From: zdlin@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (ZhongDong Lin)
Subject: Re: What About Tibet? 
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:16:22 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.214559.17827@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mlibucha@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Libucha) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.192107.1704@news.acns.nwu.edu> zdlin@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (ZhongDong Lin) writes:
>>~In article <1992Aug25.143807.12175@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mlibucha@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Libucha) writes:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Do you buy the Lei Feng story, too? Or just the Dalai Lama story?
>>>
>>>
>>  Yes, I do. And for a very good reason.  I have a college roommate at my
>>freshman year who has a relative worked with Lei Feng.  According to his
>>relative, Lei Feng did exist and he was a very nice and helpful guy.  I am not
>>denying the Chinese propaganda makes him bigger than life, but that is just
>>how the media work.  If you donot trust the media, then you should not trust
>>Dalai Lama is as good as how the western society portraits him.  Then we won't
>>have any arguement, wiil we?
>>  One thing I really donot want to buy is a criticism on a Chinese story by a
>>non-Chinese citing a reference from another non-Chinese.
>>  BTW, it looks like we are from the same school.
>>  
>>  Brian
>>
>
>	One, I *never* said that the Dalai Lama is as good as Western 
>society portrays him: you read that in yourself. All I suggested was that
>perhaps the human skins in the Potala were put there by the CCP and not
>the Dalai Lama.
>
>	Two, if I must *be* Chinese and/or *quote* Chinese in order for
>you to buy my criticism, then do you mean that you think all Westerners
>are either anti-China or seriously misinformed about China?
  
  The last thing I want to do is to get in a 1 on 1 fight with anyone.  I
would rather play my SF2 on SNE.
  But something does need to be cleared up.
  1st, donot use that 'you read that yourself' arguement anymore, it is so old a trick
it starts to smell now.  You know perfectly well where you are standing,
otherwise you would not even take the stage at the first place. If you want to
play this game, two can.  I just said you 'should' not believe something, I
didnot say that you do believe it.  There is as much a different as Lei Fen's 
story and Dalai Lama's.  
  2nd, I do want to apology if I give you the wrong impression that I donot
trust any of the westerns' view of China.  I should use more restricted words.  This is what
I should say: I donot want to buy a story that I *lived* through from someone
who *read* it from someone else who *speculated* it.  But since you brought up 
the subject, I want to add some comments on that.  I do think *most* of the
Westerners are seriously misinformed about China.  As a matter of fact, that
is the subject of an article I am trying to put together.  Those people  
who traved in and out of China for short period of time, have limited sources 
to access, limited people to talk to, read little or no Chinese, citing each o
ther's works, will hardly appear in my dictionary as 'Chinese Experts'.  Their
so-called evidents most of time failed to strike me as concrete, and their    
conclusion by their "common sense' fell way short of what is needed to convince 
me.  Worse yet, there are too many people who read their works and used their 
evidents as facts, not to mention those politicians and a selfish bunch of    
Chinese who would sell anything for their benefits.
  3rd, forget about above, your original post attempted to use an evident to
convince my fellow Chineseman that his evident is not that obivious.  All I
suggest is that you should check your own source before you take on other's.
If you get more facts you want to sell about Tibet, then stay on this
title and someone should pay attention to you.  If you want to take on my
1st or 2nd issue, I suggest you change the title.  If it is obious, I will
find it.  

  Brian 

  GO. CORNHUSKERS.  
  ok.  go wildcat too.