China does not repress religious freedom. What is religion? Religion is a set of beliefs that believes in a superior maker or creator who believes in nonviolence.  The State of China fully supports any religion or organization that abides by nonviolent venues. Nonviolence represents truth and honor and respect and dignity. China’s PR fully supports those good society ideals. But violence broke out in protest in China’s Tibet Lhasa, and when this happens and Monks and Supporters of the violence started to destroy other peoples property and causing life and death situations. Of course China being a State has come to ensure order, to stop the violence. 

Religions that practice violence are subject to exposing themselves as not religions as the Dali Lama has provoked.  This sends a signal to the State of China  that really the Religion in Tibet is a violent religion, and so what has the Dali Lama accomplished? Nothing but mistrust. Tibet is part of China I believe; having traced China history and its roots. In fact people misunderstood why China Troops came to Tibet. It was not because of taking over Tibet. How could they come to take over a region that was already part of China? The real reason they came to Tibet was to assure security of the borders from India- Pakistan, which were still opium producers left over from the British Imperialistic Opium Drug Trade that wrecked havoc on the world. Do you think China wanted more Opium wars, which resulted in their loss of their land and country to Britain namely Hong Kong, to happen in Tibet? Not on your life. Do you think they want to have Opium or drugs smuggled into China from Tibet? No of course not.  Do you think people can understand the truth to these things? Of course not. People break the law and blame someone else.

If China did not come to Tibet and allowed the protests to continue with looting and destruction of property and killing of Chinese people living in Tibet, what would that bring as a result? That Tibet a religion got its Independence by killing innocent people?  The Dali Lama does not practice nonviolence, and has not fully supported those efforts. If he truly is the Dali Lama, he would denounce the violence and work toward efforts to help change governments in the world to end their military apparatus. When there is no enemy what need for an army?  Religions I blame for the creation of the State. Their violence to each other has created the State to impose its rules toward governing society. China has a long history where Religion came to their lands by missionaries, to have them become violent enterprises that have supported drug use and wrong ideals to society. It is why they have a nonreligious attitude toward their statehood. Until religions can prove they are really religious which means they represent nonviolence even at the face of violence, then militaries will always quash the misguided religious rebels.

There are Churches in China, I live here I should know. The idea of religion and practice is two different topics of concern. Religions that seek organization and solicitation seek other things besides being religions. In all objective constructive analysis it is an attempt to overthrow the State. The United States certainly had no qualms in crushing the David Koresh Religion that was a violent sect.  600 monks protesting their lack of religious freedom is pretty much unfounded. What freedoms are they trying to extrude? Is it religion or economic controls? Is it Religion or trying to rule the State. The Chinese government doesn’t just shoot innocent people. Like Tiananmen Square, students became violent, and order needed to be restored. Is there a difference to that in comparison to Kent State University? I think not….except different time, but the issue was still about overthrowing the government. What stuck me with Tiananmen was that Deng Xiao Ping was for Democracy, and students were protesting him! Goes to prove Democracy implodes on itself constantly, while they try to blame other factors and situations. 

Religions in America are hardly free in comparison. They are as hypocritcal as the State. Most religions are made up of members of the State in America, which supports the use of guns and violence if they want.  I don’t know of any religions in the US that are exempt from paying taxes from their labor and work when they have to work in America during a time of War. They are forced to pay to support war even at the behest of their religious beliefs. This is hardly religious freedom in America; and America says they have freedom of religion? They certainly do not.