Posted: March 27th, 2009 | By Ray Hartley | Posted in General

This is what Trevor Manuel had to say about the Dalai Lama:
“To say anything against the Dalai Lama is, in some quarters,
equivalent to trying to shoot Bambi.”
“Let’s put our cards on the table. Who is the Dalai Lama? I’ve heard
him described as a god. I’ve heard him described as Buddha.”
“Is he just the spiritual leader of the Buddhists in Tibet, or is he
the one who on March 28 1969 established a government-in-exile in the
same way as Taiwan was established to counter the reality of a single
China?”
“The reason why the Dalai Lama wants to be here… is to make a big
global political statement about the secession of Tibet from China and
he wants to make it on the free soil of South Africa.
“I’m sure he’s welcome to come at any other time, but we shouldn’t
allow him to raise global issues that will impact on the standing of
South Africa.”

Now, what would the Dalai Lama say about Trevor Manuel? Here’s my version:
“To say anything against the hyper-sensitive Trevor Manuel is, in some quarters,
equivalent to trying to shoot Bambi.”
“Let’s put our cards on the table. Who is Trevor Manuel? I’ve heard
him described as a god. I’ve heard him described as financial wizard.”
“Is he just the finance minister of the South African government, or is he
the political careerist who in the early 1990s went on a quick fix finance course?”
“The reason why Trevor Manuel wants to comment on this… is to make a big
global political statement about his allegiance to the ANC’s new elite now that
Davos is out of fashion.”
“I’m sure he’s welcome to comment on anything at any time, but we shouldn’t
allow him to raise global issues that will impact on the standing of
South Africa.”

Related posts:

  1. Zuma on the Dalai Lama: It’s the month, not the man
  2. Barbara Hogan shows human rights mettle on Dalai Lama
  3. Dalai Lama not allowed visa because of … 2010??
  4. Statement by South African friends of Tibet on Dalai Lama – full text
  5. The Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela back in the summer of ’96

 


Comments

 

G. Annandale

March 27, 2009 at 10:10 am

Trevor, he who now that the chips are down, cannot recognise a recession when it jumps up and bites him on the backside is now a clairvoyant. So ANC are blessed. They have Jesus Zuma, Tokyo the Witchdoctor and now Trevor the Clairvoyant.

He can unequivoically accuse the Dalai Lama of planning to subvert the Chinese Government from SA soil. The little Tibetan is as devious as Tutu, Tambo and others who subverted the SA government from foreign soil.

 

Steve

March 27, 2009 at 12:00 pm

SA President apologizes for shoddy quality of Dalai Lama lies

 

Dave

March 27, 2009 at 3:07 pm

That’s pretty funny – all the better were Trevor to actually read it!
Cheers

 

Eli Jikelele

March 27, 2009 at 4:13 pm

Trevor was an important member of the struggle in the Western Cape but, alas, he has become just another piglet at the ANC trough trying to impress the big fat pigs!

 

Skodide Goodfella

March 27, 2009 at 7:45 pm

Well said Eli.
I would though really like to know who put TM up to spitting out nonsense like that.
On the other hand, there may generally speaking even be a little truth in what is said,BUT did ANC not use countless other pulpits in order to doom this country to the fate which we all have inherited???

 

Eli Jikelele

March 28, 2009 at 12:43 pm

He was getting all riled up in a public debate in Cape Town with Ryan Coetzee of the DA, I think!

 

Larry Goodfella

March 28, 2009 at 9:51 pm

Clever Trevor is not so clever faced up with a DA opponent.

 

Delia Riordan

March 29, 2009 at 2:10 pm

Well done, Ray!

I am shocked at the statement from Trevor Manuel. Tibet was not a ‘part of China’ in 1948 when the Chinese began to infiltrate Tibet. Tibet was not ‘a part of China’ in 1950 when China’s full-scale military invasion took place. To compare Tibet and Taiwan is disingenuous at best. The Taiwanese have had US political and military protection (and billions in trade!) since the end of WW2. Tibet never enjoyed such status.

Let’s get some perspective on feudalism’ whilst we are at it. Tibet was the most remote and isolated nation in the world until the last 50 years. Before the advent of Buddhism, Tibet had a brutal, primitive, warrior culture. But under the influence of Buddhism and the scholarly lamaism that grew out of it, Tibetans transformed their violent society into one of the most peaceful and philosophically sophisticated cultures the world has ever seen! To ridicule or minimise that achievement by reducing Tibet to a footnote in the history of China is despicable!

Yes, Tibet had a feudal structure–during the exactly the same period that Europe had a feudal structure and during the same period that China was in thrall to a succession of ‘MMORTAL’ EMPERORS WHO ACUALLY WERE WORSHIPPED AS GODS! THE DALAI LAMA HAS NEVER CLAIMED TO BE A GOD–NO MATTER WHO WANTS TO CALL HIM THAT. There is a good reason for this: BUDDHISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN ‘GOD’.

LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: BUDDHISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD. BUDDHISM IS A PHILOSOPHY. In an effort to build understanding with other cultures, the current Dalai Lama describes Buddhism as a ‘religion’ but it is a religion without a ‘God’.

Tibetan Buddhism overcame the shamanic religion that preceded it and–AS CATHOLICISM DID–incorporated elements of the old rituals into its public character. In a largely illiterate culture, the highly abstract concepts of Buddhism were beyond the understanding of the majority of Tibetans during the early feudal period.

However, those aspects of native shamanism that were NOT at odds with the primary tenets of Buddhism survived. The costumes, masks, dancing, music, and folk tales adapted themselves to the structure of Buddhism to produce a unique culture: spiritual but not religious and less ‘martial’ than its nearest cousin, Taoism.

Tibet evolved into the most civilised society (along with pre-European Bali) that the world has ever seen. A society which views what we call ‘evil’ as ‘ignorance’. If people realised that every action has
consequences beyond the immediately observable, they would not commit evil acts. Name any other society based on the universal principle of refraining from inflicting harm on any living thing. There isn’t any other. Tibet WAS IT–until the Chinese invaded.

And talk about feudal societies! They don’t come any more FEUDAL THAN CHINA, Trevor. Feudalism survived longer there than anywhere else in the world! Mao was indistinguishable from the Emperors in every respect except sartorial! Mao was a

 

Temujin

September 27, 2009 at 8:09 pm

I love the ignorance here. Tibet WAS a part of China since the Qing Dynasty. It was and has been a part of China longer than the United States has existed, so please don’t make uneducated comments. Just because it maintained independence within half a century during the time China was pillaged by various foreign powers does not make it entirely independent itself.

And honestly, Tibetans were little more than serfs for the Dalai Lama, so how is that any better than being under communist rule which – aside from alleged suppression which is vastly exaggerated by western media.

Not to mention in the end, you just proved Manuel’s point. “To say anything against the Dalai Lama is, in some quarters, equivalent to trying to shoot Bambi.”



Leave a Comment