Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (65460)	8/15/2010 8:50:21 PM
From: Maurice Winn	3 Recommendations Respond to of 218221

Hawk, it's not too late. <And maybe now it's too late to separate Tibet from China. > It could be easily done by holding a vote and if 70% of the population is in favour of separation from China, the constitutional change should be made. Heck, 51% would be reasonable in democratic process. New Zealand did such a thing, bit by bit, over a century or two in seceding from Great Britain. English ancestors moved here en masse, then, along with the local yokels and others, voted for secession and that's what we did. We are still subjects of The Crown, aka Queen Elizabeth II but that last vestige is likely to be dropped at some stage. Tibet could do the same. The only reason they couldn't is because of the barbarians ruling Beijing. It's not even that the Tibetans would be getting away with something such as Saudi oil fields or huge Alaskan oil fields, depriving the rest of China of the resource. If there was hijacking of some great resource, it might be unreasonable for Tibetans to grab it for themselves. It's true there is water going to China from Tibet, but Tibetans can't take all that. Mqurice

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (65460)	8/16/2010 4:36:03 AM
From: TobagoJack	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218221

<<Were they? Was it terrorism to export what the Chinese people wanted to buy? That's a bit of a stretch.>> ... yeah, maybe you are right, i.e. aq / taleban-sponsored drug running to usa is just taleban making supplies available to usa clients. hamoon, there is village singularity, and then there is you. <<Btw, can you tell us why the British tacitly permitted the East India company to ship opium to China? And remember, Opium was NOT illegal in the British Empire until 1909.>> ... hamoon, opium was illegal in china. so, yes, i see your point. now tell me, where do you sit w/r to mexican products flooding into usa? you are, by my read, supportive. i live and learn and watch and brief. <<So.. what Chinese policy motivated the English to ship, what was a legal substance in the British Empire, into China, where it was illegal? (hint: It was more than profit).>> ... news flash to hamoon, because the chinese culture refused to buy what the british thought they had to sell, and so the turned to crime. that is, unless you consider a certain aspect of mexican import to be legit, per cultured and civilized, per now, which you may well do. if so, you too are a criminal sympathizer and in truth, enabler. yes? <<How is that policy similar to current Chinese economic policy? Second hint: The word starts with an "M".>> hamoon, hint to you, village singularity, the big difference is just one, right vs wrong. should china shipping socks to usa buyers be on par with mexico shipping drugs to usa, and should mexico shipping drugs be as legit as the british shipping drugs, then i suggest you are truly contorted, and you just proved. It originated from the Mongols. Are you a Mongol? more than likely, along with hundreds of millions across euro-asia But who originated the concept of the Dalia Lama is not the same as claiming that people who neither look like Han chinese, nor speak Chinese, and who pre-dated both Mongal and Han control over greater China, are, in fact, Chinese.>> ... so, you are ready for the total and legit transformation of usa based on looks? interesting. <<The bottom line is that Bejing doesn't feel obligated to be follow the same rules that Western economic powers, primarily democratic, have gradually imposed upon themselves regarding economic relations with the developing world. ... stop being so funny.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (65460)	8/16/2010 4:48:08 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218221

<<... claiming that people who neither look like Han chinese, nor speak Chinese, and who pre-dated both Mongal and Han control over greater China, are, in fact, Chinese. They clearly are not Chinese. And "Bejing" communists and their apologists, like yourself, continue to mask your imperialism behind the facade of nationalism and "re-unification".>> hamoon, the tibetans are more han than the folks in miami are to other folks in boston. are you perhaps suggesting that either boston should be vacated or miami should be severed? how do you propose the voting should be done? en.wikipedia.org "... One 2010 study, part of the 1000 Genomes Project and published in the journal Science,[13] claimed that modern Tibetans split off from the Han less than 3,000 years ago.[14] However, archaeologists say they believe that the Tibetan plateau has been inhabited for at least 7,000 years and maybe for as long as 21,000 years. "The separation of Tibetans and Hans at 3,000 years ago is simply not tenable by anything we know from the historical, archaeological or linguistic record," said Mark Aldenderfer, a Tibetan expert at the University of California, Merced.[15] Aldenderfer also noted there had probably been many migrations onto the Tibetan plateau, and that there was indirect evidence that pastoralists had entered the plateau from the north-northeast around 6,000 years ago. Earlier genetic studies have found that Tibetans are more similar to northern Han than to those from southern China, and have some admixture of genes from Central Asia, he said. Geneticists have a more elastic view of dates than do archaeologists, and the estimate of a Han-Tibetan population split at 3,000 years ago could probably have been adjusted to 6,000 if the geneticists had taken any account of any other kind of evidence.[15] The distribution of Haplogroup D-M174 is found among nearly all the populations of Central Asia and Northeast Asia south of the Russian border, although generally at a low frequency of 2% or less. A dramatic spike in the frequency of D-M174 occurs as one approaches the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau of western China. D-M174 is also found at high frequencies in Japan but it fades into low frequencies in the Han populated mainland China between Japan and Tibet. ..."