While the Dalai Lama is in the U.S. visiting the White House, Tibetan Buddhism gets stepped on by CNN. by John Kusumi
(centrist)
Friday, February 19, 2010
It's Thursday, February 18, 2010, and U.S. President Barack Obama is hosting a meeting at the White House with Tibet's Dalai Lama.
Meanwhile, America's media of pawns, shills, and propagandistic sock puppets is completely dropping the ball in its coverage of this meeting.
Suppose that Russia kidnapped the Pope and offered a replacement, to be a pretender to the papacy? --The world, in its outrage, would ascribe no legitimacy to the pretend Pope. We know how Popes are selected (by a conclave of Cardinals), and that method is not by the fiat of Russian leaders.
Indeed, in the above example, the world would express shock, outrage, and demand that the situation be returned to the status quo ante.
For about a decade now, America's news media has been keeping the U.S. public "in the dark" and uninformed about the violations of human rights -- crimes against humanity -- that are perpetrated by the regime in charge of mainland China: namely, the Communist Party.
Above, for comparison, I've made a fictitious example where Russia kidnaps a Pope.
But, the analogy is to a completely true situation: China kidnapped the Panchen Lama, a high figure in Tibetan Buddhism, and offers a replacement, to be a pretend "new" Panchen Lama. And America's news media? --Having no shame, they are content to report about the new, replacement Panchen Lama.
Can you say sacrilege? Can you say no shame? --CNN and the Associated Press are both content to bamboozle the public, and then to pat themselves on the back with their self-congratulatory slogans about being "the most trusted name in news." In this vein, CNN's latest transgression was today, but let's consider the back-story.
On April 13, 2006, the China Support Network (grass roots boosters of China's pro-democracy movement) published "AP and Reuters assist in sacrilege." In there, I wrote:
No newswire is questioning whether or not Joseph Ratzinger is Pope Benedict XVI. He is that.
Tibetan Buddhism has the Panchen Lama. No newswire should be questioning whether or not Gedhun Choekyi Nyima is Panchen Lama XI. He is that.
The arrogance of journalism comes to the fore when some newswires arrogate to themselves the decision-making authority over who is a figure in Tibetan Buddhism. The correct arbiter of same should be the Dalai Lama, not Christopher Bodeen of the Associated Press.
The Panchen Lama was kidnapped by China in 1995 at the age of 6, and became known as "the world's youngest political prisoner." The abduction itself is a hideous human rights abuse, and where there is no closure in this case, it is still correct to demand that Beijing release the Panchen Lama.
Again from my earlier article, "Beijing rejects both the Dalai Lama and his choice of the boy for Panchen Lama. No one in Beijing has the authority to choose a Panchen Lama, but they have gone ahead and selected their own boy so that they can "install" their own, pro-Beijing person to be a regime-friendly, pro-Beijing person."
In fact, I had written about the Panchen Lama's case in an earlier (2004) article:
Brazen is one word. Flagrant, heinous, and sacrilegious are three more words....his case clearly points out the diabolical nature of China's Communist regime, as it readily violates not just an individual, but a religious figure, and thereby the entire society that cares about the Panchen Lama. Violated and raped are two more words, and Tibet can understandably feel that way.
Back to 2006:
if the kidnapping was bad enough, then words begin to fail now, as we consider (a.) the arrogated selection, by Beijing, of a Panchen Lama impostor; and (b.) the fact that AP and Reuters today are reporting the impostor as if he is actually the Panchen Lama. I believe clearly that this is sacrilege, and that this is foul, faulty, and false reporting that serves only to [convey] Communist propaganda, while a crime against humanity is committed. Again, I am not Tibetan, and I am not Buddhist, but I can see a religion being violated, and I can see journalists arrogating to themselves something akin to the selection of the Pope.
History did not begin yesterday, nor did we fall off of a lemon truck yesterday. (Boy, don't journalists wish? In my lifetime, journalism has gone from "the first draft of history" to "the fictionalization of history.")
Reuters began its article by saying, "Tibet's 11th Panchen Lama, anointed by China's atheist Communists but not by the Tibet's Dalai Lama, took center stage at the World Buddhist Forum on Thursday, defending China's record on religion." (Hmmm. Why would China's record on religion need defending, if Beijing were not offending?)
Reuters continued, "Gyaltsen Norbu, appointed in 1995 as the Himalayan region's second most important religious figure after Beijing rejected the Dalai Lama's nominee...." (Hmmm. Recall from above that the Panchen Lama is named Gedhun Choekyi Nyima. The impostor, Gyaltsen Norbu, is being named here....)
The AP is in on this scam, too. Look at this quote from AP: "Gyaltsen Norbu, 16, is the second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism." AP described this appearance as "an apparent sign that Beijing is seeking greater acceptance for its choice of the Panchen Lama." However, we know from earlier that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was previously reported to be the Panchen Lama. Whether the newswires agree this is sacrilege or not, a vast violation of estoppel it certainly is.
A vast violation of estoppel is a change of story; a reversal; an inconsistency. The AP did the same in 1989, when it reduced the casualty figures from the Tiananmen Square massacre. (Newswires earlier reported 3,000 dead; they later said "hundreds" dead, and CSN believes that change occurred at the behest of the propaganda minister in Beijing.) Beijing cannot make the China Support Network say what it wants, nor report Beijing's one-sided version of history. But apparently, Beijing can get the AP and Reuters to bend over backwards, and into a pretzel shape, in the course of their pandering, brown nosing, and general selling out to the Chinese Communist Party.
The AP went so far as to refer to "That other boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima," taking note of the dispute. AP also said, "A spokesman for the Dalai Lama on Thursday again rejected Beijing's right to make the final decision on reincarnations. 'Reincarnation is a religious belief and it cannot be decided by an administrative office,' Thubten Samphel said by telephone from the Tibetan government-in-exile's headquarters in the northern Indian town of Dharmsala."
This means that the AP is openly admitting that "their man" is an impostor, but they are reporting this story "the Beijing way," even without authority from the Dalai Lama. One might think they could at least have the decency to refer to the "Chinese Panchen Lama" as distinct from the "Tibetan Panchen Lama," and perhaps "Chinese Buddhism" as distinct from "Tibetan Buddhism." The rightful authority for Tibet and its Buddhism is the Dalai Lama, and the AP and Reuters stories again mix and blur the distinct concepts of Chinese versus Tibetan.
It's ugly, it's disgusting, it's slanderous, and it assists Beijing in committing a crime against humanity. To any thinking intellect, it is obvious propagandizing, and it is offensive to be assaulted with Communist propaganda while we Americans are merely sitting in our living rooms. Shame on these two newswires!
In short, the Chinese government is attempting an Orwellian revision of history, and the U.S. news media is helping Beijing in that attempt to hoodwink the world and to foist their Panchen Lama selection upon the world. My 2006 article went on to say that newswires should retract and apologize for those stories.
Fast forward to 2010. What did we see on CNN this morning?
The video report was titled, "Objections to Dalai Lama visit," and was filed from Beijing by CNN's Emily Chang. Her script began as follows:
Thousands of Chinese worshippers flock to the Lama Temple, praying for blessings. It's a shrine to Tibetan Buddhism. But, this isn't Tibet. It's Beijing, and this is a state-sanctioned temple. Over the years, the Lama Temple has become one of China's most popular tourist attractions. It's a traditional stop for national and international visitors, and an opportunity for the Chinese government to show the world it allows the practice of Tibetan Buddhism. Worshippers are required to recognize the Panchen Lama, chosen by the Chinese government, rather than the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader. Some don't seem to worry about the difference.
If this is journalism, it is one-sided journalism. Now they're stacking the bogus Panchen Lama, not against the real Panchen Lama, but against the Dalai Lama himself. Chang's report glosses over the real Panchen Lama entirely -- it skips the entire controversy! She then says, "Some don't seem to worry about the difference." --Okay well logically, if some don't worry, that implies that others do. (In fact, the first "some" could be a tiny minority, and the second "some" could be a vast majority.) So, will both sides be illustrated in this report?
No. The other side of the matter is people concerned about human rights and religious freedom. This report refers to no one from the pro-freedom, pro-democracy, pro-human rights community of dissidents and 'Free Tibet' campaigners. They don't appear. Who appears instead?
Folks, I start a new paragraph here because I am truly incredulous. --A street vendor of incense becomes the new guest on CNN!
Folks, it's another paragraph break because I am boggling. At stake are international relations, freedom, democracy, human rights, and the religion and culture of Tibet. And who gets face time on CNN? --A street vendor of incense! She says:
"Average Chinese people have no opinions on the Dalai Lama and what he does," this incense vendor says. "We just care about having enough food to eat and clothes to wear. Not politics. That's the government's business."
There is such a thing as the international human rights community, but CNN seems to be foggy about their existence. They could have inserted spokespeople from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the China Support Network, or Students for a Free Tibet. Or, how about America's labor unions, which lost jobs to Communist China? None of that appears in this report! What was illustrated is that "some don't seem to worry about" the substitution shell game -- the controversy, wherein Beijing kidnapped the Panchen Lama and now promotes its own choice of replacement.
Let's have a recap of words that apply to what we're seeing, per my article above.
- brazen - flagrant - heinous - sacrilege - foul - faulty - false - pandering - brown nosing - general selling out to the Chinese Communist Party - ugly - disgusting - slanderous - assisting Beijing in committing a crime against humanity - Orwellian revision of history - one sided journalism
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 34
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of John Kusumi only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
John Kusumi is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
absolutely agree! one of the best I've read in a long time. Thank you. btw, how do I contact John Kusumi to get a written permission so we could republish it on our website?
CNN stands for Corrupt News Network. They are definitely a liberal network, one that only presents one side of the story. They cover for the president, and withold news that are not in his favor. Anyone take a look at the ratings that FOX News has? They are slaughtering CNN and MSNBC. They're about the only fair and balanced news organization that exists. For me, FOX News is all I watch. They present two sides of the story and allow the audience to decide for themselves. I appreciate that they have both conservative and liberal commentators, unlike the other two networks. The other networks are so far to the left that they give the perception that FOX is to the right, but it's not at all. Thank you, Mr. Kusumi, for exposing CNN for what they really are.Â
If this is journalism, it is biased journalism. self test Now they're stacking the artificial Panchen Lama, not adjoin the absolute Panchen Lama, but adjoin the Dalai Lama himself. Chang's address glosses over the absolute Panchen Lama absolutely -- it skips the absolute controversy! She again says, "Some don't assume to anguish about the difference." --Okay able-bodied logically, if some don't worry, that implies that others do. (In fact, the aboriginal "some" could be a tiny minority, and the additional "some" could be a all-inclusive majority.) So, will both abandon be illustrated in this report? No. The added ancillary of the amount is humans anxious about animal rights and religious freedom. This address refers to no one from the pro-freedom, pro-democracy, pro-human rights association of dissidents and 'Free Tibet' campaigners. 70-290 practice exam They don't appear. Who appears instead? Folks, I alpha a new branch actuality because I am absolutely incredulous. --A artery bell-ringer of aroma becomes the new bedfellow on CNN! Folks, it's addition branch breach because I am boggling 70-291. At pale are all-embracing relations, freedom 70-297, democracy, animal rights, and the adoration and ability of Tibet.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
