| To Elaine who said " Tibet has a distinctive language, (verbal and written), a distinctive cultural identity, a distinctive spiritual way of way, a distinctive demographic, a distinctive historical background/ existence, a distinctive social system, a distinctive leader (government in exile) making it capable of making independent decision..." Since when does having a distinctive language, distinctive cultural identity, etc equate a separate nationhood? Should the Red Indians in America be given a separate nationhood? How about the aboriginals in Australia? Or the natives in Taiwan, whose 26 languages are almost extinct. If we follow a 'logical' world view as such, than surely, the most populous nation is entitled to have the largest footprint on earth? It is the most equitable, no? Anyway, take a look at the maps published predating the so called PRC invasion of Tibet and draw your own conclusions. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/asia_1892_amer_ency_brit.jpg http://www.mssu.edu/projectsouthasia/DigitalImagery/Maps/Asia-Historical/Asia1920Political.jpg http://www.columbia.edu/itc/meal ... 2/cramasia1902.html http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00maplinks/modern/hammond1904/hammond1904max.jpg As for the foreign journalists being barred from the news site, it still doesn't excuse them from sloppy journalism. |
Error in Western Media Report about Tibet