Our debate here, started with your comment of
To the best of my knowledge, Cole quoted two China Daily articles in this thread. One is about an interview on TYC’s Tsewang Rigzin by an Italian Journalist to show that some radical elements among the exile community were planning to resort to suicide attack tactics in the future, which was a response to Anya’s request for citation; the other is a statement issued by Chinese ambassador to UK, which Cole quoted after “Patience and Understanding…” He made no claim that these sources contain information on CIA. The CIA reference you were looking for is in the first article he cited shortly after he made the claim that “Dalai worked with Beijing for 10 years without any drama till he was led astray by CIA and deviant lamas.” That article is from wordpress.com, which is, as far as I am aware of, not affiliated with China Daily. (vide infra)

That slab of Italian text was an article written by an Italian Journalist, Valter Vecellio, born as Gualtiero Vecellio (Tripoli, January 11 1954). His name is right under the title of the article I cited. The original interview was conducted by Lorenzo Cremonesi, whose name is also mentioned. I made no claim on the validity of that original article, and in fact, I even mentioned that Tsewang Rigzin defended himself by saying that he was “misquoted” by the Italian. The sole purpose of posting that Italian text is to show the original article that China Daily cited, so that you know where you should direct your rebuttal. Your sarcastic assertion that I implied “if it’s in Italian, it must be valid” is groundless.

Now, if you want to respond to the Italian text, feel free to write to Mr. Vecellio or Mr. Cremonesi. But when you were responding to my posts, you should at least know their intentions. I have made my point clear, TWICE already, that if you want to point finger at someone, point it towards the journalist who wrote the original article. The best way to discredit a statement is to show that the original statement is wrong, rather than to question the credibility of the press that cited it. For example, if China Daily publishes an article citing Copernicus that the earth revolves around the sun, would you question the validity of that statement simply because it was cited by China Daily?

The CNN example was used to show that I am perfectly aware of the western media manipulation, a response to your sarcastic comment mentioned above implicating my blind faith in foreign media. Whether or not you watch CNN does not invalidate my claim that some western media publish unsubstantiated or distorted reports. It only affects your awareness of such problem. Furthermore, some other western media were also guilty of subjective and unprofessional journalism. It’s not limited to CNN, hence the “and co.” part.

I don’t understand why it was so difficult for you to find CIA in that article. I will do the work for you then, and here it is:
Earlier in the article it also says:
Of course, Chinadaily.com is China Daily. But the source Cole cited is from wordpress.com.

I posted the youtube videos because they are VISUAL, which are more powerful than texts. As I have said before, these videos are not propaganda from CCP, but rather interviews with former CIA agents and exile Tibetans done in the west. Also, web based information is easy to access by forum viewers.

Since you insisted so, I will gladly provide you with some non-web based references which you can check out from your local library or buy from Amazon. For example:

Carole McGranahan’s “The CIA and the Chushi Gangdrug Resistance, 1956-1974"

Also, history books on Tibet written by acclaimed American scholars such as:
The Making of Modern Tibet by A. Tom Grunfeld
The Snow Lion and the Dragon: Tibet, China and the Dalai Lama by M. Goldstein

If you don’t have access to these books, I will quote for you from Goldstein’s work here:

I hate China-bashing bigots like Jack Cafferty, but they still exist, don't they?

You still didn’t clarify the claim you requested evidence for.

Which part of ”quoted above” you don’t understand? My statement quoted above says: ”I still couldn't find any post by Cole stating that CIA was behind the current event, other than that CIA has a not-so-graceful role in the early years.”

Your quote of Cole’s statement that "Dalai worked with Beijing for 10 years without any drama till he was led astray by CIA and deviant lamas." does not give any indication that Cole believes that “CIA was behind the current event”, while at the same time, illustrated his belief that “CIA played a not-so-graceful role in the early years.” This is precisely the point I tried to make in my statement quoted above.

I never said that your statement proved that CIA was behind the separation movement, did I? Where did you get these far-fetched ideas? Meanwhile, I already provided plenty of citations showing CIA’s involvement in the early years.

__________________
What we've got here is... failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. --CHL

All I could find was:
"Much of what the O.S.S. did in Tibet remains hidden in secret files at C.I.A headquarters near Washington, D.C., but one of their plots has been widely reported. It involved a smear campaign launched against the regent who had been appointed to act for the young 14th Dalai Lama after the 13th Dalai died in 1933. The regent was hostile to U.S.-British intrigues in Tibet, so the O.S.S. spread rumors about his alleged incompetence and criminal activities. Eventually these charges led to the regent’s arrest and murder in a Tibetan prison. The 14th Dalai Lama’s father subsequently was poisoned because he was a friend and supporter of the regent."

Between uncited "secret" agreements, and ambiguous "former CIA officers" I have little reason to believe this blogger. Again, something more credible is needed.

LOL it IS in Italians, so beside a few names, I have no idea how Chinadaily might have distorted it in translation or for that matter who these people are that I should put blind faith in their article that I can't read. I'm just going to say this:
Serious citations only please
and in English or French.

No, but if China Daily posted anything controversial (meaning anything relating to China) then I have little reason to waste my time reading it. China Daily has proven to be nothing more than nationalist propaganda.

My whole point of saying I don't watch CNN was to show that there's no such thing as western media. You can't just say western media do the same things because it's a gross over-generalization. I can say Chinese media is biased and unreliable BECAUSE there's only ONE source -- the CCP. Western media on the other hand is a giant contingency of various private individuals with their own objectivity and sometimes subjectivity.

They can be VISUAL all you want, I'm still not going to sink to levels of citing youtube videos....

I didn't say all web sources can be dismissed, merely that Google searches are not reliable. If you found a credible source on Google, you can post it yourself -- I'm not going to do your research for your argument. That was the whole point.

See now THAT I can believe. Alright, the CIA was involved in sneaking the Dalai Lama out of Tibet. Makes me like the CIA even more. Good for them.

Also, more details I stumbled upon while verifying you book citations:
The Free Tibet Movement: A Selective Narrative

I guess I was profiling Cole's motives from his previous posts earlier in the thread.

"If anything, it further supports my statement quoted above."

Then what is "it"?

__________________

5 million ethnic Tibetan to my knowledge btw.
Do you read people's minds? Did you single handedly conduct a survey of all Tibetans to determine that? Again I'm a Quebec national and I had no idea if separation was something Quebecors wanted or not UNTIL THE ELECTIONS. So tell me how you arrived at these conclusions.
Further if what you said is true, then LET THEM HAVE AN ELECTION AND LET'S SEE RATHER THAN TALK ABOUT IT. Also, based on precedents of decolonization, like India, the same argument was put forward: "Those English are really great for liberating them from Islamic Mughals, enriching the region and banning Sati. English are of the same Aryan race as the people of Northern India....." well we all know how that ended once people were allowed to think for themselves and voice their opinions.

If China is currently soooo weak that you think free press would lead to another civil war, perhaps it's time for the Chinese governmental system to have democratic reforms.
Again, no such thing as western media. Might just as well cite improper Japanese news and involve China in the accusation because they're both in East Asia. It doesn't make sense at all.
Further, despite not being perfect, BBC and others are much more objective than CCTV. I laugh I how CCTV covers story and how they ignore facts....well it's pretty sad actually, but you get my meaning. There is no war. Freedom of speech, criticizing governments and free media are all beneficial to everyone.

The CCP has much more problems than corruption. And what's a GREAT way to minimize corruption? Making those leaders accountable for their action by letting the people who are suppose to benefit from governments decide -- citizens. If a leader is corrupted, then his action might costs him his job in the next election....whereas internal investigation can simply mean more bribes.
It's funny how nationalists try to past as more open minded by saying China has corruption problem. Ha, even the CCP admits that, but what of policies that outright undermines the Chinese constitution? What about the entire system of law and governance that have all proven to make a country unstable, un-democratic (meaning unfair) and inefficient in the long run?
Of course I hear none of that, from you or by people I meet in China.
And always stuck on national unity. What's so great about national unity when you have free trade? Perhaps it's time to put aside Qing Dynasty ideologies and do what is efficient. Plus if people are doing well economically, there's no reason to suggest that democracy will lead to national separation.

Who are western people? Arrogant of democracy? only if arrogance is advocating policies that actually work (it's getting harder and harder for anybody to admit the opposite, even the CCP -- look at their recent concessions to western thoughts -- third echelons, economic liberalism, more lax laws).
How much about imperialism do you really know? First of all, the first wave of imperialism was during the late Ming - early Qing Dynasty for China. These were of the kinds strictly to enrich governments through mercantilism. And throughout, the Chinese state proved to be stronger and richer than any European state - meaning these benefits hardly gave the now developed states an advantage (Spain and Portugal who were at the head of colonialism are both doing bad economically). The second wave of industrialization brought a revival of imperialism, this time not to enrich governments directly by invading countries for economic purposes, but to force open markets throughout the world to develop economies and then economic development really started. CHINA DOES NOT NEED TO DO THIS IN THESE CURRENT SITUATIONS BECAUSE MARKETS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD ARE NOW VIRTUALLY ALL OPEN. Britain, France, and other European/North American economic successes did not come from expensive occupations, they stemmed from international trade. So China can have democracy and economic growth simultaneously (like everyone else in the world).
Another significant variable in European development was DECENTRALIZATION. Individual governments knew the best way for their own immediate area to subsidize industrialization to compete with other states (further leading to innovations). A central government is not aware that opening a leather factory in AnHui for example will lead to water born pollution -- putting the entire fishing population out of work and water (usually meaning that opening the factory resulted in more social losts than social gains). A local government and elections would take care of the problem immediately, but a government on the other side of China in Beijing would be little aware of this and would care little compared to those directly affected.

In history, the CCP won public support at first because the KMT made the bad policies of targeting a much too small urban middle class and receiving foreign aid. So the CCP can thank other people's mistakes for their success.
Also, it was the KMT that did most of the fighting against the Japanese (the Long March only proved that the CCP wanted to appeal to the population by getting close to the Japanese border but not close enough for substantial fighting). Second, the American Open Door Notes did far more to withdraw European presence in China than anything else.
China was 30 years old when it started to move away from socialism and towards the inevitable liberalism that you oppose so zealously. In two hundred years I predict China will be a democracy like any other and will regret all the turmoil its forced industrialization caused at the beginning of the millennium. Chinese development is not a conflict, there's no need to be scared of anything. Anybody is happy to see China develop economically.

In the end, the CCP was the selection of the Chinese people in 1949. There's no way of determining what Chinese people want as a whole without elections. If you so dearly trusted your own propaganda, than you should advocate elections as I do, since the CCP is sure to win right? It would give it credibility on the international scene and other countries would start actually listening to it. I don't know how you can assert any of what Chinese people want unless you can read their minds or allowed objective surveys throughout China. Let them have elections and let's have ALL OF THEM say what they want, not you. It will not concede to foreign powers but conversely give power to the Chinese people instead of a few Chinese people. If you allowed decentralization by giving provincial governments more power, then the call for separations would decrease immensely. Tibet would have a very small independence movement if the provincial, elected government could make its own domestic policies. Civil wars like the one that ended in 1949 is only avoided when people's demands can be met through talks instead of military coups.

Chauvinist.

__________________

Yes, the whole of the independence movement in Tibet is to blame for the action of that single criminal. And so much for gun laws in China hey?

__________________

From Smallbox's words, i see that one core thing of your philosophy is the election, we have our election system, but the system now is not working as good as it should be, that's also what we should update!

I must admire your knowlegde about China, I think my bad english is far away from discussing so complex thing. We have entirely different history and culture, it is common we have different opinions towards the same thing, personal opinions are hard to be objective. I agreed with some of your opinions such as the CCP's problems, but i believe in socialism, socialism is the precondition of any changes, at least now i don't think socialism is a mistake, people in China live better than before, that is truth, problems are unavoidable when developing a country, what we should do is just to find what is the problem and overcome it! With the problems, we can see the future, but in western eyes, all those problems just let them see the perish of CCP and socialism.

I am not a blind patriot, I can see the bad things along with the good things. We can discuss and criticize our gov and CCP on internet, in our local forum we talk about it everyday, I can surely told you, if there is a election voted by all Chinese, CCP will still be supported!

I am happy to disscuss with you, you let me know what China is in a foreigner who ever lived in China, we understand better with each other. thanks!

__________________
借我三千虎贲，复我浩荡中华! 汉旗指处，望尘逃遁！敢犯我中华天威者，虽远必诛!

not just single criminal, separatists killed, robbed, exploded organizedly!

__________________
借我三千虎贲，复我浩荡中华! 汉旗指处，望尘逃遁！敢犯我中华天威者，虽远必诛!

You mean the Third Echelons (election for village head in the country side)? That is utterly meaningless. In one of the most centralized countries in the world, the leaders of the lowest and least important ranks are elected. WOW. You don't just need to make these elections better, you need complete reforms of how the government works for these elections to mean more than the Chamber of Commerce means here.

China only started doing better when it moved away from socialism. Considering health care is private and so are firefighters in China, China is not very socialist perhaps except in the laws and the structure of its government. Good for China coming from an economic theory platform, socialism has proven a failure. To quote Friedman: in today's world, you're either free market capitalist or you're North Korea.

Then why don't you have elections?
And what I would suggest for Chinese elections is not disclosing any party during elections. Everybody runs on his/her own platform as independents and THEN choses which party to join and reveals it to his.her constituency. So to have fair elections, free of the political bias imposed on Chinese for the past 60 years.
The CCP is known to block any website that criticizes the CCP or advocate things it doesn't like and that the latter finds. Of course, in China most people know very littler about this.

Np....

__________________

I have no reason to believe that these riots were organized, even less that they would all target this one officer -- let me guess, 80 people pull that trigger?

__________________

I didn't mean the murder of this officer was orginized, I meant the riots were masterminded organizedly.

__________________
借我三千虎贲，复我浩荡中华! 汉旗指处，望尘逃遁！敢犯我中华天威者，虽远必诛!

Yes, it may be so in 1949, but not in 1958, 1966, and/or 2008. The bad thing about CCP is once it started to rule China, Chinese people can not get rid of it anymore, in a nonviolent way.

Don't forget, CCP promised freedom and democracy to Chinese people in 1949, and that is one big reason that it won the civil war in 1949. But it cheated, what it imposed to Chinese people was and is autocracy (even more so that its predecessor--KMT), hunger, tens of millions of death of innocents, destruction of Chinese traditional culture, etc, etc.