Tibet: Another Side to the Story

An apparently Asian woman who blogs under the name “FactsandTruth” has put up a mind-blowing website which she claims tells the real story of Tibet. The site is full of photos of the Dalai Lama smiling with famous Nazi leaders, and videos and articles on the history of Tibet that turn the Western perspective upside-down.

Before the Communist revolution, these sources allege, Tibetan power was in the hands of the wealthy ruling class, which consisted of the lamas and the landed aristocracy, while 95 % of the people lived as slaves and serfs. Little boys were conscripted into service as monks when volunteers were in short supply, and slaves were executed by owners who would give their dead bodies to lamas in exchange for the Dalai Lama’s blessing. The monks would allegedly strip these bodies of skin, long bones, liver and heart which they used in their rituals. The website further alleges that the story we’re hearing in the West is propaganda spun by our media in partnership with the CIA agenda which has supported the Dalai Lama all along.

So who is lying, and how do we tell? And why, if Bronte Baxter is so smart, did she make a lot of hoopla about the glorious freedom movement in Tibet when there’s serious reason to suspect it may be snickering behind its hand at us along with our favorite bad guys?

The last question first. Yours truly Bronte Baxter spoke from limited knowledge. I based my opinion on a smattering of experience and didn’t look deeply enough into the story before taking a position. Or rather, more charitably, I took a sincere position which now turns out to probably be wrong. There’s something to be learned here.

There’s always another side to every story, and beneath both sides there is usually a third. No one has a corner on truth. Not you, not I, not even those we most respect and admire. Any of us are, at best, thoughtful people observing what’s around us and calling it as we see it in an effort to live freely and honorably. But how tempting it is to defend our initial positions from the onslaught of incoming evidence! To become attached to looking good or to being certain and right. But if we pick certitude and image over our search for the truth, we fail ourselves in the deepest way possible.

I once heard an incredible man named Robert Morning Sky remark that to have integrity we must be willing “to follow the trail of truth wherever it may lead, at whatever the cost to me or my opinions.” It’s one thing to say, “Oh yes, I live that way,” quite another to do it. But if we don’t do it, if we don’t consider the uncomfortable opinion and question our own assumptions, we are ourselves dogmatists, sitting fat and happy inside our sorry fortresses of self-delusion.

We can’t afford to follow people anymore. Look at where it got us. We have to follow the facts, guided by gut instincts. When a trail turns cold, we have to abandon it, then pick up the scent again as quickly as we can. In doing this, we come to trust each other, fellow explorers finding their way through the woods. If someone climbs a tree today and gets a glimpse of the world from the top of the forest, we cheer him for his report. But tomorrow someone else will be in a different tree shouting down different visions.

No one person should ever become “the leader.” We can’t afford to build new hierarchies. That’s what corrupted this world, with a few elite and powerful exploiting the rest of us. Everyone has the Infinite whispering in their hearts. Let us make that our collective leader.

But back to Tibet. Who’s telling the truth? The Chinese Communists or the American media? The monks I heard speak at the Tibetan performance I wrote about, who may have been misled in their innocence? Maybe the short Tibetan man who used to work in the lunchroom near my office, who passionately spoke of genocide in the country he had to leave. But was he a former serf or aristocracy?

I know a German woman with a Ph.D. whose special research interest is the Third Reich. She told me once about Hitler sending a radio as a gift to the Dalai Lama during the Second World War. A Nazi emissary carried it for days over the snow-covered passes to get it to its Lassa destination. I was chillingly reminded of that when I read Dalai Lama’s alleged Nazi connections on FactandTruth’s website.

Is it really possible that a man and a religion that preach compassion and kindness could be pulling the wool over everybody’s eyes? Before the Communists came to Tibet, did lamas really conscript little boys to be monks, torture prisoners, enforce a feudal system that consigned most of the population to poverty, and use human organs in sacrificial rituals? Is the Dalai Lama really in bed with the CIA and were the Nazis his friends?

If these things are not true, Tibetan Buddhism may be the only religion on earth not in the back pocket of trans-dimensional entities who feed off human suffering and worship. Is it likely that Tibetan Buddhism is the noble exception? More likely that we were taken in again, in our wish to believe in something good. Goodness is out there — we weren’t wrong about that. But there’s reason to question it behind the Dalai Lama’s smile.

Bronte Baxter

The Free Tibet Movement: Evidence of the Freedom-Web and the Smoldering Power of Quiet Discontent

Last week I wrote about the phenomenon I call “the freedom-web,” a conversational matrix that is quietly spun (person to person or through grass-roots tools like the Internet) until it grows to the level of critical mass, where it explodes into public view as protests, civil disobedience and mass outrage. Only then is a freedom movement officially said to be born. In reality, every grass-roots movement lives and grows within the womb of collective opinion long before it bursts upon the world as action.

I cited the black freedom movement in America’s south as an instance of the freedom-web at work. Now, all at once, we have another example in the news: the loud birthing of the Free Tibet movement. Where did all this dissent suddenly come from? It was growing unseen in the mind of mankind for years, as people across the globe slowly became aware of Tibet’s plight. A collective opinion has slowly been taking shape. And when the monks decided to mark the occasion of the genocide anniversary with protests, they triggered answering protests around the world.

This kind of massive dissent, springing up like artesian wells everywhere the Chinese government looks, puts powerful pressure on their policies. The dissent was there all along, invisible. It simply took the anniversary and the Olympic Games coming to China to ignite the fuse on the stick of dynamite.

This wonderful phenomenon of Free Tibet demonstrates the power and importance of talking among ourselves about things we know to be wrong, quietly spreading the word. Tibetan monks have been touring the world for the past few years, offering public performances of their spiritual dance and music. At the end of each show, they quietly tell the audience about Tibet, the country they have lost. The power of these presentations, which I was privileged to view on two occasions, is difficult to describe. By the end of the evening you have a feeling for these monks, their innocence and goodness. When they tell you their country’s story in simple, halting English it goes right to the heart. They ask for your support for their people and your prayers. The audience is so attentive you could hear a pin drop.

The monks make this global journey in order to help free their people. In their humble way, giving cultural gifts in exchange for people’s attention, they quietly transmit their message of Free Tibet. Now their work is paying off.

Imagine if everyone who knows the truth about the global, one-world agenda quietly told just ten open-minded people, sharing substantiating evidence and laying out the facts. Imagine if out of those ten, five took the information seriously and studied up on the subject for themselves, becoming convinced. What if those five told ten more people, of whom five became convinced? How long would it take for the news to spread into every home in the world?

If there were just 3,000 of us, using these ratios, in five years or less a third of the world’s population would be very well-informed about the global conspiracy. A third of the population can trigger critical mass: that’s how many colonists were in favor of breaking with England, and that’s the minority fraction it took to win the American Revolution. Social and political change begin in the human mind, with the collective spinning of a freedom-web.

Two years ago, I launched my own personal Tell-Ten Campaign. It went so well I decided to tell more than ten. I brought up the subject with people I hardly knew, like the produce man at the local supermarket. I inched into the subject, testing people’s level of openness before I sprung the full story, but to my surprise I rarely met resistance. It was amazing to find how many people were already thinking along these lines themselves. They seemed grateful to have someone bring the subject up and talk with them openly about their observations and concerns. When people expressed sincere interest, I referred them to the David Icke books and website for a crash course on Big Brother.

Although I started talking two years ago, I knew about the conspiracy a long time before that. I kept silent because I was afraid of getting tagged a dissenter and winding up dead or in a detention camp one day. I was perhaps even more afraid of being viewed as a weirdo by the people who knew me. Now I regret taking so long to do something. Over time I’ve come to the point where hiding what I know is not an option anymore. We must all reach that point soon if we are to defeat the global agenda.

Winston Churchill had this to say about speaking up:

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

I don’t intend to die as a victim to power-hungry global fascists. I fully intend to succeed with my freedom-loving brothers and sisters in defeating the one-world government before it arrives and then to live in a society that surpasses the best we’ve ever known on Earth. A society of true freedom, perhaps for the first time in human history. But to find the courage to speak about this subject, I had to decide whether it’s worth dying for if it came to that, and if it’s worth being laughed at over. If the global fascist state is a snare that could at any moment be tightened around us, should we really care who laughs at us for alerting people? And isn’t dying a better option than bending our heads and getting shot with a microchip?

Bronte Baxter