I totally forgot about that show, I was either watching that or Hidden World on CH4, but some of the stories of forced sterilization were horrifying, no anesthetics, something like 20 women in one village were dragged out of bed by the police, taken to an operating theatre and forcibly streilised. I knowI'm repeating myself, but it needs to be repeated I think, no anesthetic and where they were only supposed to cut her tubes, I say only, but that enough, in the end they ripped out her ovaries...
It's really dampened my mood for today. Besides hearing all these really cruel incidents, my heart was pounding throughout that documentary, especially when they were stopped the reporter at the road blocks. Just to think how dangerous some of my closest friends were when they went to Tibet for some photo opportunities of local people and scenic views last year. Please download and see this if you haven't already.
Incidently, when Samba and I comment on US news, this is the sort of thing we are refering to. This sort of thing is normally shown at 9pm. Not to mention all our broad sheets.
I'll stick with the Christians leading the US. At least we have people selecting them instead of unseen magical deities.
i'm not british either and don't get me wrong, i love the states, would rather live there then here but it's not all that possible legally at the moment
Brit...ex-pat...whatever.... It just bugs me that REPEATEDLY, it's brought up that Americans are blinded by our media, and that we need to be educated that there are better forms of press out there. No shit. Give people a little credit that they're intelligent enough not to just believe the first thing they read. Any opinions I have, are formed by research, not just the first thing I latch on to. Like anyone regurgitating FoxNews clips as an example...the majority of people here KNOW it's garbage...the only ones watching are neocons. Do I realize our press is lacking, especially in world matters? Of course...but the lion's share of us know where to go to get that news.
I can agree with that. I'd much rather have an open theocracy ruled by a non-violent, open-minded religion than a covert theocracy masquerading as a democracy ruled by publicly elected fundamentalists. In my eyes the Christians leading this country aren't too different than the Muslim extremists in the Middle East - they both assume that their belief system is the only correct system and are willing to kill over it. If there really was a god it would smite all of these fuckers regardless of their religion.
3 words I'll be glad to be rid of in a few months? "Faith based initiatives". Now, if I could just get rid of people's use of the "word", "ginormous".... I actually heard a NY financial expert go on BBC and use it......maybe I shouldn't get angry that the world thinks were all idiots...
i don't really agree with that. I can talk all the shit I want about my christian leaders... people tend to lash out less if it is their "spiritual leader". not sure how open minded a religion is when they have to wait for some dude to die... and then there will some change
i understand where you're coming from hillsy and apologise if I ever did it. you and most other american SBers are pretty obviously intelligent people capable of cogent, rational thought but you have to realise you guys (or at least in the outside, this is how it seems to the rest of the us) that you are the severe minority, haha (as an aside I know knowledge of geography doesn't denote intelligence by any stretch, but if i had a dollar for the amount of times an american made some comment regarding scandinavia when I mentioned I was from new zealand..)
I think the Dalai Lama would let you talk shit about him. Though people might look at you crazy because what sort of shit can you talk about the Dalai Lama!
you're taking what backtrack said about the current situation out of context! Things would be completely different if tibet had sovereignty. It's not that they HAVE to wait, it's more out of respect for the dalai lama
To me, the part in bold only exists in fairy tales. Buddism and Buddhists are not magically good and fair people simply by virtue of their religion, nor is their history devoid of any prejudice or oppression.
I agree, which is why I'm against all religion - religion and money are at the root of all that's wrong with the world. However, the bolded text fits the Dalai Lama, if not all the people of Tibet. If you can find someone with those virtues to lead a country then I think that makes for a better country, but that's not to say that all the people of the country will believe what the leader believes or act how the leader acts. But because of those virtues in the leader the people would be free to own their beliefs and actions, within the laws of the land. Buddhism is not immune to bastardization - but I'd say it's far less bastardized than Christianity.
I read an interesting essay on secessions, trying to draw a line on which efforts toward secession should be supported by the 'free world.' Ultimately, it came down for the principle that secession is only appropriate where the people can not have a voice in their own governance in any other way. By that standard, I presume that the Tibetans, Kurds and probably Chechens would be deemed 'entitled' to seek secession, while (for example) the Basques in Spain and the Quebecois in Canada would not, as each of the latter is seeking to secede from a liberal-democratic state. I just thought it was an interesting place to draw the line, as it becomes tough for outsiders to determine when secession is the only reasonable solution, and when it is not.
Unfortunately, sometimes I think it comes down to convenience. The US wholly supports a Kurdish region (inside of Iraq, of course), and it shows since it's basically holding Turkey back from a widescale escalation of conflict. It's "convenient" for the US, though, because we're occupying the country. Chechnya ,unfortunately, isn't as important to the the US as not pissing off Russia is, thus it's not convenient to back that cause. Also, the US would look a little hypocritical...for all our talk of terrorists, to then criticize the Russians of who they label terrorists (not to mention, we've killed our fair share of civilians in Iraq...not on the wholesale level Russia did in Chechnya, but still....). Not saying it's right, but I think that's what it comes down to. This is, of course, from a US perspective. Noone needs US "permission" to seek secession, but having it on your side goes a long way. Kosovo probably would not have sought secession if it wasn't sure it had US backing. Again, it was convenient for the US because we were already there. The US is too dependent on China to risk getting involved in Tibetan secession.
I'm not so quick to judge. I wonder how he feels about a woman's right to choose contraception, or a woman's right to an abortion if she wants one. I don't know what the answer is, but if one of the central tenets of his religion is that all life is sacred, he might encourage rules restricting those things if he was put in charge. If he's ever going to be installed as a leader, I think it's worth it to question these things without assuming that things would be better. To invoke Iraq again, a lot of people thought that country would be better off under new management...
If it makes you feel any better, Hillsy, I put that in there just for you I can never resist a good wind up. And yes, I'm an ex-pat, born in Brooklyn, did my 25 years on the east coast, a bit of traveling sea to shining sea, got bored, and transplanted my ass in the good old smoke. Roger. if you would like a more detailed biog, please get in touch. Though this does raise the question of what difference it makes where I am from or where I am currently and how that relates to me being "allowed" to comment on various Americanisms. I will second Soda Pop when he says that you, we are all intelligent, relatively learned folk, and that is what allows us to have these discussions. But also as hillsy pointed out, there are a lot of challenged Americans out there, and their votes tend to drown out the intelligent, informed voters. (lets not go down the whole voting road) As for open minded religions, we all know that institutionalised religion is detrimental to humanity. But as far as religions go, Buddhism is a pretty good try. My understanding of it, is that it is as much a lifestyle choice as a theocratic one. And the amount of respect that the Dali Lama gets, is stupefying. A friend of mine has been in the company of both the pope and the Dali Lama and she said that the 2 received such a vastly different response, that she felt compelled to look deeper into buddhism (she was raised christian and was at the time a regular attendee). The US Gov will always stand by the money, and with a few exceptions, most "smaller" countries will not do what the US doesn't want them to do. A perfect example is what has been happening in ex-eastern bloc countries, they are constantly getting brides (well trade deals) to accept the missile shield or allow illegal detainment centres or allowing oil pipelines (always that pesky oil, even I'm sick of it)
"Though this does raise the question of what difference it makes where I am from or where I am currently and how that relates to me being "allowed" to comment on various Americanisms." It's not an issue of what you or anyone should be "allowed" to say. You should be allowed to say what you like. My issue was that the trend here seems to be that those living outside of the US, regardless of nationality, thinking those in the US are just sheep being blindly led by the press and the government. It's seems it's easier to bash and throw stones when you're not living here (again...regardless if you're an ex-pat or not). There are lots here trying to make changes to an inept system. It could be I'm being too sensitive, as well.
