CBS 2 News-Mar 15th Police Clash Outside Chinese Consulate

JDBONA Says:

Mar 21, 2008 - Brits and Americans do not want Freedom as much as Tibetans do. Tibetans are not interested in ever being part of China OR any other country. Big difference Mr. Paranoid

georgeneo Says:

Mar 22, 2008 - lol, lmao

georgeneo Says:

Mar 22, 2008 - free your mom in bed first!

catchtt2 Says:

Mar 22, 2008 - It's true, right? Either our Llama believes in Christ or not. Based on his past statements, he did not believe in Christ and he should be condemned for that. That's what Jesus told us. How dare he claim to be a living God when Jesus is the one and only God according to the Bible? Either he is a fraud or Jesus is wrong. I trust Jesus more.

AttunedFlux Says:

Mar 25, 2008 - When there are violent/damaging protesters in the crowd, you should be isolating them and them alone, NOT the rest of the crowd. As soon as any sign of violence is identified by police, they brand the entire protest as "violent", and they also have been known to lie about supposed violence in the past, which is truly frightening. Im much more concerned with violent police against protesters than i am the protesters themselves. Fascism is taking over america! wake up!

AlenaB1979 Says:

Mar 25, 2008 - adfd

AlenaB1979 Says:

Mar 25, 2008 - Originally the PRC did claim Tibet as being part of China since the Tang Dynasty. But the current official Party line is that Tibet became part of China during the Yuan Dynasty, although they neglect to mention the Yuan was a Mongol & not a Chinese empire. So this Chinese professor's claim is not new in this regard.

AlenaB1979 Says:

Mar 25, 2008 - What is interesting is how he points out that the concept of "China" & its borders did not originate until after 1912. Prior to that time, China was ruled by the Manchus (1644-1911). The Manchus did not consider themselves Chinese although they were the rulers of China, & Tibet, like Mongolia, was a vassal state of the Qing Empire. However, it was a colonial relationship & the Manchus never considered Tibet to be part of China.

AlenaB1979 Says:

Mar 25, 2008 - Of course, when the Qing Dynasty fell, Tibet became completely independent of Qing overlordship. This concept of Tibet as an integral part of China did not develop until after 1949 by the CCP. However, the Party has been successful in convincing most Chinese of this lie. It's scary how easy it is for a govt. to make people believe something is true when it is not if you keep repeating it over & over again & the lie itself is palatable the listener.

lovetibet4 Says:

Mar 27, 2008 - keep up the great work!!we will never let down our hope.free tibet!1

ligushka2002 Says:

Mar 28, 2008 - Remember when Jap. Embassy in Beijing was attacked by the "protesters" in 2005, Chin. police just watched all events and let the mob throw stones to the Embassy. Japan claimed this is violation of intl law but China refused to make apology nor to make any compensation saying that the evil thing is Japan's foreign policy. Now let us listen how Chin. gvt react to this violence.

legend01oom Says:

Apr 2, 2008 - As a Chinese,I can tell you "Chinese"doesn't mean Han only.One of my best friends is Manchu.I've never heard he claimed he was not a Chinese. We,Chinese,do not need anyone to teach us what Chinese is. clear on that?

openlc555 Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - After Dalai Lama has left Tibet for over 50 years, can he still represent the ethnic Tibetan people in Tibet? Those born outside Tibet and have never been to Tibet, how can you claim you know what's in the best interest of the multi-ethnic residents in Tibet? I understand those left with Dalai were the ruling class of a serf-feudal society, which accounts for less 5% of the sociey. What's their base to claim ownership of the Tibet issue, especially in the year 2008?

Vash6the6Stampede Says:

Apr 9, 2008 - You just lied to yourself. You said yourself that Qing Dynasty ruled Tibet. Then why it was lie that China said Tibet belongs to China? Qing = China. Brain damaged?

ajhande Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - Listen up all you people. I have met the Dalai Lama. He is no ordinary man. He's good through and through. That is why the establishment hate him so much, for they are pure evil.

pngudup Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - Yes he represent all in Tibet;our faith has no boundaries. We don't claim to know whats best for them.But we know what human rights are. 50yrs is like yesterday for those who escaped.We r their children;we still feel their pain. We rn't allowed back. Even if only the rich escaped(which is untrue),its irrelevant.many have left after HHDL, I've seen 10 year old children with nothin but canvas shoes and a couple of layers of torn clothes weather the cold winds at 16000ft for a chance to live free.

pngudup Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - The Chinese princess Wencheng was sent to marry Tibetan emperor Songten Gampo in 640 so that he would conquer more of China. Does that mean China belongs to Tibet? What is important is that in before the Chinese occupation, there was a people, a territory & a govt, conducting its own domestic affairs FREE from any outside authority. Foreign affairs were conducted exclusively by the govt. of Tibet with other free countries which conducted affairs with Tibet as an INDEPENDENT state.

pngudup Says:

Apr 11, 2008 - Thank you for the warning but please allow us to determine what is right for our country. That is what freedom means and that is what we want.

pngudup Says:

Apr 11, 2008 - If you go far back in history Gengis Khan ruled most of Asia...so China must be a part of Mongolia.

pngudup Says:

Apr 11, 2008 - Since you are commenting on a "Tibet" video on Youtube, you are probably residing outside of China. That means you have the opportunity to read and learn about Tibet/China historical facts which are very different than the chinese propaganda that gets hammered into young chinese minds. You also have the RIGHT to disagree to calms that Tibet was never a part of China. And that should be and is your OPINION. It is not the TRUTH. Please NEVER confuse it for the TRUTH.

Vash6the6Stampede Says:

Apr 11, 2008 - Google "Qing Dynasty map", see how many different versions can you find. See if you can find a single one without Tibet as a part of China.

namchung7 Says:

Apr 12, 2008 - i think you got miss information ....getting married with chinse by tibetan king does't mean that tibet belongs to china. the same king who got married with chinese lady has got married with an another princess from nepal, if so does that mean tibet belong to nepal ? i don't think so ......your fucker got married with an english lady does't that mean your family belong to english ? i don't think you can agree for that ...

pngudup Says:

Apr 12, 2008 - I had 2 typos in my initial statement. What i meant to write was "...so that he wouldn't conquer more of China.." and the point I am trying to make is that in 700 AD Tibetan emperor Songsten Gampo ruled a big chunck of China. The Chinese emperor sent his daughter to marry the Tibetan ruler so that he would not conquer more of china. The point of the whole argument is that ancient history of who ruled whom is irrelevant what is relevant is that before 1950 Tibet was INDEPENDENT.

qimiqimiqimi Says:

Apr 12, 2008 - did u say a 10-year-old suffer all those things for a chance to live free? 10-year-old!!! your brain must is filled with some bullshit. lol!

timeesprit Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - the number of people out of poverty (UN standards) is 400MILLION in china in the past 10 years - dont you think that is pretty good? dont you think being able to eat and not starve is more important than being able to vote? the right to food, education, healthcare are all human rights too you know. democracy is secondary.