slove the problem and give tibet back to dalai lama. Oly. seems is a chip to help dalai lama to get tibet on hand. that is not acceptable. I will think that is awful and trickly dirtly way to perform.

if talking about events in tibet, your guys say chinese government should give tibet back to dalai Lama. do not talk about the thousands years history, forget it, just talking about in 100 years about tibet. dalai lama has controlled tibet at 60 years ago, after second war, chinese government gave Dalai Lama same power in the tempers as before and treated him is master of tempers in tibet but there was one condition, all of people must be free, the slaves will no longer be slaves anymore and all of the land
must allocated to all poor people or slaves. from your point it might be wrong, becuase these land are belong to those people who had before. the situation was in tibet is that no road is wide then a meter, no any technical contained equipment and of course no electrical staff, no lights too. if you have been tibet, you might be surprised, Lhasa just same as normal chinese cities, new, moden. that is chinese government has done all of their job in tibet.
but what dalai lama has done his job? he refused chinese goverment's condition to give freedom to slaves and give out the lands from few rich people. he had run out this place and forget all of tibet people if he loves them as he said. what is going to happen? if he controls tibet? chinese government said, always welcome dalai lama come back to tibet if he can give up the separating of tibet from china. he is a monk, why he wants power? why he want fully control tibet? why he wants it independent? he still a master of the region in tibet without doubt, is it not enought be a leader of the region for a monk? did he ask tibet people want to be independent same as him?

last question, does he has right to kill others, to burn shops, to make peole afraid to go to the street? does he has the right to make tibet people has worse life and live in violence? it will be much acceptable if he just burn goverment buildings and do not kill innocent people.

my opion of this case, who support dalai lama, who give him the money? that must be a hugh amount of money. I was told he pays 50 to 300 euro in france this time to those tibet flag holders in paris torch carry, someone ever asked, he can carry chinese flag if chinese can pay more. I wonder what is purpose to support such big money to them?
but obviouly dalai lama has picked up very good time and good words as human rights. all of the world are give bad comments to chinese about human rights. when european heard this world, everybody feel that is their duty to say something to help dalai lama get human rights? I wonder is that human rights also mean slavery? does slavery mean freedom?
we are the people who live in china, we has no doubt about freedom and human rights we have, why people who not live in china all the time talking about it for us? we will not just follow up as you wished, we just be ourself having own way to live. we enjoy it that is enough. you have rights to speak whatever what you think, also we have the right to do just as we wanted.
the only thing I would ask is that be fairly to chinese, tell the truth by the media, be treated same as european to those chinese who works in irish companies. we do not ask for help, whatever how poor we are, no more then be treated fairly.

Pro C

Breezer wrote: »

I am well aware that Chinese people view many things differently to Western people. A few years ago, I became well acquainted with a Chinese man living here in Ireland, and he explained some of these things to me. I know that pride in one's self and one's country are very important to your people, and that something an Irish person might laugh off, a Chinese person might find deeply offensive.

However, I don't think your analogy about the temperature is a particularly good one. The point I was making was that the Chinese want us to understand their point of view. If they won't put that point of view to us, and won't let our media see and report back to us, then we are not going to understand it. Whatever China thinks about revealing facts, it must understand that if it wants good relations with the west then facts need to be revealed, because that is how the west operates. Simply marching out of meetings and then refusing to say anything will get China nowhere.

I respect your first part, you know what you are talking about, at least. No like those who knows nothing about China and starting comment.

There are two points I want to say, first, if talking about another country, better see it in your own eyes, rather through a LCD, there will be something added or taken away. Same for me, if I have never come to Ireland, I would reserve my comment until the day I am here.

Secondly, your logic is, China want to be understood>should put their point of view to the west>you may or may not understand, but don't you realise after all those we have said, if you did not making accusassion about us in the first place, which we never asked your point of view - thanks very much, we would not want to be understood.

See, we start on different point, tbh, don't you feel the western are nosy and in fact that's where hurt our feelings.

Breezer

Yen, I have no idea why you quoted me there, and can only assume you hit the button by mistake. I never mentioned the Olympics, not did I say that the Chinese government should give Tibet to the Dalai Lama. Neither did Minister Gormley say this; he merely called for dialogue to be initiated. If, then, the Dalai Lama demands nothing less than full sovereignty that flies in the face of all evidence that he has a right to it, and threatens more violence if he doesn't get it, then maybe China has a point. Until then, all we have to go on is monks saying one thing about the past and politicians saying another, with no effort being made to establish order through peaceful means.

Pro C wrote: »

I respect your first part, you know what you are talking about, at least. Knows nothing about China and starting comment.

There are two points I want to say, first, if talking about another country, better see it in your own eyes, rather through a LCD, there will be something added or taken away. Same for me, if I have never come to Ireland, I would reserve my comment until the day I am here.

Secondly, your logic is, China want to be understood>should put their point of view to the west>you may or may not understand, but don't you realise after all those we have said, if you did not making accusassion about us in the first place, which we never asked your point of view - thanks very much, we would not want to be understood.

See, we start on different point, tbh, don't you feel the western are nosy and in fact that's where hurt our feelings.

I agree with your first point, to some extent. However, journalists have access to facilities a tourist would not, for example they can talk to important figures from both sides, as well as the general population.

Regarding your second point, I think we have now reached the crux of the matter: China does not want to be understood. For years, the CCP took this line, and China became an extremely insular nation. I will not go any further into the matter because it doesn't matter: that period is over and China now wants to deal with the west. The thing is, for this to happen, the west needs to be able to understand China. We do not believe in dealing with people we know nothing about, because we are uncomfortable with the idea that our money may then be used for purposes we do not support, such as human rights abuses. All China has to do is show us (not tell us) that it is not abusing any people in Tibet, and we will be happy. But China prefers not to show us this.

On a related point, Ireland has signed the UN Declaration on Human Rights. It has a duty to uphold this declaration and to put pressure on those that aren't to do so. Human rights have been called into question in China. Minister Gormley merely asked for dialogue to take place between the two sides involved in your internal dispute in order that human rights may be upheld. That is not interfering in the way that, for example, the US did in Iraq.

Grudaire

Pro C wrote: »

Secondly, your logic is, China want to be understood>should put their point of view to the west>you may or may not understand, but don't you realise after all those we have said, if you did not making accusassion about us in the first place, which we never asked your point of view - thanks very much, we would not want to be understood.

See, we start on different point, tbh, don't you feel the western are nosy and in fact that's where hurt our feelings.

The Tibetans asked our point of view, and that's being lost in translation. Clearly they are dissatisfied, and it's unclear/unlikely that the Chinese government is giving them fair treatment

Pro C

Cliste wrote: »

The Tibetans asked our point of view, and that's being lost in translation. Clearly they are dissatisfied, and it's unclear/unlikely that the Chinese government is giving them fair treatment

Really, proof??

BTW, just saw the 9 o'clock news, for those who is interested, German Chancellor Angela Merkel did not speak English in her speech.

Something to learn everyday.

Mr. Presentable

The nub of all this is that we do not trust what China tells us. Ironically we base this distrust on information we get from the UK and USA, chiefly, and they at least we know to be untrustworthy.

So, if we only get from Tibet

a) What the USA/UK wants us to see, and

b) What China wants to show us

How can we have informed opinion?

Realistically, this superpower accounts for almost one third of the world. We need to get our heads from the sand and start being respectful. No-one here can say that the USA (for example) has a better record on human rights that China, why are we not shunning them?

Tomas_V

yen wrote: »

I have answered question clearly to you, my ambassador walked out because your Mr Gormely has recognized Tibet is a country but not a part of china.

Except that this is not the question that I asked. But to be fair, unless you work at the embassy or back in Beijing, you would know the answers.

As to Northern Ireland. We're working to resolve our differences with our former enemies/opponents and are very grateful for the foreign help with the reconciliation process. We would be very glad to share this experience with you.

Grudaire

Pro C wrote: »

Really, proof??

The riots/ political unrest..... the whole thing where people getting killed no? or did I miss something?:rolleyes:

Pro C wrote: »

BTW, just saw the 9 o'clock news, for those who is interested, German Chancellor Angela Merkel did not speak English in her speech.

Something to learn everyday.

? and.....?

Pro C

Yes, you are missing the riots was directed by the DL, there are civilian and innocent people killed in the riots.

To your second paragraph, and that's why Mr. Liu speak Chinese to RTE.

Grudaire

Pro C wrote: »

Yes, you are missing the riots was directed by the DL, there are civilian and innocent people killed in the riots.

To your second paragraph, and that's why Mr. Liu speak Chinese to RTE.

For there to be people to actually riot, they have to care about something, I'd be interested in what that is.

Was she talking to the Irish/ the national Irish station?

Breezer

nipplenuts wrote: »

No-one here can say that the USA (for example) has a better record on human rights that China, why are we not shunning them?

Because we have a long-established relationship with the US and Fianna Fáil refuse to say boo to them for fear of jeopardising that. We should, at the very least, be ensuring no unauthorised renditions are stopping off at Shannon.

yen

As to Northern Ireland. We're working to resolve our differences with our former enemies/opponents and are very grateful for the foreign help with the reconciliation process. We would be very glad to share this experience with you.[/quote]

1， what is human rights can be if there is even no fair?
2. as a chinese, very welcome wester people to visit china, and desired to have good communication with others and would be very happy if others can give help, but basically we need respection at the front. we do not need bias, refuse to be diseateemed and should not be accusatoried without the truth.
if you would give help, the only thing we need is media and politican tell speak with the truth. do not cover anything and just pick up the contect which they need to make different stories to make it more political.

Pro C

Cliste wrote: »

For there to be people to actually riot, they have to care about something, I'd be interested in what that is.

Was she talking to the Irish/ the national Irish station?

No, but government official represents a nation and that why she spoke German there, and that's called self-esteem.

Apart from using English as official language countries, Irish government heads were one of the very few do not speak their own language in occasions like that. Can't think which country is the next.

Grudaire

Pro C wrote: »

No, but government official represents a nation and that why she spoke German there, and that's called self-esteem.

Apart from using English as official language countries, Irish government heads were one of the very few do not speak their own language in occasions like that. Can't think which country is the next.

Eh- what? the head of state of Germany, not talking to Ireland or an English speaking country, talks in German.
This is put in a direct comparison to a representative of China, addressing the Irish people, through their national Tv station, come on.... it's no wonder that we have 'failure to communicate' here

Jim_Are_Great

Pro C wrote: »

Ok, the first part, you contradict yourself here.

And you "fact", how do you know that? From BBC I guess.

No, ProC, I didn't contradict myself. Not at all. I was quite clear. And your second sentence doesn't even make sense. I appreciate that may have to do with an imperfect grasp of the English language, but if you are unable to linguistically express a point, just leave it alone.

Pro C wrote: »

Because your media is biased, as not showing any interest in our protest

Look, you're going to have to cut that out. Firstly, pro-Chinese demonstrations have featured on the fromt page of the Irish Times for two days running. How does that demonstrate bias?

Secondly, people on this forum like to discuss things. That's why the forum exists. People come here to have intelligent talks about things they believe in. China, at the current moment in time, is something people have strong opinions on. So it's great that we have threads like this to talk about it, and people with different views to debate with. But we can't possibly talk, in any way, if you insist on reducing every argument put against you with silly claims about biased media. That's not a discussion. If that's all you will say, you may as well say nothing.

Thirdly, the "western media" is a meaningless phrase. To what does it refer exactly? If you are referring to all media sources from states described as liberal democracies, then to describe them as a single entity in absurd. They are all distinct, usually corporate, entites, and have no concerted objective at all.

So let's continue this discussion with minimal reference to ridiculous biased media allegations.

yen

Cliste wrote: »

For there to be people to actually riot, they have to care about something, I'd be interested in what that is.

Was she talking to the Irish/ the national Irish station?

hi, I can show you a statement from tibetan separatist. it bit joke for me, but i can not copy to here directly, it is chinese, but I can send you by email if you want to read it in chinese.

it means,:( they did not use violence, from the understanding of violence by tiben people, only killing is called violence. from the video, can only see they hit or beat people, just it, no killing, also people are running away after got beat. those people killed are just accident, from chinese governemnt video can see, these people just hided into the house when they fire the house, they did not know there are people in the house, so that is accident be killied. it is not called riot.

if you agree with these points then I have nothing to say about it.

Pro C

Cliste wrote: »

For there to be people to actually riot, they have to care about something, I'd be interested in what that is.

Was she talking to the Irish/ the national Irish station?

simply put, she spoke German, not English when making her speech

Pro C

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

No, ProC, I didn't contradict myself. Not at all. I was quite clear. And your second sentence doesn't even make sense. I appreciate that may have to do with an imperfect grasp of the English language, but if you are unable to linguistically express a point, just leave it alone.


Look, you're going to have to cut that out. Firstly, pro-Chinese demonstrations have featured on the fromt page of the Irish Times for two days running. How does that demonstrate bias?

Secondly, people on this forum like to discuss things. That's why the forum exists. People come here to have intelligent talks about things they believe in. China, at the current moment in time, is something people have strong opinions on. So it's great that we have threads like this to talk about it, and people with different views to debate with. But we can't possibly talk, in any way, if you insist on reducing every argument put against you with silly claims about biased media. That's not a discussion. If that's all you will say, you may as well say nothing.

Thirdly, the "western media" is a meaningless phrase. To what does it refer exactly? If you are referring to all media sources from states described as liberal democracies, then to describe them as a single entity in absurd. They are all distinct, usually corporate, entites, and have no concerted objective at all.

So let's continue this discussion with minimal reference to ridiculous biased media allegations.

I am here long enough to get what you tactic is, LOL, when you can't back it up, use language as a weapon, shame on you.

You second part must come from the stone age, obviously you haven't catch up with the pace, may went off for a few Dutch Gold, right?

GuanYin

Pro C, this is the internet, it is easy to misunderstand language at the best of times (I do) so please, not need to be aggressive.

Regarding your second paragraph. If you post like that again on this forum, you'll be banned.

I'm going to make one last warning to everyone.

KEEP IT CIVIL!

AngryHippie

nipplenuts wrote: »

The nub of all this is that we do not trust what China tells us. Ironically we base this distrust on information we get from the UK and USA, chiefly, and they at least we know to be untrustworthy.

So, if we only get from Tibet

a) What the USA/UK wants us to see, and

b) What China wants to show us

How can we have informed opinion?

Realistically, this superpower accounts for almost one third of the world. We need to get our heads from the sand and start being respectful. No-one here can say that the USA (for example) has a better record on human rights that China, why are we not shunning them?

Their record is worse, in the sense that they have one, they record the casualties (mostly) in their ridiculous wars and conflicts, Unfortunately to maintain the patriotic fervour and respect of their home population, the Chinese government has deemed it prudent and necessary to control the information available to their own populace, and takes huge offense any time it is called to book on the matter, Be it an olympics related stunt or the means of control of the Tibetan people, China has no right to deny access to anyone interested in writing on the subject, the writing can then be peer judged and its merits assessed, but a media blackout or government censorship are two very dangerous situations in which civil rights can all to easily be abused. It could well happen that Chinas claims are legitimate, It could well happen that the majority of Tibetans prefer their independence, This is not up to China to decide, It is up to the Tibetan people. Until they are given a platform to express their wishes, the media curtain should be lifted. After that, whatever necessary measures to restore order can be put in place.
But it'll never happen...

Pro C

Breezer wrote: »

Yen, I have no idea why you quoted me there, and can only assume you hit the button by mistake. I never mentioned the Olympics, not did I say that the Chinese government should give Tibet to the Dalai Lama. Neither did Minister Gormley say this; he merely called for dialogue to be initiated. If, then, the Dalai Lama demands nothing less than full sovereignty that flies in the face of all evidence that he has a right to it, and threatens more violence if he doesn't get it, then maybe China has a point. Until then, all we have to go on is monks saying one thing about the past and politicians saying another, with no effort being made to establish order through peaceful means.

I agree with your first point, to some extent. However, journalists have access to facilities a tourist would not, for example they can talk to important figures from both sides, as well as the general population.

Regarding your second point, I think we have now reached the crux of the matter: China does not want to be understood. For years, the CCP took this line, and China became an extremely insular nation. I will not go any further into the matter because it doesn't matter: that period is over and China now wants to deal with the west. The thing is, for this to happen, the west needs to be able to understand China. We do not believe in dealing with people we know nothing about, because we are uncomfortable with the idea that our money may then be used for purposes we do not support, such as human rights abuses. All China has to do is show us (not tell us) that it is not abusing any people in Tibet, and we will be happy. But China prefers not to show us this.

On a related point, Ireland has signed the UN Declaration on Human Rights. It has a duty to uphold this declaration and to put pressure on those that aren't to do so. Human rights have been called into question in China. Minister Gormley merely asked for dialogue to take place between the two sides involved in your internal dispute in order that human rights may be upheld. That is not interfering in the way that, for example, the US did in Iraq.

We are not accussing John for what he said about the open dialogue, probably at this stage we can't care less, the world fued our anger is he refer Tibet as a country, believe or not, it is insulting.

To your second point, although government request to show how the CCP deals with the human rights issue, does it really mean or have a effect on anything, maybe just by saying "yeah, we have put our point across - as a ass covering act, isn't it?" you businesses are still investing and capturing profit before the crisis is resloved, that's the greedy part of capitalism.

The US has made decision about the war in Iraq long before the UN declaration, wonder does the UN has anypower these days?

Pro C

Tomas_V wrote: »

Except that this is not the question that I asked. But to be fair, unless you work at the embassy or back in Beijing, you would know the answers.

As to Northern Ireland. We're working to resolve our differences with our former enemies/opponents and are very grateful for the foreign help with the reconciliation process. We would be very glad to share this experience with you.

No. Thanks! Our country will never be torn apart!