Dalai Lama visits Israel

by **Gouda** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:04 am

"Dalai Lama visits Israel, asks Hamas to renounce violence" By Haaretz Service and The Associated Press The Dalai Lama on Wednesday urged Hamas to renounce violence, but refused to take sides in the increasingly bloody dispute over cartoons of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed. At the start of a five-day visit to Israel, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader also said he is optimistic about talks between his envoys and Chinese government officials. An emissary of the Dalai Lama arrived in China on Wednesday for the fifth round of meetings since 2002, and the Dalai Lama said the atmosphere has been improving. more here: <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=683250&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1">www.haaretz.com/hasen/pag...ntrassID=1</a>

by **antiaristo** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:07 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>3.30pm 'Dissident prince sought to influence opinion' Chris Tryhorn Tuesday February 21, 2006 The Prince of Wales saw himself as a "dissident" trying to influence opinion by writing letters to politicians and he used the media to disseminate his views, according to former aide Mark Bolland. On one occasion, the prince placed a story in the Daily Telegraph revealing that he deliberately snubbed a banquet at the Chinese embassy, Mr Bolland, Prince Charles's former deputy private secretary, claimed in a statement submitted to the high court. Mr Bolland's statement - which the prince's legal team attempted to keep out of open court - is part of evidence that will be presented in a privacy claim brought by the prince against the Mail on Sunday, which is being heard today by Mr Justice Blackburne. In the statement, Mr Bolland, who worked for the prince between 1996 and 2002, said his employer would write to MPs and other prominent public figures to make his views known. "The prince's very definite aim in all this activity, as he explained to me, was to influence opinion," Mr Bolland said in the statement. "He saw that as part of the job of the heir apparent. He carried it out in a very considered, thoughtful and researched way. He often referred to himself as a 'dissident' working against the prevailing political consensus." Mr Bolland said he regarded the prince's letters as "constitutionally controversial" and that they had concerned some politicians and senior civil servants. As for the media, Mr Bolland said the prince would sometimes authorise friends or employees to "brief" on his behalf. He pointed to an incident in October 1999, when the prince did not attend a banquet at the Chinese embassy held to mark a state visit by the then Chinese president, Jiang Zemin. "He did this as a deliberate snub to the Chinese because he did not approve of the Chinese regime and is a great supporter of the Dalai Lama, whom he views as being oppressed by the Chinese," Mr Bolland said. He said he was given "a direct and personal instruction" to draw the media's attention to the prince's "boycott". He said he had briefed the Telegraph to run a story "as the prince wanted" and added that Charles was "delighted" by media coverage of the incident. However, Mr Bolland's account was contradicted by the witness statement of the prince's private secretary, Sir Michael Peat. Sir Michael said the prince had told him<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/mad.gif ALT=">:"> "He gave no instruction to draw the media's attention to his failure to attend the banquet, or to publish any material critical of the Chinese government." As for the prince's alleged lobbying of politicians, Sir Michael said: "He does not campaign on contentious issues but occasionally raises questions about matters he regards as being of public concern." He added that the prince wrote to ministers "from time to time on issues he believes are important". Other details of Mr Bolland's witness statement are being challenged by the prince's legal team. The case continues.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1714742,00.html">media.guardian.co.uk/site...42,00.html</a> Since when is hearsay evidence allowed in court? The last time a member of the British royal family appeared in court was the Prince of Wales (later Edward VII) who was cited in a divorce case in the 1870's. But of course that was about ten years before they began to use the Treason Felony Act as a pre-emptive tool to control the bureaucracy.

by **antiaristo** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:15 pm

I'm waiting for a reply from all you deniers out there. Those of you that find it easier to believe in the supernatural than the Treason Felony Act. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>However, Mr Bolland's account was contradicted by the witness statement of the prince's private secretary, Sir Michael Peat. Sir Michael said the prince had told him "He gave no instruction to draw the media's attention to his failure to attend the banquet, or to publish any material critical of the Chinese government."<hr></blockquote> Since when is hearsay evidence allowed in court?

by **Floyd Smoots** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:59 pm

John, my unknown friend "across the pond", relax. I know it's hard to do so when you see the "Vogon Bulldozer" aimed straight at your "Homeworld". The dalliance llama-fukker is nothing but another Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, Benny Hinn, Billy-goat Graham want-to-be. He's NOTHING MORE than a "wolf in sheep's clothing". You probably can sense that I'm not a NAZI, nor do I feel ANY kinship with Nazism, BUT, for some (possibly?) genetic reason, I feel drawn to the Germanic peoples. It's probably genetic, but I find their native tongue, Deutsch, to be "most interesting", i.e., the way that new words (and even old ones) in that language, are compound phrases. That bloviation aside, I offer you the following phrase, concerning many psyop operations, which attempt to claim our attention, while mis-directing it from more important matters: Machs Nichts!!! Literally, Makes Nothing, figuratively and colloquilly, Means Nothing. Your TFA seems to me, over here, to be just a precursor/contemporary(?) of our Patriot Acts I & II, which our congress has just handed to "Monkey Boy & Big Dick-Cain't-Shoot-Straight" on a PLATINUM PLATTER. I mean, we Untied brothers of the USuk, can violate these acts, which are so secretly-important in the War on Terra, that they can't even be PUBLISHED!!! They're "classified", don't you know. You'll only know if you accidently "violated the virginity" of one of these acts when the "Men In Black" come to get you and haul you away in one of their lovely large black SUV's, never to be seen or heard from again. Brother John, I truly feel your pain. Don't ignore the probability, that it's USuk now, but Spain is in the target sights all too soon!!! Dangit, John-bo, I said NAZI in this post. Crap!!! Now, the cut-and-posters (sic), will use my own words against me in future posts to "PROVE": "We ALWAYS KNEW thet thar dam'd ol' Floyd wuz uh fraggin' NAZI, 'n' now we kno' it!!! Heh-Heh, we's gonna git his redneck ass raht naow!! Le's lynch him, yeah, that's tha' ticket!!!! Courage, brother John, keep the faith!!! Brother-In-Arms, Alexander Franklin Mutter, B.A., D.S.,b. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)">

by **antiaristo** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:32 pm

Thank you, Floyd. Gouda, I apologise. The connection with the Dalai Lama is that he is NOT neutral. But I hijacked your thread on this tenuous basis. I've started a new one instead.

by **Gouda** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:15 pm

He is certainly not a neutral bloke. Threads for all!

Dalai Lama visits Israel

Dalai Lama visits Israel

Wheels within wheels

Time To Put Up

Unlax, Doc........"Buggs Bunny"

Re: Dalai Lama visits Israel

Re: Dalai Lama visits Israel

Who is online