Talk:2008 Tibetan unrest/Archive 4

Complementary Material
Hello, everyone, as you might notice I did some major changes in the background section, not deleting any old information but add complementary material for a more complete picture. I think the effort would let this topic more neutral. So far, I have not cite the original sources, not because I don't want, but because I have to learn how to do it. I promise I will do it asap.

I also consider to add some complementary material in the unrest section, however, due to the controversial nature, I want to see how my changes in the background section accepted or unaccepted before I spend time to do that. Sildroad (talk) 21:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The revision, which I made yesterday about the role of CIA on Tibet Independent Movement has been deleted with no explanation. This topic is politically sensitive with controversial nature but the current version is not balanced at all. While I did not delete any opinion from the TIM side, I wonder why the additional information from the other side is refused to reveal by whoever delete my revision. Is it a sign that the one who delete it refuse to be in a neutral point of view? Sildroad (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You've added to the article popular misconceptions like "all Dalai Lamas have been appointed by central Chinese governments in history after the application of Tibet local governments, since several hundred years ago" and bizarre claims like "small kids were killed for harvesting their skins each year to celebrate birthdays of Dalai Lama" with no citations. If you do that, it's natural for other editors to be suspicious of your contributions.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!•What have I done?) 23:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) About the appointment for Dalai Lamas, I started the paragraph that "It is generally believed in China", which means the opinion is from one side of the conflicts. There are plenty references in literature that support this statement in China and of course I can complement the sources of documents in history (all in Chinese), although they could regarded to be valueless by all TI supporters regard as valueless The “popular misconception” (you mean unpopular misconception?) are not neutral words. If any one the “general believe” in China   is wrong, it is better to be present his/her own citation, than delete and block the “misconception” which hold by over a billion Chinese, unless Wiki is not a place for balancing different views.


 * 2) There are also plenty documents and even photographs of the skins from small children peeled off by the Dalai Lama’s loyalists. I hesitated to cite them because I worried it would not be pleasant for the readers to see. Also, I tried to restrain myself to put too much information, in order to prevent too much opinion from one side make the article unbalanced. I only stated Chinese believe this story without explaining the reasons.


 * But if it is necessary to present the evidence and elucidate, according to what information most Chinese think the Dalai Lama is a slave master who killed small kids and harvest their skins, I don’t have to keep the scruple any more and I will certainly offer my service in the next version.


 * Vandalism is to remove information but not to add information. I did not remove any information from former edition that favor Tibet Independence, but just present additional information from the other side to give a more complete picture. This would help to understand how the so called “strongest nationalism ever seen in China” could happen. I hope to cooperate, but not clash, with any other editors in this issue by respecting the contribution from the other party, despite of different points of view.


 * Finally citing all the references might imply that the article would become too long. I don't know how to open a new Topic something like "Argument that support or oppose Tibet as a part of China."Sildroad (talk) 11:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The passage in question did not make it clear that "all Dalai Lamas have been appointed by central Chinese governments in history after the application of Tibet local governments, since several hundred years ago" and the thing about the skin of children are being described as popular opinions rather than as facts, which is an important distinction for an encyclopedia to make. I certainly agree that the opinions of the Chinese public are relevant to the article and should be described. This is tricky, however, because I suppose there are not many sources that explicitly demonstrate what Chinese people think about these things&mdash;as opposed to sources which make their own assertions which an editor then decides represents public opinion.


 * Regarding the use of Chinese sources: normally, it's fine to use sources in any language. This is again a bit tricky, though, if you are making controversial edits to a politically sensitive article. Other editors will want to review your sources, but many will be met with a language barrier. I'm not sure what the best way of handling that is.


 * "Vandalism is to remove information but not to add information." That's not quite right. Vandalism is any bad-faith edit which removes text or adds nonsense or intentionally incorrect information. Good faith edits are not included in the definition of vandalism. There are various good and bad reason why a well-intentioned editor might remove text.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!•What have I done?) 22:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I have made the revision concerning the selecting system of Dalai Lamas in history and involvement of NAD/RFA/CIA, by citing a lot more original sources. I have not time yet revise the part concerning the slavery system in Tibet but I will do it, in the next few days, from both Chinese source (that I will acknowledge if they are state-controlled) and western sources that public can not directly accessed from major media. I understand that the language a obstacle for English speakers to judge if Chinese sources are nonsense or not, but it will always be before anyone they trusted are willing to translate. I just want leave clue here for find the reference and the reader unfortunately have to find their own way to solve the language problem.


 * Concerning the excruciation in Tibet, such as whether the slave masters kill small kids and offered their skin for celebrating birthdays of Dalai Lama, other than citing the references, I plan to present the photographs of Tibetan music instrument made by human bones, human skull painted as adornment for the Tibetan upper class, the peeled skins of kids and the hand-writing official documents in Tibetan language for ordering the supply. I also plan to present the photographs of dead bodies of those civilians who were poured on gas and burned alive and those whose eyes and ear were cut off by the protesters, together with some photographs of the protesters in with swords and knives in their attacking. I understood these photograph might be unwelcome and disgusting for many so that I did not planned to do so. But now the pictures seems to be necessary for me to prove whether I am intentionally adding nonsense or incorrect information.


 * So far, I don't know how to post and quote pictures in Wiki. I would appreciate if any one could tell me.


 * Here is a link for the TV program about Dalai Lama made by Penn Jillette, in which some of my picture come from. Perhaps it helps to judge whether my contribution about life of Tibet slaves and their masters are nonsense. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7t2Ztb92mE&feature=related


 * Perhaps I should also remind that people have different values about what is good or bad faith. Some people believe killing innocent civilians in a "uprising" is good while some others think it is bad. The Chinese authority jam Radio Free Asia because they think the information from the latter are bad nonsense. In every conflict or something with controversial nature on earth, arguments from one side are always regarded as bad nonsenses. To be popular in one side must be unpopular in the controversial side. If I understand correctly, this should be balanced in Wiki and let the reader judge which one is nonsense. Of course, I can't agree more the contribution should not be intentionally incorrect information, which I personally think might exist in the current version before my editions.


 * The edition seem to be too time-consuming for me and I can only do a little bit each day. It would take me many days to finish my contributions Sildroad (talk) 14:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think it is very relevant for this article that old Tibet had mummies and skull cups. No more relevant than pointing out the Chinese practice of footbinding (or all the other outrageous things Chinese people practised in the past) when talking about the opium wars.


 * Saying all this was planned by the FDP ( without source edit: and citing german-foreign-policy.com) almost borders on the ridiculous. Does this mean FDP mastermind Guido Westerwelle can never travel to China again? I am all for mentioning this claim (as a claim!) if we indeed can find some at least semi-official source for it (Xinhua, People's Daily etc.), but just repeating nonsensical conspiration theories does not seem like a very good idea. Yaan (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * History has already been presented in the previous version and my contribution is just for balance. It is helpful to understand whether the original protests for supporting the Dalai Lama, the Nobel-Peace-Price-Winner was peaceful or not. It is also relevant to the so-called nationalism ever see in China. These new contribution help the West and China to understand each other.


 * In the previous version, it was stated that the conflicts were caused by ethnic hatred, with inclination that the violent attack on civilians is because Tibetan people miss happiness under leadership of the Nobel-Peace-Price-winner Dalai Lama before China's invasion in 195x. The new complementary materials, together with the previous information that I have never removed, might give readers an option to decide whether the so-called ethnic hatred is artificial or not and have better chance to understand the background and the reason for the riot. If you find foot-binding in China is important to understand the riot, for example, all ethnic Tibetans hate Chinese because of their foot-binding in the past, I believe you should add your own material instead of removing contributions from others that you don't want to readers to see.


 * If you show me the record that you tried to remove the previous contribution about the history favoring, I would believe your new removing is from a neutral stand consideration.


 * It should be readers who judge the so-called conspiration theory is nonsense or not, based on the inforamtion such as book from former CIA senior officers who engaged in secret war in Tibet. I believe tax payers in the west deserve a chance to access these information before their politicians use their money on the secret war for "Free Tibet Movement" in future, in similar way they use their money for "freeing" Iraq from Saddam Hussein. Since they have their own brain, if the material I presented is nonsense, they don't really need some one to block the harmful information for them like small children need custody of kindergarten.


 * Whether FDP foundation mastermind the protest should be judged by the readers after they access the information. I just present them without comments. If I really have to answer, I would say they are certainly not the major masterminder. The report itself already said the it a Washington based office who played the major role of orchestration, while the FDP foundation, funded by German-state, was involved as a minor player for some reasons I don't know. What I did is not to explain why they did but just present the source that indicate they might do it, and let others to find out if it is true and why. Moreover, Information about FDP foundation might help to understand why major German media reported the event in that way during the unrest. But it should be the reader to judge whether the information is valueless or notSildroad (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The following pictures might be also helpful to understand whether Tibetan rioters' violence were due to their lost happiness under leadership of the holy Dalai Lama. But I will hesitate to present them at this unless anyone would remove my contribution about the background because suspecting they are nonsense or intentionally false information.Sildroad (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Skin_of_killed_kids_collected_for_dalai_lama.jpg‎|The photograph presents skins of some small Tibetan children preserved in Museum of Tibet. It was alleged in the museum that the children were killed for offering their skins to the Dalai Lama before he fled to India in 1959.

Sildroad (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we can just go with Tom Grunfeld. I am to lazy to copy this stuff here, suffice to say that not every preserved body part in the world is from people who have died from unnatural causes. People like Gunther von Hagens might even tell you that even if the previous owner of certain body parts died from non-natural causes, it does not yet mean the reason he was killed was to harvest his body parts. But that discussion does not really belong here anyway, because I don't think anybody rioted for the right to sacrifice fellow humans. In fact, I don't even think the PRC liberated Tibet to prevent human sacrifices (why did they not do so after 1951 already? Why did the Chinese people all this happen in the first place when Tibet has always been part of China?). Yaan (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There must be something you misunderstand; the presented information is not for singing praise for Liberation of PRC, nor Free Tibet Movement of course, it is just to reveal the fact in the Tibet riot 2008. The riot involved a background of the CIA secret war in Tibet, as their former senior officer described in their book. Since the violence is alleged to be a consequence of "race discrimination" or history as the previous version quoted, a more complete picture for the history should be presented for fair chance to understand how the reliable these allegations are. Is it the fair chance for that you insist the information should be never here?Sildroad (talk) 15:00, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, if Yaan has his own opinion about whether collecting those skins of slaves children imply human right violation or unnatural death or not, I fully respect and have no will to force him to change his value view. However, the previous version put a human right as an important issue in this riot, the my contribution just provides complementary verifiable sources for those who may concern the background of the riot on the human right issue, as an balance for the counterpart of the old version without comments.


 * suffice to say that not every preserved body part in the world is from people who have died from unnatural causes. People like Gunther von Hagens might even tell you that even if the previous owner of certain body parts died from non-natural causes, it does not yet mean the reason he was killed was to harvest his body parts. Look  at this  “We need four fresh head, ten guts, various clean and dirty meat, various heart””In order to pray for celebrating Dalai Lama's birthday, we urgently need a fresh wet human gut, two fresh heads, bloods of a number of people, an entire human skin. Please send them as soon as possible.” , How, in your opinion, could they get ‘’’fresh’’’ human skull, heart or gut without killing their slaves? Do you think they keep the organ fresh in the refrigerator? Well, when sometimes they took leg bones for make music instrument, I agree that it did not necessarily cause unnatural death. But, if the body parts were possibly taken away from alive slaves, it is a bit odd that those, who put background of human right in Tibet so important to this riot, don’t consider the body parts for celebrating the birthday of Dalai Lama, who the rioters love so much support for,  was related to the human right background.

I did not plan to say the how the preserved body parts came from killed slaves, but it seems that I have to make it clear, not in this article, but somewhere else in Wiki. Unfortunately it was indeed alleged by some slaves from some at PRC controlled media or some western visitors before 1959, that the body parts were cut off either from slaved alive or killed. It is always necessary to check if these materials were fake or not, especially for the witnesses at PRC state-controlled sources. However, since so many sources agree on the same allegations, with photograph of these slaves whose organ was allegedly cut off by their slave master, you can’t just block the information for they don’t support your “Free Tibet” political stand without any reasonable argument to prove why they are not unreliable.

The above photographs were alleged the slaves whose hand or eyes were cut off by their slave masters during Dalai Lama’s regime for punishment.

The above pictures are the adornment made by skull and music instrument made by thighbones of young girls, which were allegedly, took off by the slave masters under Dalai Lama’s regime in Tibet. The last the picture was snapshot from Penn Jillette’s TV program.

I have to be honest that I have neither investigated whether human organs in any of these pictures were cut off by Tibet slave master or by the communists, nor I checked if Penn Jillette really investigated seriously before he made his allegation that agree to the communist ones. However, I did read a book Portrait of a Dalai Lama: Life and Times of the 13th, written Sir Charles Bell before the propaganda war between CIA and the communists started, in which the author confirmed killing cutting slaves’ organ was a costumes in Tibet punishment system. This book is available in Amaze http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Dalai-Lama-Life-Times/dp/8121509440/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242236903&sr=8-1. There was plenty of western sources (written before the Communist regime establish) that confirm the same allegation, quite a few that I have read myself. I would be happy to provide under request.

According to PRC source, when the 14th Dalai Lama launched a rebelling war in 1959 under support of CIA, a Tibetan merchant Dondabaza refused to join the rebelling team. The Dalai Lama' crews not only killed him and but also raped his wife. The rebelling army got a 9 years old boy Songny in the Pojang village, Naidong couty. They rift his stomach and took out his gut when he was alive, then took out his heart, cut his body into pieces and hang them on a tree in order to threaten others to follow them. I can’t say I really investigate myself if their story is true, but if one read the western sources that describe the old society before the communist regime, he/she would feel nothing strange if the winner of the Noble Peace Prize really did it. I did not comment at all whether the old system under Dalai Lama regime were good or bad, nor the communists regime, I just present the information for readers, especially for those in the west, who might pay tax to their politicians in future for Free Tibet movement, for their reference

I know the slave system should not be mentioned too much. Originally I just made simple statement that “In china it is generally believed that ……”, in order to reveal why the perceive about the riot between the West and China are so different. However, my statement was blamed as nonsense or intentionally false information, which makes me to add more information for the background, yet I tried to make it as short as possible. I would accept if my simply statement recovered with citation to replace the long description, but will not accept they were completely removed.Sildroad (talk) 20:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I find it interestin that you think you know my political point of view. Do you have access do secret dossiers from Chinese secret services, are you psychic, or are you just once again putting more into someone's words than is really there?


 * Maybe you can just tell me in one or two sentences how all this is supposed to be relevant to this article. This article is not about why you think Tibetans should be happy to be ruled by Chinese (even though according to the PRC, they have always been ruled by Chinese!), it is about some incidents in 2008. What happened, why, the consequences etc. Even if some of your material should be relevant, I already told you this can all be summed up as "according to the People's Republic of China [choose similar wording as you like], Tibet under the Dalai Lamas [or under the Chinese Qing Dynasty, under the ROC and under PRC rule between 1951 and 1959] was a brutal feudalistic regime."


 * Re. your reply to my comment above. I did not say there were no penal amputations in pre-1951 (or pre-1959?) Tibet, I said there is little evidence for human sacrifices. And that skull cups or drums with human skin don't prove the contrary.


 * Look, I don't think you speak Tibetan or made the picture of the letters and those skins yourself, and you don't tell us where those images are taken from. (Edit: They are from an online forum) Right now I even have my doubts that they are part of what the PRC claims about the Dalai Lama, and not just from some random weblog.


 * In any case, you have not shown one source that says any of these abuses and alleged abuses have contributed to the riot. I consider this therefore completely off-topic. Yaan (talk) 16:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * ’’“Right now I even have my doubts that they are part of what the PRC claims about the Dalai Lama, and not just from some random weblog. ’’ If you ask me how to make sure those picture were not fake ones that PRC make to slander Dalai Lama, it is really difficult for me to answer . However, it you just ask me whether PRC make these claiming, it can’t be easier to answer. All the pictures above can be found in the web page of Xin-Hua news agency. Here I provide the original link of three of the above pictures. http://www.xizang.xinhua.org/misc/2008-11/12/content_14900862.htm  http://www.xizang.xinhua.org/misc/2008-11/12/content_14900862.htm In the first link, the caption said “In 1959, the shepherd Buder was telling how his slave-master cut off his eyes ”. In the second link, the translation of the letter, in which the author ask the senior masters to offer fresh human organs., into Han-Chinese. I don’t expect to convince you to withdraw your doubt any more, after you showed your insistent effort to exclusively chose the material that favor TI, and in the same time tried your best to block all the fact/information that could reveal the thing your don’t like public to know.


 * ’’In any case, you have not shown one source that says any of these abuses and alleged abuses have contributed to the riot. I consider this therefore completely off-topic.’’ In a war, the fighters would consider any information from enemy completely off-topic for his own propaganda, and should be block off. You have shown yourself as a good fight for “Free Tibet Movement”. No matter how the slavery system is relevant, I don’t expect you consideration can be changed. If you own Wikepedia and can block any information as you like, there is no point I should spend time here to provide complementary information. However, if I don’t make it wrong, you don’t own Wiki and Wiki hopes its information as neutral and balance, which implies they don’t want to block information that does not fit someone’s political interests. So I don’t care what you consider. I guess, soon or later, one of us would apply the protection of this page. Perhaps you should consider whether you want to do this, because, although I don’t want to delete any information you present, I would not give up to present the information that you want to block.


 * By the way, there are simply too many sources among those western politicians and media who use human right to justify the protest. In fact in the current version of this article, you also put human right in the important position as background to justify the violence. The information about slavery system is directly complement the most important source, i.e this article. Look at this in your versionTibet and among the Dalai Lama's followers, to take advantage of this Olympic year. But also inspired simply by all these festering grievances on the ground in Lhasa,"[19] and he noted in another report that "The rioting seemed to be primarily an eruption of ethnic hatred."[3] Some Tibetans also complained about social discrimination, unequal pay, and rumors that Tibetan monks had been arrested, and even killed, in the days before the riots.[20]. Your statement use poverty as an excuse of the riot, my presented information indicated that the poverty under Dalai Lama's regime might be much worse. If it is true, it is very understandable people who newly moved into Lhasa from other area are richer than the local people before the economy growth in future.


 * Further more, in your current version, there is a link for "background" which direct to human right in China. Tibet now is internationally recognized as a part of China by most countries (no matter how relunctant some might be), since your favored previous version put the in Tibet and China so important, the human right in Tibet history should be also included as a complementary material.


 * Also my material was direct counter part to this in the older version The People's Republic of China government's invasion of Tibet in 1951 and the failed revolt in 1959 continue to generate tensions. While recognized by most countries and the United Nations, the legitimacy of Chinese sovereignty has been questioned by advocates of Tibetan independence. However the Dalai Lama has excluded independence from consideration, while demanding autonomy within China. It is interesting that you don't mind the above background unrelated until you find my counterpart.


 * If you need more source, I remember I watch Euro News report for the riot in their Web site. They always remember to say "China invade Tibet and Tibetan people suffer....." as background. Human right issue was always mentioned in CNN. I can find the web page, for any referee here, but too lazy to find for your, because it does make any difference for you no matter what I present.


 * By the way, I like your pictures. You have shown me your creative way, making an nonsense theory to prove another unfavored theory as nonsense. You have contributed a brand new logic thinking of proving which has never been seen since ancient Greeks contributed their logic thinking in the world. Did you find anything in Holy Bible or letters by Popes, bishops or priests that ordering fresh human gut/heart or skull to church for celebrating every birthday of them? If yes, I do think people should investigate seriously whether "Christians kill your kids" is true or not.Sildroad (talk) 00:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * "In a war, the fighters would consider any information from enemy completely off-topic for his own propaganda, and should be block off." Be that as it may, you should actually discuss the topic of your contributions' relevance to the article instead of responding with ad hominems, which are certainly irrelevant.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 00:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The relevance is not difficult to find. There is a propaganda war between Chinese authority and the "Free Tibet movement". If Mr. Yaan stand with the latter, who claim they did not mastermind the violence, of course he would hav the motivation to block any information from the enemy under excuse of irrelevance.


 * The relevance of my statement is not difficult to find. There is a propaganda war between Chinese authority and the "Free Tibet movement", in fact the violence, including gun shooting, might close to a real way of small scale. If Mr. Yaan stand with the latter in this propaganda war, who claim they did not mastermind the violence, of course he would certainly consider to block any information from the enemy, no matter under excuse of irrelevance, or not So his consideration should not be regarded as NPOV.


 * The relevance of my complementary background information to the article is also very clear. According to these information, the riot might be a hidden continuation of various CIA secret war in Tibet in the past 40 years. Some of those in the West, who stand with the protesters, might have their own interests as shown in the history. To present the knowledge, is just like some major West present information about "Chinese invasion in 1950s, human right violation, race discrimination, ethnic hatred etc force Tibetan People Uprising", which is quoted in the previous version of this article. The backgrounds from both parties help the readers to find out the interests of those who provide information to them. For example, reader might have a second think when they see the lovely Nobel peace prize winner Dalai Lama appeal to oppose human right abuse in Tibet by supporting the global protest after they saw the picture presented above. They also might reconsider whether they should continue to pay another $400 millions to something like Radio Free Asia or BBC for helping Tibetan people to gain their freedom, when they read information from both sides together with other neutral sources. That is the whole point they want to know about this event.


 * To present background information exclusively from one side in this propaganda war, as Mr. Yaan insisted, is not a neutral point of view, and blocking the information from his enemy is abolishing the right of readers who want to know the truth. It should be the reader who decide what information is relevant and accurate. Sildroad (talk) 16:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

cont.
Dear Sildroad, to be honest I see only one person here imagining him(or her?)self to be fighting in a propaganda war. Brave little soldier. Thank you anyway for adding at least some useful links to the Chinese translations of those letters. I guess the link with the skins just got lost in sensation. I still fail to see how all this is relevant to the article. So far, the only arguments I have seen from you in all that lengthy discussion above seem to be something like "This is relevant because economic conditions can not have been a reason for these protests/riots, as Tibet was much poorer 50 years ago" and "the riot might be a hidden continuation of various CIA secret war in Tibet in the past 40 years".

Re. the first point, if you can bring up a relevant source (not some blog post or forum entry) that makes exactly this point - just add the information. But your argument is by no means self-evident: 45 years ago people in Gaza or the West Bank had no colour TV sets, a lower life expectancy and higher children mortality than nowadays. That does not mean poverty does not contribute to the current intifada. Actually, if monthly income in Lhasa is so low that you only need to pay someone a few RMB in order to make him riot (but do you pay before or afterwards, or 50-50?), as one of your additions to the article implies, it's not very surprising to think that people might be frustrated about their situation, even if 50 years ago they would have had it much worse. In fact, Xinhua seems to be on the record for saying that economic conditions can contribute to unrest even within the PRC.

Re. the second point, again please find a relevant source. I don't think quotingspeculations of a guy who is on the record for saying Iraq "may have" trained up to 200 al Qaida "personnel" (p.19) is suitable for an encyclopdia. Xinhua statements at least reliably give the POV of one party relevant to those riots. Vague ramblings by some Richard M. Bennett on the other hand are just irrelevant. Yaan (talk) 11:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Btw. are you aware that china.com is a private company from Hongkong, not some part of the Chinese state media? Yaan (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)