Jackie Chan to Christie’s: sale of China’s looted bronzes ’shameful’
By Carol Huang | Asia editor 02.26.09
An auction this week at Christie’s of the Yves Saint Laurent collection raised a whopping $478.8 million for charity and AIDS research.
So, could Pierre Bergé, the late designer’s partner, have done without the $35.9 million for two Chinese national treasures? The sale of the two bronzes, a rat and a rabbit’s head looted from Bejing by British and French troops in 1860, unleashed a torrent of protest from Chinese lawyers, bloggers, students, the government, and even Jackie Chan. (Click here to read about China’s efforts to reclaim stolen relics.)
The growing spat hits at a long-disputed question: Should the West return looted artworks?
The calculus seems unclear. In December, Christie’s decided at the last minute to pull a pair of 3,000-year-old earrings from Iraq off the auction block in New York, pending investigation on whether the jewelry had been stolen. (See the Monitor’s report on that here.) But the auction house defended its sale of China’s bronzes, saying their legal ownership had been “clearly confirmed.”
Jackie Chan begs to differ. “They remain looted items, no matter whom they were sold to,” the kungfu movie star said in Hong Kong Wednesday, adding that he’s now planning a film about a quest for stolen Chinese relics. Guess how it ends…
Mr. Bergé had thrown a verbal punch of his own as the three-day auction began Monday, saying the bronzes would be returned “when China establishes human rights.”
China dismissed the comment and hit back Thursday by ordering officials to “scrutinize artifacts” that Christie’s takes in and out of the country. The auction “will have serious effects on Christie’s development in China,” the State Administration of Cultural Heritage warned.
Not sure if that will ease – or inflame – tensions in the centuries-old dispute over looted treasures.
<< Tehran to Washington: Get used to a nuclear Iran | MainComments
2. Josh | 02.26.09
If you visit many of European and American museums, you will find them full of pillaged and stolen items. They should be called museum of stolen goods. Europeans are barbaric and shameless.
3. Nguyen | 02.26.09
The Chinese has looted the Vietnamese artifacts for thousand years in the past. Should we ask China to return the all looted items back to the Vietnamese people? China should do the deed first before asking the others to do it.
4. Rob | 02.26.09
Barbaric? Exclusively so? Please get a grip. This is a human problem. Conquest and looting are old problems and far predate the art.
Dave’s comment is germaine. Mr. Chan has used coded speech to suggest that China could improve ralations with the world by learning how to change it’s position in Tibet. His text also insists that it is a most difficult problem that, “nobody can solve.” Face not offending face, I think.
Now that the Olympics are done, he may have slightly clearer text. Is he upset about it? I don’t know. Dave’s question is a very good question
6. Zephon | 02.26.09
The real irony here is that China has done so much to promote the ethnic cultures of the indeginous people of China, including Tibetans. Most get greatly increased social benefits than the majority of Chinese/Hans.
The western nations including Japan has done so much damage to China and other Asian nations in the past. Including the theft and looting of valuable cultural artifacts such as these bronzes stolen during the Opium wars… wars that western nations, France and Britain included, forced opium consumption upon the Chinese through their war machines, armies and navies.
Return these cultural treasures to China and other nations that were stolen during the dark years of western conquest and imperialism. And western people should learn this history and stop acting like they are the harbingers of human rights as if they are the ones to decide which cultures nations should support in their countries.
And to consider the CIA coup that supported Tibetan terrorists…. what a farce.
7. Ansel | 02.26.09
I have a few points….
1. Jackie Chan is right to speak up about this issue as he is a potent international face, and someone who does a lot of charity work. It’s easy to criticize him on a single issue regarding the country he originates from. He does not bear the responsibilty for Tibet any more than the American people have a responsibility to return land Native American tribes and compensate for centuries of genocide.
2. Calling Europeans “barbaric” is equally as irresponsible as the attacks on Jackie Chan. Most of the European population was working in fields or factories barely scraping by when these artifacts were looted. Like the other comments all it does is feed a pattern of reckless misunderstanding instead of really trying to reslove the issue.
3. Unfortunately both of typical responses are merely shadows of the international attitude. Neither France nor China will get what they actually want by acting like the victim. China by acting as if it has not committed similar crimes, and France by justifying the crime because they want China to stop committing another. You would hope two long standing cultures (one possibly the oldest in the world) would act with a little more class.
9. Brian | 02.26.09
It is shameful that these looted items are not returned to their owners. Still, there is no such thing as FAIR or JUST in our world. Whoever has power and takes, gets.
With that thought in mind, and with China’s rapid rise, maybe Christie’s should reconsider. It would be quite ironic 100 years from now if China owns and tries to auction off the Mona Lisa.
10. Gotham | 02.26.09
Dave is definitely correct in saying that the Chinese are being hypocritical. The Chinese have been supplying 90% of small arms to the Sudanese government responsible for the Darfur massacre since 2004. Furthermore, they refuse to have a floating economy which keeps their labor cheap and so cheat other countries of a fair trade. They also have almost no real enforcement of environmental policies since China’s factories cause so much pollution that it has often created storms over Korea that have resulted in acid rain. They have also displaced Chinese and moved them to Tibet so that they outnumber Tibetans 9:1. This allows them to effectively control a country they have no right to occupy. The list goes on. China has never really followed any of the requests from Western nations so why should their requests be fulfilled at all?
11. wang | 02.26.09
If China had indeed looted the whole country of Tibet. Does that give you a good reason to be happy about looted Chinese bronzes?
12. Chris | 02.26.09
Western countries have looted so much from China since 1840s. It is time to return them.
13. Dave | 02.26.09
In the west there’s a saying that applies here:
“Practice what you preach.”
While I’m admittedly deficient in my knowledge of eastern history, I’m sure there’s been times in history when China has defeated other countries (Tibet?) and looted them. Have they returned those looted artifacts?
14. HM | 02.26.09
Besides stealing vietnam artifacts for more than 4 thousand years, China is currently stealing land along the China/vietnam border and island. Jackie, do something.
15. Ron | 02.26.09
The Chinese should let them have the two bronze heads. They can always loot some replacement heads from Tibet to replace it. This would be a perfect solution, because apparently in the minds of some Westerners, Tibetans and these two bronze heads are related to each other.
16. Sanjeev | 02.26.09
This heating debates of looted Chinese bronze is hypocratic. Why not Chinese Govt. talk about all the looted LION AND TIGER SKIN smuggled over CHina from India……which against the animal rights…………Hope Jackie CHan visit Hongkong and check all those looted skins too……………..which is keep on happening and smuggle almost every month….
British Govt has looted all the important precious Diamonds, jewels and other moonuments from India…………..those are more valuable to any country…..but so far not seen any reactions from any one……..
History is history……….we should focus now how we can meet each other expectations, freedom and respect and win hearts of each other….
17. Jackie | 02.26.09
China has looted not just Tibet also half of Mongolia(now called Inner Mongolia)+Kazaks so on. it is clear that mongolians or tibetians has nothing to relate to China., in terms of language, culture whole everything is differend.
18. Jay | 02.26.09
I want to mention the recent judgments where items looted by Nazi are being returned to their European owners. Whereas items looted in Asia by European armies (French, British, Portuguese et.al.) are not being returned back to Asian countries. Why this double standard?
19. BrianGriffinLovesYou | 02.26.09
They’re just “things.” Their only true importance is as historical records, and that’s unchallenged and open to examination no matter which petty world fiefdom claims to “own” them (as if such “ownership” meant anything besides the traditional children’s cry of “mine!”).
20. Dave | 02.26.09
Chris | 02.26.09
Dave, Tibet is always a part of China.
———————–
I don’t think the Tibetans would agree with you. It’s like saying Canada has always been a part of the United States or Poland has always been a part of Russia.
21. MK | 02.26.09
Agree with Josh. I’m sure, any museum that one visit can find at least few items from ‘illegal purchases’. More in UK- like king’s thrones, diamonds and what not?!
22. Jays | 02.26.09
No matter what china does to others, that does not give someone else to steal the art work.
23. Mike | 02.26.09
If Beijing is objectionable, they can return the relics to Hong Kong, or Taiwan, or even Singapore.
The point is that historic artifacts should be returned to their original people.
The Greeks are upset about the Parthenon Marbles for the same reason.
24. Steve B | 02.26.09
With hindsight, it is probably most fortunate that these treasures were not in China during the Cultural Revolution. If that had been the case, they would have most likely been destroyed with so much of the rest of Chinese history and artifacts which were destroyed at the time.
25. Sam | 02.26.09
Can Christie loot the Statue of Liberty from America and justify it by America looting Texas from Mexico?
26. Norrish Hall | 02.26.09
Every country has some treasures belonging to other nations that have been looted in war.
How you treat it depends on the type of message you want to send to your own people.
Most nations practice the art of “If we took it from you long ago, we now own it (but don’t try taking any things of our…that’s stealing)
27. Droy | 02.26.09
TS and Wang are correct. Two wrongs don’t make a right. It’s intellectually dishonest to claim that looting can be justified because you don’t like the victim.
28. franics | 02.26.09
Jackie Chan please send your karake kick to the chinese government for plundering Tibet and its people and looting Tibet’s heritage and its history. Shame on you !!!
29. jeff | 02.26.09
Gotham, saying the Chinese are responsible for Sudan is wrong. Maybe you
should look at who is supplying arms to the rebels that are trying to overthrow the Sudanese government. With your logic, the Chinese are
responsible for the Iraq war, since they are loaning the U.S. money.
Tibet has been are part of China for hundreds of years. Here is an
American Government Film from WWII, “why we fight, the battle for China.”
You can watch this on youtube. At around 3:40 of the video it
clearly states Tibet as a part of China.
30. tang | 02.26.09
‘the bronzes would be returned “when China establishes human rights.”’
The return of cultural artifacts should be discussed on its merit. Why should it be linked with some other issue? Please grow up.
And which country in the world is clean on human rights?
31. Paul | 02.26.09
First, I believe those looted treasures should be returned to its orginal owner. I also want to remind those who want to use the selling of the two bronzes to incite hatred to democracy and western culture that the Chinese communists looted and destroyed far more Chinese cultural treasures during Chairmao’s Great Cultural Revolution than all foreign invaders combined.
32. Bob | 02.26.09
I am an American, but I agree we have a shameful past by looting weak nations all over the world. We should return these items to China or Taiwan.
What if we are in Chinese shoe? What if China holds something stolen from us? Will we not feel angry?
33. J | 02.26.09
1. White european settlers have looted the native americans and called the land, the United States. Should all non-Native Americans just jump into the ocean and swim back home?
2. Looting, stealing, taking what is not yours is wrong.
3. No country is perfect. Did the US give Sadaam Hussein and the Taliban AK47s and nerve gas to fight against the Communist Russians in order to fight against Communisim? Did China provide financial aid to North Korea in order to feed its starving people which ironically North Korea’s dicataor used to buy weapons and use for his own personal gain?
4. If the US has nuclear silos why shouldn’t other countries? Does it not produce jobs, weapons, money flowing into the economy, gdp?
34. Michael | 02.26.09
It is ridiculous to suggest that, for the sake of two bronze sculptures, which by the way were not even made by Chinese hands (Italian artisans), they are enough in exchange for China’s sovereignty over Tibet!!!!! Tibet was, is and will always be a part of China, so get use to it. No amount of whinning and crying and protesting will change that. In fact, the more of an issue one makes of it, the more China will tighten its grip on Tibet, which by the way, should be called Xizhang. Perhaps China should do to Xizhang what the US has long done to the native people of America? Who are the French to lecture China?
Given China’s economic strength, especially in the context of the collapsing global economy, Berge, the French and the whole western world are really not in any position to call any shots. But I personally dont understand why the Chinese care so much about these sub-standard bronze pieces. They are certainly not in the same league as the bronze work from the Shang dynasty. If you want to see real bronze masterpieces, go to the Shanghai Art Museum. Now those are REAL masterpieces worth fighting wars over…and China has them.
35. jeff | 02.26.09
So what you trying to prove here. That a bad guy’s stuff is stolen and change hands a few times, it will become legal? A thief’s decendent inherited what his father had stolen, and then sell them, they will become perfectly legal. Come on, think if you car is stolen and then sold and it becomes legal, think two thieves cooperate in doing this!
36. Hao | 02.26.09
I do not think the bronzes below to the current “new china”, it belongs to Qing Dynasty.
They are totally different, and should not be messed together.
What the current “china” has offer to the world? cheap labor, not bronzes.
37. Tony | 02.26.09
I own a Tang Dynasty Vase, which I got from China and had authenticated.
I purchased the vase in Chong quing, China for 100yuen, when checking it in at the airport, the customs officers made me pay each of them 10 yuen (there were 5) to put it on the plane.
I purchased it legally, I carried it out of the country supposedly legally, it is mine,and Iwill never return it to China.
So, how do we know these items were stolen, because China, or Jackie Chsn said so?
This is ridiculous, and Christie’s is right, in auctioning these items, they are the property of a private individual who put them on the auction block.
Aside from that they are over 100 years old, so a statue of limitation should be placed on them. If China wanted them back, then the government, or Jackie Chan, or another private Chinese individual should have bought them from the auction and returned them to China, yet, they didn’t.
Just because Jackie Chan proclaims them a National treasure does not make it so.
If the Egyptian’s claimed the Vatican should return its obeleisk.
Because, suddenly, 1000 years later, Egypt wanted to suddenly claim it was a national treasure for no reason other than to get it back. Many of China’s claims are absolutely ridiculous, and should be confronted, this is a good start.
Thumbs up to Christie’s
38. JD | 02.26.09
It’s very amusing seeing people raise Tibet and whatever things the Chinese has looted over the millenias as justification for not allowing the looted relics be returned. As Jackie Chan said, the artifacts are looted relics, and they remain looted relics regardless if the Chinese conform to your wishes.
39. ThunderCat | 02.26.09
yes, it should be returned to its rightful owner, the Manchurian Royal family. But didn’t the Han loot China from the Manchurians? Wait, the Manchurians looted the land from the Royal family of Ming Dynasty who looted from the Mongolians. The Mongolians of course looted from the Zhao family of the Song… So exactly who “stole” what from “whom”?
40. sarah | 02.26.09
It seems like the West only knows one thing about China: Tibet and human rights, because it gets dragged into every conversation or topic relating to China. If everything the U.S did gets tied to guantanamo bay, Iraq, and stealing land from Native Americans, how will Americans feel? Sure, there are no ‘human rights’ problems in America and Europe, just racism.
And what if the Chinese people demand the return of the cultural relics since they are Chinese zodiac signs that have rich cultural meaning and no political meaning? I thought right activists in the West are strong proponents of human rights in China–that means rights for the Chinese people, correct? Or is it that the West only cares about Tibetans’ rights?
41. Sumait Seniwongse | 02.26.09
It is a pity that the Western world has never come to terms with its shameful and piracy past. Shuffling its feet or passing the buck by blaming China for its current policies at home and internationally will not change the truth by even an iota. Excessive greed and coveting is at the root of all their problems and misery, be it in the past or the present (just look at the chaos of the financial meltdown that they have brought upon themselves and others by packaging financial products such as derivatives and selling them and trading them at manifolds of their actual values). Have they changed and become more civilized since those colonial and looting days? Hardly, they have merely hidden behind modernity and pretended that they are a respectable lot. Just scratch their superficial outlook and you will find that many of them are still pirates through and through!
42. Dave | 02.26.09
One good thing coming out of this is the exposure it has generated. It must be so embarrassing for countries like England and France, bastions of human rights, freedom and everything we hold so dear, to have their dirty linen aired. I guess they are just like the rest, except why the constant grandstanding?
43. 7ohnnyRamone | 02.26.09
Mao Tse Tung once said “Power comes from the end of a gun.”
And so it was when both these statues were taken, by the end of a gun. Same as when the Chinese entered Tibet.
To the victor go the spoils of war. Same as it ever was.
It’s only “fair” when you’re standing on the right side of the gun. As for Jackie Chan, he should stick to slap-stick kung-fu movies. That’s what he’s best at. Leave the politics to others… of course, if he and the Chinese government were THAT concerned about the statues, they were free to participate in the auction. Did they? NOT!
Which just goes to prove it was all about plunder in the first place. They wanted to plunder from the rightful owners, what had been plundered from them. In the end… what’s most important is the decimation and rape of Tibetan culture that has been ongoing for the last 50 years. It’s high time the Chinese got a taste of their own medicine. Long Live The Dalai Lama, Long Live Tibet!!!
44. Chris | 02.26.09
Those people who try to justify possession and sale of looted cultural objects from China have been very creative. There is one report claiming that these objects may have lost before the French and English invaders/robbers went into the palace during the second opium war. This is so ridiculous. How can that type of story explain that all the fountain objects emerged so far all were in the West? Could it be really possible that Chinese, instead of French and English invaders/robbers, took the objects before or after the invaders/robbers laid their dirty hands, and somehow sent them all out to the West? Bringing out Tibet seems to be the only moral high ground those descendants of the invaders/robbers can take and justify their own and their cultural forefathers’ deeds.
If you truly worry about Tibet, why don’t you send all the proceeds to the Tibetan people? You can set up a charity which builds some schools in Tibet, for example.
45. Dave | 02.26.09
Nguyen and Gotham comments are just playing the victim card. We all love to be victims don’t we? But the victim here is China and she was robbed, end of story.
We can have another section for Vietnamese victims and Tibetan victims. But two wrongs don’t make a right.
Stop blaming the victim here and blame the perpetrator!
46. justis | 02.26.09
The Chinese should be grateful for the fact that some artefacts were saved from the barbaric rule of the Han Chinese Communists, who almost entirely destroyed all and sundry of their heritage in an insane orgy of destruction and violent ‘bourgeois purge’, which saw millions slaughtered, and every artefact destroyed by this frenzied mob Han Chinese Communists puppets.
The same barbaric cabal is still in power today and is looting the whole of Tibet of all the natural resources, and disowning the Tibetans of their ancestral lands to hand it over to the Han settlers.
A crime of unimaginable depravity, but Jacky Chan is just concerned with regurgitating inculcated Han Chinese CCP Propaganda, which only serves to whip up a frenzy amongst their constituency the 1.2b Han Chinese, to divert their huge simmering, pent up anger, away from the CCP, and towards anyone else.
But mostly the Tibetans are used as the victims of this malevolent scheme, just as the Jews served as the whipping boys for Hitler in the 30s, so are the Tibetans used as the lightning rod by the CCP to take the anger of the Han Chinese; to save the CCP cadres’ skins from the angry mobs of their oppressed, disenfranchised and aggrieved citizenry.
http://one-just-world.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-real-shangri-la.html
http://one-just-world.blogspot.com/2008/08/will-olympic-spirit-survive.html
47. Chang | 02.26.09
Communism a curse to humanity and now they are talking about being upset about looting… Get a life
49. Jeff | 02.26.09
China has no right to complain about those bronze after they destroyed over 6,000 monasteries in tibet during the oppression let alone looting all their religious artifacts and selling them.
50. Yang | 02.26.09
“They have also displaced Chinese and moved them to Tibet so that they outnumber Tibetans 9:1. This allows them to effectively control a country they have no right to occupy.” Sounds like another country that the west help create and still protecting. Guess who hint GAZA
51. Richie Rich | 02.26.09
The problem with the West’s arguments is that morality is always tied to natioanlaity. That is, whether something is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, depends purely on who does it.
If it was the Chinese or Arabs or black Africans who were openly selling a stolen Mona Lisa picture, then the average person in the West would consider that morally wrong and unacceptable. If it was the other way round, then there is usually nothing moraly wrong and almost always acceptable.
52. LootsInTheEy | 02.27.09
It seems to me that China has abrogated any claim to call upon the international community in any area of cultural sensitivity. Those naming Tibet are right on both points, China’s blatant refusal to recognize the cultural and territorial integrity throws into doubts its right to claim the protections of an international community, and their blatant looting of Tibet makes mock of ludicrous protestations against western powers.
Until China agrees to come into the international community as an open partner rather than a dictatorial monster throwing its economic might around to cover its hypocrisy and dirty (environmentally) dealings, it will have to live with the incredibly minor inconvenience of the rest of us seeing it for what it is and refusing to consider any claims, reasonable or absurd, against an international legal system they neither support no adhere to.
53. Le | 02.27.09
China is the world third largest economy now and its’ billion workers like ants produce cheap products that the west hate and love. The western countries are consuming these Chinese junks faster than they can send them to the trash bin and make the Chinese richer and richer every day. So what the heck if these items were stolen, the Chinese can just buy it back, no worry be happy!
55. horace | 02.27.09
good job, Mr. chen!
no matter what,stolen is stolen,I think we need to return those two bronze rat and rabbit
56. Eddy | 02.27.09
Chris, forgive me but I am Tibetan. Are you suggesting we don’t know what we are? Are you saying my Father, my Grandfather were liars? Do you know that Tibet once conquered the ancient capital of China? Please don’t make statements with no basis in reality. Tibet is not and never has been a part of China. It is held by force, it is an occupied country. Many, many Tibetans have died since the invasion, beating, arbitrary arrests, false imprisonment, all these continue even today. In fact, most of Tibet is on lock down right now. I have friends and family still in Tibet and believe me they would like nothing more than for the Chinese to leave and to take all their brothels, tacky amusement parks, bars, and cheap shops with them.
57. Xinran | 02.27.09
amazing how many generic western names on these comments say ‘tibet has always been a part of china’…In all my time in the West, i never heard anyone but a Chinese say this. Seems to me, some chinese are ashamed to use their real names. If you are Chinese, why be ashamed? why pretend to be a westerner defending China in Tibet?
58. Zyzyx | 02.27.09
Tibet is not a country. It has been a kingdom VERY long time ago and that is long forgotten. Tibet has been part of China since the last 700 years, and during that time, no country ever accepted Tibet as a country, except Nazi-Germany perhaps. Many of the Tibetan Youth see themselves as part of China, rightly so, and all those exiles are like the Cubans in Florida or the Achmed Chalabi’s of Iraq: totally not representative of mainstream opinion in China and operating on the fringe, yet getting disproportional media attention of a biased anti-Chinese Western press.
59. Joe | 02.27.09
It strikes me that these figures are more important for their historic than artistic interest but the looting and destruction of the YuanMing Yuan was a tragic loss for the world, not just the Chinese.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Looting_of_the_Yuan_Ming_Yuan_by_Anglo_French_forces_in_1860.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiyantang
http://www.synotrip.com/beijing/tourist-attractions/yuan-ming-yuan-420.shtml
You can scarcely imagine the beauty and magnificence of the places we burnt. It made one’s heart sore to burn them; in fact, these places were so large, and we were so pressed for time, that we could not plunder them carefully. Quantities of gold ornaments were burnt, considered as brass. It was wretchedly demoralising work for an army.
60. Chris | 02.27.09
I don’t know what French law says. But, under Anglo-American system, the rights to an object and the physical possession of the object are two different things. When an object is robbed, the title to the object has not been legally transferred. Therefore, successive possessors of the same object never get any legal title because the legal title is absent ab initio.
This is especially true in this case. The sellers (the fashion designer and his lover) of this object is said to have exercised the highest level of professionalism in acquiring the objects that were in the auction. Therefore, it is highly doubtful that they didn’t know its provenance and significance. It can be inferred, therefore, that they were not even qualified as good faith purchasers.
For at least these reasons, I do think there is a valid legal claim that can be asserted by China.
If the sellers want to bring up Tibet as an issue, they would first have to prove the legal relevance in the ownership dispute of these objects. They probably would have to answer why the conduct of a war forcing legal import of narcotics into China by two then modern powers is not an relevant issue in the current ownership determination and why such a war is any more justified than the supposed occupation of Tibet by China, which gives “justification” to possession and sale of these objects.
61. Richard C | 03.02.09
Eddy,
Not that Tibet has anything to do with the sale of looted relics, but can you name one government in the world that recognizes Tibet as a country? The ansewr is an obvious no.
OK, you say it’s because China has taken Tibet by force. Then let me ask you another question: From 1913 to 1949, when there was not a single non-Tibetan soldier in Tibet, did any country recognize Tibet as an independent country?
The answer, which may be surprising to you, Eddy, is still no. It’s a historical fact that, even while China was falling apart following the collapse of the last emperial dynasty, the international community thought Tibet was part of China.
In fact, Eddy, can you tell me the last time any country had a diplomatic relationship with Tibet?
I suggest you get the following book
which was written by a Jewish American scholar. I suggest you catch up on Tibetan history, especially on the stuff that you father and grandfather did not tell you.
Richard
62. mhabw@hotmail.com | 03.02.09
For those die-hard anti-China fans just be more patient will ya? China has only had 50 years to practise colonialism and imperialism unlike western countries that have had years to hone their skills and are still screwing up. The Dalai Lama is to be commended for making buddhism mainstream. Just imagine a Mullah from Gaza doing the same for the muslim religion, eh? Then echoes of “Free Palestine” will be chic.
63. Richie Rich | 03.05.09
All world maps from both China and the West going back at least 300 years clearly show Tibet as part of China.
So for those who claim that China invaded Tibet in 1959, would you please explain how a country can invade itself?
Also can anyone find an internationally recognized world map in the last 300 years that shows Tibet as a country?
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
2. Ethics Newsline® » News » Antiques Dealer Allegedly Sabotaged Sale of Looted Chinese Artifacts | 03.02.09
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Dave | 02.26.09
Seems hypocritical of Chan to be upset about looted Chinese bronzes when China has looted the whole country of Tibet. Is Mr. Chan upset about that?