On Apr 30, 12:18=A0pm, "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > I MAY HAVE BEEN of the opinion you were here for honest discussion
when =
I
> > first posted to SCC, but I see now you are not.
>
> > Do you see how language works and how the Canadian tourist could use
"ma=
y
> > be" without calling into question the peacefulness or existence of the
> > earlier protests?
>
> Well, if one was present during a protest, =A0either the protest is
> peaceful or not peaceful. There would not be any "may be." One,
> however, would use may be if he did not really see the protest but
> assumed one. Anyway, the vague statement is quite meaningless without
> the minimal information on who was protesting against whom and for
> what reasons and other collaberating evidence.
He's on to you, LT. We have seen this scenario dozens of times: a well-
meaning, thoughtful person comes to s.c.c
and tries to have a discussion with LT Lee. LT seems genuine at first,
but after a few rounds the person realizes that LT is
dishonest and stops conversing with him.
It's happened many times, LT. What do you make of that?
It's pretty clear that the reason so many people get frustrated trying
to converse with you is
because there's something *wrong* with your attempts at discussion.
Can you really not see that?
> > > How do they feel? Who are the "they"? The rioters, the victims of
the
> > > riots? All Tibetans? Please feel free to answer your own question
and
> > > substantiate it.
>
> > You're the one that making the claim to know who the "pro-Tibetans"
are =
and
> > where they live, you substantiate it. =A0If you know that Tibetans
livin=
g in
> > Tibet are not "pro-Tibet" then substantiate it.
>
> No. I do not include the real Tibetans, ie, those who had spent a
> large chunk of their lives in Tibet. As a matter of fact, they do not
> generate much news although Xinhua news agency re****t statements made
> by their political and religious leaders. Those who generte news to
> garner international publicity are invarible outside of Tibet.
You really are shameless. There is huge unhappiness in Tibet but you
think by not talking about it you
can pretend it doesn't exist. You can't. You're not fooling anyone.
You can't hide the truth with semantics
and deceit.
|
