Archive for March 17th, 2008


No Thugs In Our House, Are There Dear? We Made That Clear

So by now, some of you may have heard about unrest occurring in Lhasa, Tibet, and other nearby provinces with large Tibetan populations. What I want to say that, at least of the western media I’ve read on the topic (since a lot of it is strangely inaccessible this week – purely a coincidence, as I’m sure the Chinese government has nothing to hide), is that I can’t believe that the agents of the Dalai Lama clique have so effectively pulled the wool over the eyes of everyone outside of China.

What people don’t seem to understand is that even though they have an entirely different language, culture, religion, dominant ethnic group and until 1950, a different government, Tibet has always been an inseparable part of China. What could be more plain and obvious than that?

And naturally, what’s with this whole idea that the Dalai Lama is a man of peace? The deluded world out there gave him a Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, when really, unjustifiably, great peacemakers like Mao, Deng, Jiang and most recently Hu Jintao continue to be snubbed. Well, world, we all know the truth now. He claims he wants peace, but the truth is that the Dalai Lama would like nothing better than for the streets to run red with blood, to disrupt the Olympics, and drive a knife into China to carve out a personal little dictatorship for himself.

Anyway, if you want to know the truth, the best source of information about China, or about Tibet, is the Xinhua website, the official news source provided by the Chinese government and Communist Party to set the record straight. I might especially recommend especially this article, with the headline, “Dalai coterie’s secessionist attempts doomed to fail.” This article reveals that it’s actually valiant, non-violent Chinese troops – brothers, husbands, and fathers, we’re told – who are suffering at the hands of thuggish Tibetan Buddhist monks, on the direct orders of their terrorist leader, the Dalai Lama. Why, it seems that several monks even cut themselves up with knives, so as to make the soldiers look bad! The nerve! As the article points out:

In the shocking degree of cruelty which local Tibetans said they had not seen in their whole lives, “brutal” was an understatement of the true picture, but the word was only reserved for the mob, and not for the policemen. Throughout the incident, Lhasa police officers exercised great restraint. They remained patient, professional and were instructed not to use force. In humanitarian spirit, they even rescued the malicious monks who attempted sensation through hurting themselves. But such restraint was met with even more malice.

The article is great in that it shows how objective reporting should be done. Take the conclusion:

All these facts have come to say and will continue to prove that the Dalai group’s ill-willed attempts to destabilize Tibet, in whatever forms, will not succeed, since such efforts go against the popular will of the international community and 2.8 million people in the Tibet Autonomous Region.

Clearly! The international community, as the article stresses, unanimously understands that Tibet is part of China, just as much as East Turkestan Xinjiang and Taiwan. And more over, as they’ve frequently expressed in regularly-held, free, multiparty elections, all 2.8 million Tibetans have expressed their will repeatedly that they are happy to be part of China, and that the fact that all political power in the region is held by the local Communist Party chairman, who by sheer coincidence has consistently been a Han Chinese from outside Tibet since its “liberation” in 1950, is perfectly fine by them. They’d far rather allow all that messy political decision-making be handled by Beijing-appointed leaders, so they can stick to herding their yaks. This is what it means to share in the beautiful vision of a “harmonious society,” as envisioned by the great, wise leader of all of China, President Hu Jintao, who, by the way, cut his teeth on political leadership by once holding chairing the Chinese Communist Party’s Tibet branch. And what better authority on the matter than the local puppet leader of Tibet, the Beijing-appointed Qiangba Puncog? He may not have any real political power, but surely he has his fingers on the pulse of the Tibetan people.

Chairman Puncog, I should mention, sets my mind at ease. I don’t think we have to worry about any brutality from the Chinese troops there when he mentions, for example, that “[N]obody in our law enforcement teams carried or used lethal weapons all the time.”

And the charges of “rule of terror” and “cultural genocide” are so absurd that the Chinese government shouldn’t even dignify them with comments, much less all anti-Chinese foreigners and human rights activists to poke around Tibet to investigate. Xinhua has already done a fine job in refuting these charges, by observing the great lengths the Chinese government has gone toward preserving several major historical and cultural sites.

[Director of the Standing Committee of the Tibetan Regional People’s Congress Legqog] said the Tibetan culture has thrived, quite contrary to the so called “cultural genocide.”

“There were 161 cultural sites in Tibet, including 35 on the list of state-level protection. We have 1,700 well-protected temples. Monks and the public enjoy full religious freedom,” Legqog said (presumably also referring to the well-known freedom Tibetan Buddhists enjoy to openly display photographs of the Dalai Lama).

You see? How could a cultural genocide be falling upon the Tibetans if their relics are being carefully preserved by archaeologists? Just as great cultural sites belonging to groups like the Anasazi, the Cathaginians, the Babylonians, and Philistines have kept those cultures alive and well today, surely the Tibetans will thrive for generations to come as a result of the careful preservation of their artifacts.

I also had a thought. If the Tibetans are having economic troubles, perhaps they could arrange to solve any foot shortages caused by the uprisings by eating babies?

(By the way, have I mentioned that from what Allison tells me, Chinese culture doesn’t really get satire or sarcasm? Chinese humor tends to emphasize slapstick instead. So something written in sarcasm might not be understood as such.)