The author may be contacted at agam [dot] tapak [at] gmail [dot] com Posting times are Bangkok time [GMT+7 = EDT+11].
March 21, 2009
Tibet Information Network
Tibetan Committee for Human Rights and Democracy
International Campaign for Tibet
Australia Tibet Committee
Tibet Justice Center
Tibet Online Resource
Virtual Tibet Library
Dreams of Tibet
Snopes: Urban Legends
BBC | Monitoring
The Jakarta Post
Metro TV News Online
Democratic Voice of Burma
Southeast Asia News
Sydney Morning Herald
BREAKING: LYING LIARS FRAME TIBETAN
just don't know what I can say about this. I'm feeling rather speechless right now. This war of words between PRC patriots and Tibetan patriots has seemed to have escalated into something truly ugly, far more than words, and getting uglier by the day.
If you really want to know how ugly it is, please read this. But do it just a little later, I have something to show you and it won't take long.
Last week I was drawn to a YouTube video by a comment on one of my own videos (I've deleted the link now, gave up on it, there were thousands of comments and hundreds of thousands of views on that one). It was a clip of the "vicious attack" on a handicapped Chinese girl who was carrying the torch in Paris. No "vicious attack" was visible in any way in that video, but the PRC patriot commenters were ready for war. The girl, Jin Jing, is now a national hero in China. Such a shame that an innocent girl is being used in this way.
Links to further "proof" of the despicable behaviour of "Tibetans" were provided among those comments, including to this photo:
Yesterday, my headline watcher picked up on this post on Big Lizards blog (don't worry, I've already contacted him about the soldiers with monks' robes picture, which was included but not relevant to this particular deception). The above picture was widely disseminated in China, and according to Mr. Ching (a Chinese blogger in Japan), some bloggers (in China) tried to find the identity of the "attacker". What they actually found was more shocking yet. [update: oops, forgot to wai the reason I found Sachi's post at Big Lizards in the first place. All due to having Instapundit in my feed-reader. So a big wai to Glenn.]
Here's the "attacker" on his way to the rally. Just so you can clearly identify him as the same fellow, it's a crop from this photograph:
Oh my goodness, look who his friends are! And I'll just bet that's one of those "useful idiot" (once again, Stalin's phrase I believe) Americans of the Far Left persuasion at his left shoulder. Probably got a few hundred copies of Parenti's tract on "Feudal Tibet" in that shoulder bag too. With this much high emotion (and patriotism!) at play, I find it hard to believe the two opposing groups would be mingling like this. A couple more Tibetan flags are seen behind.
And just for giggles, here's one more from the contingent. I sure wish we could see the rest of that "Free Tibet" sign, just to confirm that it doesn't say "Free Tibet from Murderous Lama-lovers" or something. But I'll go with my gut here. "You've got dark skin, you play the Tibetan today."
The "attacker" was mis-identified somehow as a Tibetan living in Utah, and now his life is hell. He receives obscene death-threats from PRC "patriots", and he hasn't even been anywhere near Paris (the story misplaces the location of the "attack" as London, but it was Paris).
Are any Chinese out there getting ashamed yet?
- posted by Agam @ 7:12 PM 20 comments
Shocking indeed. but not suprising. If they could sent policemen in monk's robes and plant Chinese policemen in Tibetan clothes to pose as "rioters", anything is possible.
I used to say earlier that we Tibetans hate the Chinese govt but not the Chinese people. But I am slowing losing it. The viciousness of overseas Chinese towards Tibetans is slowing draining whatever compassion i had in me for them.
Also may I suggest that you moderate comments or delete comments by the pro-chinese commentors on your blog. It's not that i am against freedom of speech, but genuine comments may get lost in the barrage of such comments and it takes aways from the seriousness and sanctity of the post.
I couldn't get through all of the postings, of course, but enough to understand how hopeless this sort of dialogue has become. Students for a Free Tibet at the University of Arkansas recently held a celebration of Tibetan culture, with food and tea, and Chinese protestors (students, I gather) showed up with posters proclaiming that Tibet belonged to China. I wasn't there, but was told that they were well behaved, though ill-informed. It's pointless to negotiate with anyone--Chinese, Tibetan, American--who claims their demands are non-negotiable, and I fear many on the Chinese side have already moved to this point.
I can't, for the life of me, find a credible piece of historical evidence that shows why the Tibetan people belong to the Han Chinese . . . So I ask: Without the screeching rhetoric, can anyone, with clarity, reason, and real historical knowledge, uncover the relevant material for me? I can't find a single point that supports the Chinese position.
By Anonymous, at 15 April, 2008 01:29
I just don't know what I can say about your article. I'm feeling rather speechless right now. :o) You walk with crowd on the street every day but are all these people you pass by your friends? There are thousands pictures out there where you can see Pro-Tibet and Pro-China protesters standing side by side. Are they all friends? They were together because they were protesting at same place or going to the same destination to protest. Just hope you can do better than that next time.
By Anonymous, at 15 April, 2008 11:46
Aqua: I also am losing it. But then I remember my Chinese friends who do respect HHDL, and that helps. See my comment to you in the other thread also.
sjburris: The PRC patriots will tell you that ALL the historical evidence proves just what you cannot find. And recent events seem to show that your fear of a hardening, non-negotiable attitude among many Chinese, is well founded.
Anonymouse: I'd be more than happy to see some of these "thousands pictures" of PRC patriots happily mingling in friendship with exiled Tibetan patriots. Contact me by email (on the front page) or drop some links into comments here.
The top photo in the previous article shows a "vicious attack" by the former against the latter in SF, more of a "vicious attack" than the first pic in this article, which got all the CCPatriots stirred up and ready to go to war (at least before the guy's other pics surfaced).
Scroll down in the previous article, to where it mentions the Duke University incident. There's a link to a news account, and another link to a video on Tibet Talk. See the small Chinese girl trying to talk reasonably with the Chinese demonstrators? Now follow the first link in this post, where it says "please read this". They're calling that small girl a "race traitor", and some vow they will find her. Some say they want to kill her. For speaking up in defence of Tibetans' human rights.
That's what actually made me feel speechless. You can't possibly justify it, I dare you to. This attitude is very clearly widespread among overseas Chinese right now. It's really a shame, and good-hearted Chinese people would be ashamed of them.
You can try to make the case that these pictures have an innocent explanation, but at this point I'm not buying it.
sjburris: One afterthought. If you're looking for a very good and impartial history of the Tibet - China relationship, you won't find anything better than "Dragon in the Land of Snows" by Tsering Shakya. Yes he is a Tibetan, but his historical research has made both the Tibetan exile gov't and the Chinese gov't uncomfortable (in different places). Shakya is very even handed, and most Tibet scholars who aren't connected to either side, will agree that his work is the most comprehensive telling of this complex relationship. It focuses on 1947 - present (it's published 1999), but lots of earlier background as well. Any good library would have it.
I checked the various links in particularly the one about the mistaken identity. How the man in Utah could be mistaken for the YOUNGER individual in PARIS is beyond me. The Utah man is older and has a fatter, rounder face. The younger individual has a straighter more lean face!
By Anonymous, at 15 April, 2008 15:21
SJBurris, Don't want to sound like I'm loudly tooting my own horn or providing that unwanted lunch meat they call spam, but I really did do my level best to answer your question
"Without the screeching rhetoric, can anyone, with clarity, reason, and real historical knowledge, uncover the relevant material for me?"
in a brief and not too complicated way in a blog called "Tibetan Independence: Testimonies from Two Professors & a Bird." located at
You'll also find out how a Tibetan hero saved the Chinese people from genocide in the 13th century, with pictorial evidence!
I do not know whether you are a pure anti - China. If you are, just delete my comment. If you are willing to listen my words, I appreciate that in advance.
I read through your article. I gotta say you are so behind the time. The man who are grabing the torch is definitely a Tibetan. In one of your pics, he walks with somebody who takes China flag. The group that the Tibetan walks with are Chinese, and they claimed the Tibetan just walk into the crowd to protest and walk with them. The Chinese supporters acted peacefully, they did not drove the Tibetan away, and just left him alone. Anyway, you cannot prove that the Tibetan was disguised by Chinese just from this photo. It can prove nothing. Anyone who is reseanable can judge calmly. Please do not prejudice against China. Anyone who loves peace needs the truth. I do not dream to change your point. I just hope you can see the truth. Thank you very much.
hunterseeker: You're right of course - little resemblance between the young guy who "attacked" and the man in Utah. Those "human flesh search engines" are not infallible. But excitable patriots won't let that stand in their way.
Dan: Thank you for the link to your new article, which should be helpful to sjburris, and many others. I still need to listen to Prof. #1's interview, I never want to miss anything from Barnett. And the Bird - that's my favourite part. What a rich literary history they have! I got lost for a while in that painting.
Allen Kon: No, of course I'm not "a pure anti-China." Why would it be that someone who advocates basic rights for Tibetans and Chinese and everyone else now ruled by CCP, could be seen as "anti-China"? It's a logical red herring of course. I am more than willing to listen to your words.
I wonder why you assert as a fact, that the man in the picture is "definitely a Tibetan." If you're going on actual statements by the other actual people with him - who obviously would say he's Tibetan even if they were together - nothing unexpected there.
You are right: I can't prove anything with these pictures. They were dug up by Chinese bloggers in China (as reported by a Chinese blogger in Japan). But it sure looks fishy, you have to admit. How come the "human flesh search engines" haven't accurately identified the guy yet, but only set the mob against some innocent older man in Utah? If, as the pictures seem to show, the "attack" was staged to discredit Tibetans, racial solidarity (unfortunately) will ensure that the truth never comes out in any provable way. As I told another commenter recently, I think this "motherland" thing has been taken way too far.
But given the abundant cases in the past few days, of despicable smear attacks against Tibetan, Burmese, Vietnamese, Falun Gong, Chinese democrats, Save Darfur, etc. protesters as well as direct attacks against Chinese deemed insufficiently patriotic, like the girl at Duke (please read "Globally Competing Narratives" from yesterday), the innocent explanation for the photo is the most far-fetched of all.
No, I'm not prejudiced against "China" but against the permanent ruling party and its renewed cultural revolution tactics. The behaviour of many online Chinese citizens and some overseas Chinese communities reflects badly only on those people themselves (I don't mean the ones who just want to celebrate, just the ones who are vindictive and hateful). It's the permanent ruling party which reflects badly on the whole country, but I don't blame the whole country for what they do and say.
Is that any clearer?
There is really nothing shocking or surprising about it. We have seen wave after wave of grotesque smear campaign against the Chinese. We have this claim that Chinese soldiers dressed up as monks to incite riots, and there is even a photo to "prove" it, which of course turns out is nothing like that at all.
We have another claim that a sword wielding tibetan in a picture taken by a tourist was actually a policeman in disguise. What a scoop! Except that the story is so full of holes that no one with more than two brain cells would believe it.
That is not to say no one will believe in these sort of stories. On the contrary, plenty will, and these stories will be told and retold thousands of times on the internet.
So, it is hardly surprising that there is now another equally moronic story (OK, perhaps a little more moronic than the usual). To save time I will just copy an analysis from EastSouthWestNorth (http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200804b.brief.htm)
"Question: Chinese netizens noted that there is another photo with the attacker of Jin Jing, in which he is walking down a path. The first thing to note that is that there are four five-star Chinese national flags and three Tibetan Snow-Mountain-Lion flags in this one photo. The netizens wanted to know: Why are these people from opposite camps walking calmly next to each other? Why are they not at blows with each other?
"Answer: Why do you expect people from different camps to physically assault each other upon sighting? What kind of assumption is that? .........
"You can look at the beginning of the Dailymotion video and you can see the crowd have a mixture of people waving the Chinese national flag, the Tibetan snow-mountain-lion flag and the black RSF five-handcuffs flag. Do you see any street fighting? If you expect that a fight should break out whenever the two camps get close, then there should have been fights breaking out all over Paris. Do you recall any media story saying: "Fights and melees broke out all over Paris today as Tibetan separatists and China supporters clashed and fought with fists, rocks, sticks and poles"? All I found is this AP report: "Outside, a few French activists supporting Tibet had a fist-fight with pro-Chinese demonstrators. The French activists spat on them and shouted, "Fascists!"" This doesn't cut it, does it? If you think violence should have occurred, then it is your projection of your own predilection for violence. You are saying that you would have attacked the other side if you were out there. All I can say is: Shame on you! But these people are in Paris and they don't have to obey your rules."
Indeed, the very idea that the Chinese need to "frame" a "Tibetan" is idiotic. Is it seriously suggested that the Pro-tibetan protesters had no interest in disrupting the torch relay, so that the Chinese had to arrange someone to do it on their behalf? And of course the "Tibetan" in question was not the only one who tried to have a go at the girl in wheelchair. Are we supposed to believe they were all Chinese agents?
Unfortunately, whilst moronic stories can be pulled apart, there is no stopping the morons from coming up with new ones. And there will be more coming. That much is clear.
It's interesting that you should post your comment when you did. Because I have just had a day of direct experience with pro-PRC anti-human rights protesters, right here in Bangkok. And the least likely thing which never happened on this day, is any China supporters permitting a single Tibet supporter to go unmolested if they could help it.
Police had to prevent attacks from Chinese foreign exchange students several times that I saw myself. The Tibet, Burma, Darfur etc. human rights defenders were outnumbered and stayed behind barricades as they were told. The Chinese students (they were not Thai) tried very hard to provoke something, with several groups making repeated attempts to march right into the Tibetans and their friends.
But the latter were not provoked, and they didn't give the Chinese kids what they were looking for. It would have been simply unthinkable for any actual Tibet supporter to be walking along together with those people (as your scenario would have it) - he would have been chased away in a heartbeat.
In fact, a couple of naive foreigners had this happen to them at the starting point today. They thought it would be fine to hold up pictures of Dalai Lama, and to call out "Long Live Dalai Lama" at Chinatown Gate. Two of them. They were immediately massively overwhelmed by Chinese patriots screaming at them, hurling abuse, and the abundant police force on the street rescued them quickly before anything worse happened. I saw the pictures, the foreigners were pretty scared.
I've said already that these photos don't comprise proof of anything. But it's pretty darn fishy. What I experienced today, watching the almost uncontrollable rage pouring out of those Chinese students (who are here as guests, by the way) as they did everything they could to provoke the Tibetans and their friends into retaliation, makes your explanation of these pictures practically inconceivable.
I know Paris is the city of love, but Bangkok is capital of the land of smiles. Now in France, I see the Chinese are painting swastikas on the French tricolour. That will win some friends. Don't know much about his-to-ry...
No, those people I watched today would never tolerate an actual Tibetan in their midst. Absolutely not. A couple of them actually tried to go over the barricades to get at them!
I'm sorry to tell you this, but it's been getting very ugly for a while now.
Oh, and no copying other people's work on this blog. Say what you want but say it yourself, or just provide the link if you can't do that. We know how to follow them.
"(P)ro-PRC anti-human rights protesters"? So if one is pro-PRC, one is anti-human rights? Well that really says a lot about your mindset.
Your experience of this "uncontrollable rage" of the Chinese in Bangkok is apparently not shared by the media. In an article entitled "Thai leg of Olympic torch relay festive, with small protests" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/19/AR2008041900315.html), it is said that:
"Security officials had little to do but direct traffic and the mostly festive crowds, except at one spot where they came between pro-Tibet demonstrators and pro-Beijing supporters who exchanged angry words."
There were indeed some scufles. You may be pleased (or may be not) to know that the BBC World had a footage of the incident involving the 2 protesters that you mentioned (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ks1stATBYYg).
It can be seen that the duo engaged in a shouting match with a crowd of China/Olympics supporters, which of course the two emphatically lost. After that they were unceremoniously ignored. Poor things.
Back to the photo of the Tibetan walking down a path. There is nothing fishy about it. The only fishy thing exists in your mind, the same mind that comes up with stuff like "pro-PRC anti-human rights protesters".
You would of course say "I've said already that these photos don't comprise proof of anything". That's your "I-am-not-a-complete-a-hole" banner, but that's pretty lame. For one thing, that did not stop you from coming up with the VERY title: "BREAKING: LYING LIARS FRAME TIBETAN". Second, that did not stop you from posting on Kadfly's blog the following:
"Will she (girl in wheelchair) still be a national hero when (not "if") Chinese find out that it was a Chinese provocateur who actually did it? What do you say now?" (notes in bracket added by kapmax)
I note you have, as predicted, come up with more inane stories, like the latest one about the Chinese government paying people to protest. The crackpot script itself is laughable. Like, if the student on the pay wanted to check out the going rate for staging the protest, would it not be simpler to check out with his fellow banner-carrying protesters, rather than this Tenzin guy? And, just for argument's sake, if the guy , for some inexplicable reason, really needed to talk to this Tenzin fellow, wouldn't he have first asked something like where he came from, or whom he was with, or even "Are you paid?", I mean, something other than "How much you got paid?"
Crackpot script aside, the whole story is just entirely removed from reality. Ther is now widespread protests within and beyond China against the biased reporting of the western media, and against the disruptions to the Olympic torch relay. So much so that the chinese government has to appeal for calmness. A story that the chinese government is paying people for not attending protests would have been more credible.
And, if one really want to pay people to stage a protest, wouldnt the money be better spent on a protest against something other than this Global Human Rights Torch Relay, which nobody gives a damn?
Oh, and what about your "no copying other people's work on this blog"? You don't seem to have any inhibition about copying this Tenzin story. Is it that your rule applies to everyone but yourself?
kapmax: It's two descriptors - maybe I should use a comma, so shoot me. The protesters were pro-PRC and anti-human rights. Maybe it's possible for some democratic-minded reformers in the Party to be pro-PRC AND pro-human rights. I think there used to be some at one time.
I could have said (and I think I did in a photo caption) "supporters of PRC human rights policy", which is the same thing. Pro-PRC and anti-human rights.
And I'll stand by my own experience of the "uncontrollable rage" since I was right up close to it on Saturday. You read something with a different angle in the Washington Post, good for you. It was mostly festive, the program was not disrupted at all by the couple of hundred pro-human rights demonstrators, which I wrote in the post. Chinese media reported no nay-sayers whatsoever in Bangkok, which is a lie. No big deal, you also expect Chinese media to lie I guess.
The excitable Chinese patriots were not Thais, and not Thais of Chinese heritage, who would not go around waving the red flag of communism. They were foreign students. Those who turned out to welcome the torch at a military airport at 2:30 AM, which the local paper referred to as "Thai-Chinese", were actually the staff of the Chinese embassy (thanks Xinhua for reporting that, at least).
The protests that day were organised by a range of Thai organisations (labour, student, democracy defenders, etc). The police had to do a little more than just "come between" the angry Chinese students and the Thai human rights defenders. The latter stayed where they were supposed to behind barricades, were very vocal but peaceful. The former tried everything they could to actually start a fight. Disbelieve me if you wish, but I and those present saw it very clearly.
Lying Liars Frame Tibetan - if you stop and think for a minute, refers to the unfortunate Utah man who was nowhere near Paris, but blamed for the "attack". Now he's being threatened, just like that young Chinese student at Duke U. who got "outed" by the fleshy search engines. How come these engines can "track down" an innocent, much older man in Utah to pin him for the young guy wearing the Tibet toque, but they can't find who it really is - even with several pictures of him now?
Either they decided to stop looking, or they actually found him and shut up about it.
But you got me on "when" - "whenever" would have been better word choice. Congrats. If the fleshy search engines live up to their reputation, it will eventually come out. There's no real conflict between my believing that, in the context of all the other deceptions going on, and still saying that this one photo does not comprise ironclad proof.
I'm highly suspicious of these "patriots" (and I have engaged with some similar people in forums up to 12 years ago, I have a bit of experience with how some operate), so shoot me again.
If you choose not to believe the Phayul reporting, up to you. Read the whole original before you write it off. Political protests in Thailand are often like this: hire some buses, provide lunches and daily allowance, and off we go to Bangkok for protest. I can assure you that none of us trying to defend the principles of human rights on Saturday were paid one single baht for it.
If you can be bothered to read Phurbu Thinley's report, he clearly states that the Chinese guy approached Tenzin because he thought he was Chinese too. It's a good ice-breaker, isn't it? "How much did you get?" Why would that be implausible? He probably already knew that everyone was paid, and just wanted to check that he got his fair share. Otherwise he probably would have asked "Are you getting paid?" No, instead he started with "How much?" You think it sounds unnatural, I think it sounds entirely natural. D'ya wanna shoot me again?
And yeah, like, I know eh, the Chinese are protesting in China. I even posted a picture, tell me something I don't know. And I know the nationalist spirit is starting to worry the authorities, scroll down to Friday. And don't forget to read the inside Tibet accounts on the way down.
But why the gov't would pay people not to protest - there must be some nuance I'm missing here. They're very proud of that fact, at least for the overseas ones. Xinhua: "American Chinese and Chinese students across the United States have been voluntarily and spontaneously staging a series of peaceful protests against the Dalai Lama's separatist activities as he tours the country."
Spontaneously eh? Scroll down a bit further to where the Chinese Students and Scholars Associations come up. The Canberra chapter has issued some pretty ugly statements about "ethnic scum" and so on, promising a robust confrontation involving 10,000 pro-PRC human rights policy patriots (do you like that wording better?) when the sacred flame gets there. We've seen the Duke CSSA chapter's involvement in the criminal harrasment of that young girl, and her parents in China. CSSA is in virtually every country. Reuters: "A letter from Chinese authorities circulated to students in Australia asked protesters to 'prevent all actions that can in any way be detrimental to the image of China'."
When you get your own blog, you can do what you want. I notice you're pretty secretive about your profile. I quote news sources for pertinent information, never just reprint the entire thing. I quote bloggers too if I like a sentence or two. But I'm not going to say, "here, this blogger makes my argument better than I, so I'll just quote the whole thing instead of making my own argument at all."
Bloggers don't usually like their articles to be lifted and put on somebody else's site. It happens to me, and my concern wasn't for myself but for the other writer.
You could have just made your own case with your own ideas, put a link to the other guy and said, "this blogger makes my case better than I do." No problem.
But it is my blog. I like commenters who have their own thoughts. If one copies long passages of somebody else's work, I don't like it. And I don't do it either. Get your own blog, or tell us where it is, and do what you like.
1. "The protesters were pro-PRC and anti-human rights".
Well I think you really shot yourself with that. But maybe you are mightily proud of your bigotry.
2. "The excitable Chinese patriots were not Thais, and not Thais of Chinese heritage"
Two Chinese supporters were interviewed in the BBC World footage I mentioned earlier. The second one speaks with a distinctly Thai accent. Better luck next time.
3. "Lying Liars Frame Tibetan - if you stop and think for a minute, refers to the unfortunate Utah man who was nowhere near Paris"
Actually I had thought about if you would say that, but I thought it would be just too lame a thing to say. You wrote a 10-para blog entry under that title. In the first 8 paragraphs you talked about your discovery of this "fishy" photo and how ugly it meant. The unfortunate Utah man does not get a mention until para.9, which comprises 2 sentences. And even then all that is said about him is that he was mis-identified. There is nothing about framing, lying or liars in connection with this Utah man. Now you wouldn't deliberately use a sensationalist title which is neither substantiated in nor even has connection with the contents, would you?
4. "But you got me on "when" - "whenever" would have been better word choice."
" Whenever" would not have been a better word. The sentence
"Will she still be a national hero "whenever" Chinese find out that it was a Chinese provocateur who actually did it?"
makes no sense. But I guess making sense is not high on your agenda.
5. "If you choose not to believe the Phayul reporting, up to you. Read the whole original before you write it off. Political protests in Thailand are often like this......
"If you can be bothered to read Phurbu Thinley's report, he clearly states that the Chinese guy approached Tenzin because he thought he was Chinese too....
I have of course read the original "report" about this protest against the "Human Rights Torch Relay", which is why I find it strange that you want to talk about the way you do a protest in Thailand, when the protest in question took place in Minnesota. I shuddered to think, you wouldn't just copy people's work without knowing exactly what you are copying, would you?
Anyway, I guess there is no point reasoning with people who think it rational to assume that every Chinese you meet (or Chinese look-alike, for that matter) is a protester in the pay of the Chinese government.
You may of course make any rules you like, there is no need to get defensive. I have no plans to start a blog. But relax, I won't be here all day commenting on your Blog. You may find it hard to believe, but I don't get paid for this you know. And I usually have better things to do.
I don't feel defensive in the least, but if that's how your read me, up to you. I tried to straighten up your perception of what I'm writing, but you insist on sticking to the "idiot bigot" narrative, as though I claim absolutely all Chinese are liars, absolutely no Thai citizens support China, etc. The protesters who were screaming their heads off at me, standing quietly before them, appeared to have no interest in human rights for Tibetans or anyone else. Foreign exchange students, the top ".0001% cream of the crop", or so another commenter informs me.
Think what you like, I'm busy. Go find a non-idiotic blog to read.
I was of course reading Kadfly's blog when I saw you post a link there to your blog with the question:
"Jonas, and anybody else who is harping on the "evil Tibetan protester" who molested that poor little girl in the wheelchair in Paris:
Will she still be a national hero when Chinese find out that it was a Chinese provocateur who actually did it? What do you say now?
Agam's Gecko: BREAKING: LYING LIARS FRAME TIBETAN"
I have the feeling that you don't like what I have to say after all.
Don't mind me if you are busy. I hate to think that I am in your way of making a living.
Look kapmax, I actually don't mind you, and I actually am busy. You made the judgement that I'm an idiot, so that's that.
It's nothing to do with money. Unlike apparently many others who are fighting for the CCP's right to treat Tibetans any way they please, I give my efforts voluntarily, not for money. I don't even have advertising on the blog. So spare me the sanctimonious posturing.
Nice to know you are not too busy.
No I don't think you are an idiot at all, unless of course you really believe the stories you post.
There's your problem, you don't read carefully. I said I am busy, and you read the opposite. Very busy, and money is not involved.
If you think I don't believe what I post, why not look at something more current and say that.
Or not, I really couldn't care less.
Chinese impersonate tibetan to fabricate a fake story.
By Anonymous, at 16 June, 2008 06:35