Amnesty Int. against Shugdenpas

[DharmapalasDharma]

Amnesty international says that all the problems committed against Shugdenpas are not real criteria as human rights violations. They say Tibet and the PRC have the human rights violations. I understand and pray for the Tibetans suffering in Tibet but also don't see how the exile community can be united for a Free Tibet with divisions. If His Holiness lifted the ban Tibetans would be in harmony and China who has promoted the practice in Tibet would be shocked and His Holiness as well as the Chinese leaders would have dialogue.Maybe Tibet will get autonomy or something of that nature.

If AI stood up for Shugdenpas Tibetans would be reunited as one. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA17/014/1998/en/b4bf4aa2-c7b0-48ce-8b6e-46fce3f3200f/asa170141998en.pdf

[crazycloud]

If you read their statement carefully, you will see that what you have said here is not accurate.

Amnesty said that the problems in the settlement did not constitute violations of human rights that "None of the material AI has received contains evidence of abuses which fall within Al's mandate for action — such as grave violations of fundamental human rights including torture, the death penalty, extra-judicial executions, arbitrary detention or imprisonment, or unfair trials."

emphasis mine.

Noone was alleging that these were taking place, so actually amnesty simple said "We are not the right persons to asses whetehre or not religious persecution and banning are taking place, and monks being harassed, denied civil rioghts, etc."

They were essentially saying "we're staying out of it."

A.I.....  "While recognizing that spiritual debate can be contentious, Amnesty International cannot become involved in debate on spiritual issues. "

[WisdomBeing]

Not many established organisations would go against a Nobel Peace prize laureate, icon of World Peace and beloved of hollywood and political glitterati, HH the Dalai Lama.

Not Amnesty International, nor the Indian government.

Om Mani Peme Hung.

[iloveds]

Quite amazing the power of speech that HHDL has. That even large organisations will be careful how they look to the public with regards to what HH says vs what shugdenpas say.

Very political times we live in

[Zhalmed Pawo]

Quite amazing the power of speech that HHDL has. That even large organisations will be careful how they look to the public with regards to what HH says vs what shugdenpas say.

Very political times we live in

No.

By it's own rules, Amnesty International can only speak against actions made by official entities, like Governments, States or Countries. As the TGIE is not really any of those, AI is by default incapable of saying anything.

[LosangKhyentse]

Quite amazing the power of speech that HHDL has. That even large organisations will be careful how they look to the public with regards to what HH says vs what shugdenpas say.

Very political times we live in

No.

By it's own rules, Amnesty International can only speak against actions made by official entities, like Governments, States or Countries. As the TGIE is not really any of those, AI is by default incapable of saying anything.

It's amazing how TGIE can be excused by a technicality. When in fact they try to act and somehow function as a de facto govt albeit poorly. Having said that, they can't do much or accomplish much, because if they could, their main purpose for setting up over 50 years ago would have been accomplished-Independence.

They are the only 'govt' dependent totally on their leader. When their current leader passes (sorry), they will close up and move to other countries super fast. Sad, but true.

tk

[a friend]

Dear TK, you mention independence. I'm afraid that independence is at the heart of the problem disseminated among the Tibetan community in 1996, the holy Protector having been used as a scapegoat to distract from the fact that the DL's brother had initiated a campaign pro Independence that surely was going to win the hearts of the Tibetans ... against the DL's acceptance to give back Tibet to China through "autonomy".
Some Tibetan friends always say that the Protector issue is pure politics, nothing to do with religion. The dates of the events are quite talkative, March for Independence toward the end of 1995 ... the ban, March 1996 ...

There is no need for imaginary sacred plans behind the ban. The fantastic theory offered by this website at its inception does not accord with religion. The  political theory, on the other hand, is based on facts and it nicely explains the actions of the Dalai Lama, that arise naturally from his role as political leader of the Tibetan people.