This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that this page may be found highly contriversal (especially by anyone sideing with the Chinese), and should be watched closely for vandalism. Politicalnerd08 ( talk) 22:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if someone could complete the timeline and add an image. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nangpa la ( talk • contribs) 12:24, 21 October 2006.
I too would be grateful if someone could somehow post another relevant photo or two, visible on the page; the whole operation with adding photos being too complicated for a non-experienced Wiki user. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by YakWrit ( talk • contribs) 22:21, 29 October 2006.
Any photos added need to have the relevant permission from the copyright holder(s). See Wikipedia image use policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AImage_use_policy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.249.48.109 ( talk • contribs) 10:01, 11 November 2006.
Comment posted by YakWrit 14:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC) , in view of the Nov. 26 "Controversy"-addition to the article. QUOTE Controversy There are some question, which according to experts, are not easily answered for the video.
Cho Oyu pass is a common escape route for fleeing Tibetans, and thus the probablity of a Chinese guard seeing fleeing Tibetans is very high. Therefore, if this incident is real, why has a similar incident not been reported by Tibetans in the past?
The Type 81 Assault Rifle rifles which are utilized by the PAP are automatic weapons with a maximum effective range of 500 metres and with only a moderate accuracy. Based on this, the accuracy at such a long range is unlikely. Why is there one clean shot, followed immediately by a Tibetan falling, then another clean shot, then another Tibetan falling, so on?
If the PAP was at a closer range to the Tibetans, then why did more than half of the refugees manage to survive there survivors? An automatic rifle would be very effective in killing or injuring anyone within the effective firing range.
Even a long-range weapon such as a Dragunov sniper-rifle or a copy thereof does not have such a long range. So, why is the gunshot and the fall at the same time? The Dragunov bullet travels at 830 m/s, while sound travels at 340 m/s (but would have been slightly slower in the cold temperature). The climbers said that they were one kilometer away, which means that there was approximately a three-second delay before they heard the actual gunshot. This would mean that in order for the Tibetans to have been seen falling at the same time as the gunshot, the PAP was 2.49 kilometers away from the Europeans in any direction, which also means that the nearest the PAP could have been was 1.49 kilometers, and this is assuming that the PAP could shoot through the mountain. Such a range is well outside the range of either the Type 81 or the Dragunov.
Lastly, why did the refugees continue at the same pace after the first 'victim' fell? It seems rather improbable that they would not run away from the gunfire. UNQUOTE
Questions/Comments for "BogdanM02"
1. What experts are you referring to? Have these experts (all) gotten in touch with the ICT, HRW, AI and possible other organizations officially investigating these killings? How and where did you learn of such "expert questions" in relation to the video footage?
2. Cho Oyu is not the pass. The pass is Nangpa La.
3. As to probability of seeing refugees: contrary to other groups of Tibetans escaping Tibet, this group trekked in daylight. Reason given for that decision was a.o. the large number of children that belonged to the group of refugees.
4. As to reportings in the past: there are "tons" of such reportings. What's new and what made this incident get media-coverage worldwide, is the fact that this time (western) mountaineers A] spoke out ; B] were able to provide photographs in line with eye-witness statements ; C] were able to provide video footage, again: in line with eye-witness statements.
5. Just exactly where, how, when and why did you learn about the weaponry used by the PAP?
6. As for your other questions under bullet # 2: was this the first time ever in your life, that you saw a video (or film) of a shooting incident filmed by only one cameraman and with only one camera?
7. Re. bullet # 3: please clarify first sentence. Re. 2nd sentence: on the ICT (Save Tibet) website under News, you'll find the page with the many additional photos, including the statement that the weapons fired single shots, not automatic salvos, at the time of the incident.
8. Re. bullet # 4: First part of the paragraph: please see my remarks about the one camera and the one cameraman. Are you familiar with the meaning of the notion "editing" where it comes down to films and videomaterial? Did you ask these questions to the ProTV.ro mediacompany in Romania? Because that's where they'll know who did the editing of the raw material. Re. 2nd part under bullet # 4: there is no such thing ever reported as "The climbers said that they". There are differences among the several eye-witness statements. First and foremost due to the (large) differences in their exact geographical position on Cho Oyu (either in basecamp, in ABC, or even higher up on the slopes of the mountain). Also, they did not all report on the exact same few minutes. Some reported about events later into the incident. And others even managed to confirm that on Sunday October 1, again Tibetan refugees were shot at by the PAP but this time not injuring (or killing) anybody.
9. Re. bullet # 5: A] Tibetan refugees know that if they stop running away, chances are they'll be caught (by the Chinese), imprisoned for many years, and while imprisoned: TORTURED. Possibly the children of this group have been less aware in particular of the TORTURE PRACTISES IN JAIL. That plus their age (less prepared for and decided on an escape-strategy) and smaller legs, may well be responsible for the fact many of the children fell into the hands of the PAP borderpatrol that day (i.e.: were unable to escape). B] Clearly you have very poorly researched the subject before submitting your questions, or you would have been aware of several personal statements by members of this group of refugees of how they were forced to leave the dead bodies behind. I recommend you check the "External Links"-section of the article. And your imo poor research makes your comments about so-called experts who question the video footage even more interesting. What did your "experts" ever truly study about the incident? Only the Chinese claim about self-defence? Please clarify. C] As to "continuing at the same pace": please find yourself a glaciated pass at approx. 19.000 ft altitude and where the snow is chest-high for yaks. And then start running, and report back here how you managed.
Over to you, BogdanM02.
. Posted by YakWrit 20:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC) - Communications with the ICT (Intl. Campaign for Tibet) meanwhile make clear that there is a considerable number of inaccuracies in the information supplied in this Wikipedia-article. The ICT is investigating the Nangpa La shootings of Sept. 30 ever since that news broke. So a number of corrections is expected to follow here soon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images YakWrit 01:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC) ctd. Dec. 14 - Back to the "disputed" image in the Nangpa La Killings-Wikipage: also I MUST say (checked some files meanwhile) that ever since that page was started (I know extremely well who started it, and when) there has ALWAYS been a clear reference beneath that photo of the soldiers and the Tibetan children in Cho Oyu basecamp about WHO SUPPLIED THE PHOTO: Pavle Kozjek, a mountaineer present in Cho Oyu BC. It was there all the time, that information. So who changed it into A THREAT to delete the image due to an "uncertain copyright status", as the page said untill I edited it? Some Chinese intelligence agent? Some Chinese national who doesn't believe in the plight of the Tibetan people and how they're more than on Sept. 30 only being MASSACRED if they try to flee their country over the Himalayas? Whó is responsible for deceiving Wikipedia-users? Who is trying to play down the Nangpa La massacre? What tools does Wikipedia.org have to determine the political agenda of those who edit and influence articles around here? How can readers as well as contributors AVOID to become the victim of foul play here? Because, as said, copyright-information as to the origin of that particular photo HAS NEVER FAILED HERE, untill someone must have deleted it!
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images"
why is the chinese border guard wearing tennis shoes in a snowy mountainous terrain?
Posted by User:jimknock 05:00, 03 May 2008 (UTC)
In the form I found it, this article was heavily slanted to portray the incident from a Chinese POV. The most egregious statement gave a list of people who were simply "missing". There was no mention of the obvious fact that there have been numerous inquiries about each of them and the Chinese have obviously refused to provide any information about the people they rounded up and led away. It is not confusing that since the snow was chest high people were not able to move more quickly when the Chinese opened fire. The children presented the smallest targets and were undoubtedly moving through snow that was over their heads.
The article said that the people were "illegally crossing" or some such nonsense. They were, in fact, leaving China and were fired upon by Chinese guards. This is a boarder crossing that is often used for trade. Usually groups of this kind cross in the dead of winter or at night in order to avoid the guards. This is really China's Berlin Wall.
The article failed to mention that the people were pilgrems going to Darmsala to see the Dalai Lama. The issue of religious freedom or a pilgrimage was not mentioned.
The article said that only one person was killed, another was wounded in the leg and one died in the hospital from a "lack of oxygen". Some observers said they saw seven dead. In fact, many are missing. I think it is reasonable to assume that they were shot at the time, or executed later. The youngest was seven.
I searched for other articles with the keywords of "China" and "Tibet". I found that others had been similarly written or revised to slant everything from the Chinese point of view. So, since I am not an informed student of Tibetan or Chinese history, I wrote to several Tibetan interest groups asking them to review Wikipedia articles and to try to correct the BS found here.
Today I checked an article regarding a different international dispute between Korea and Japan regarding Dukdo island. I found it was politically very nutral and was under some kind of special watch by Wikipedia editors to try to insure political neutrality. It would be nice if similar actions could be taken regarding this and other issues concerning the "face" of China. There is ample evidence that the Chinese government launches campaigns to scrub the web of negative information wherever possible. Unfortunately Wikipedia is uniquely vulnerable to this kind of ruthless misinformation.
Jim
I see Tibetan zealots have taken over this page. We can definitely say 2 people were killed and the rest either arrested or later released (in fact, I definitely recall reading one article about a boy who was beaten on the legs and later released, according to his own testimony). By writing the ludicrous garbage about the "missing, presumed dead," it just shows that people who feel they have a just cause feel they should lie and twist the truth to their own end. Dishonesty is never acceptable. The ends do not justify the means. In fact, what's implied here is a little racist and hateful. Isn't the Tibetan side supposed to be about embracing your fellow humans? Honestly, do you believe that these chinese border guards (or the authorities who took them into custody) killed these 7-14 year old kids? Really? If you do, then you display a level of hatred for them that denies them any humanity.
The Crossing is illegal. BBC "Each year an estimated 2,500 Tibetans make the dangerous and illegal crossing through the Himalayas into India." 199.246.40.54 ( talk) 13:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
this article is biased towards the tibetan side, wikipedia is neutral. but the article was clearly written by a pro-tibet side person Btzkillerv ( talk) 10:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
See this video clip and decide for yourself what actually happened: < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv-FOHeoHXM&feature=channel_page > —Preceding unsigned comment added by OptionM45 ( talk • contribs) 07:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
The Nangpa La shootings or Nangpa La massacre was a fictional incident created from a fake China-bashing video widely distributed on the internet sites such as Youtube. It is proven to be a lie after careful examination. This video showed two instances of "dead man" walking in the course of this footage. It was actually the "prostrating pilgrimage" taking place. Both were errors by the editor attempting making a China-bashing video. In the original video, one can clearly see the so called pilgrims who were "shot dead" rose again and walked away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OptionM45 ( talk • contribs) 07:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
what i'm saying is that it is biased towards the tibetan side, we should make it neutral, stop going off topic. Btzkillerv ( talk) 10:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I just finished reading Murder in the High Himalaya (2010) by Jonathan Green (journalist) published by PublicAffairs. It is the most complete and reliable account of the incident. Green has spent the past 4 years investigating, interviewing 100s of people and traveling to the locations involved. No one knows more about it than Green. In the book, Green shows only one person was killed, seventeen year old Kelsang Namtso. A few other people were injured, none seriously. Rumors of other people being killed proved false. Obviously the Chinese were trying to kill them all, given how many rounds were fired, and would probably have, except for the distance and poor weapons for sharpshooting. In any event, only one person was killed. Does this merit an article title of "shootings" or "massacre"? These are highly charged and POV given only 1 person died and a few minor injuries. I suggest we rename the article. One suggestion is the Nangpa La shooting incident or even just the Nangpa La incident. Another idea is to focus on Kelsang Namtso, since it really is all about her death. Call it Killing of Kelsang Namtso or Death of Kelsang Namtso or Kelsang Namtso shooting. Other suggestions and thoughts welcome, thanks. Green Cardamom ( talk) 06:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
(ps. in case anyone notices the connection between Jonathan Green/Green Cardamom - purely coincidental, no relation. I'm also of Caucasian descent, a native of USA, and never traveled east of Europe - I like rice pudding, and have no personal connection to the incident, in case these things matter to anyone.) -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 06:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- When Chinese border guards shot and killed a nun on her way to the land of Dalai Lama, Geir Lysfjord, aged 59, saw the whole incident from nearby. Together with the mountaineer Jan Arve Andresen, the Norwegian was a witness to the bloody drama that unfolded on 30 September this year [2006].
- A few hours after the shooting that left dead bodies on the glacier, 25 Chinese soldiers entered the base camp armed with automatic weapons, says Lysfjord.
- The following day they returned, this time with ten Chinese police officers.
- They went out to the dead bodies on the glacier. As far as I could see they tried to bury the bodies, but they failed, says Lysfjord to TV 2 News.
- The next day the bodies were removed. At the same time the base camp was searched in pursuit of more refugees.
Green Cardamom, at "allwords.com" the definition of "popular culture" is given as "the prevailing vernacular culture in any given society, including art, cooking, clothing, entertainment, mass media, music and style." These two items that you included in that section don't really fit that definition, since I do not think that either of these accounts of the Nangpa-La incident are currently "popular." They might be in the future, depending on how much exposure they get, and how many people care to view/read them. Merely belonging to a category of art, mass media, book publishing, etc., does not make something popular. This topic of the potential abuse of human rights in Tibet may get the attention of the masses only when it makes prime-time news.
I don't think that the majority of people make a conscious effort to educate themselves about specific issues through reading books or going to local film screenings for limited-release documentaries. Notice that the documentary was made by a partnership between the BBC (limited to Great Britain viewers for television) and an Australian company. This does not mean that mainstream America is viewing it. In this regard, another definition of "popular culture" is "frequently encountered or widely accepted; commonly liked or approved."
I would rather see these two items listed under "Further reading and viewing," as you already created a section for "Further Reading," which has now become partly redundant. Let's not prejudge whether these items are popular, because they may well not be! Skol fir ( talk) 23:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I just got a simple question on whole report of BBC . I saw it, and i recognized that the shot in the report appears the same moment,when the tibetan falls down. I really don/t know from which distance the cameraman is filming, but i think it must be about 2000 metres, and as much as i know, the sound needs 6 seconds on that distance to appear. So how can the sound of the shot be heard same moment ,when the shot tibetan falls down. Must there not been a time difference of 6 seconds, and why is there no 6 seconds in original video? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.119.32.77 ( talk) 19:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
In 2008 I watched a movie, I think it was "The Cup". An episode in the movie involved religious people being smuggled from Tibet to refuge in India. Using Google maps, I tried to find how and where they had crossed the Himalayas. In my search I stumbled into this article.
The article had obviously been propagandized by Chinese agents. Every aspect of the outrageous incident had been reduced to drivel. I essentially rewrote it. Some people jumped on me, but most of the changes stood the test of time and critical Wikipedia review. It was very gratifying.
In the last few days I noticed things about Chinese hacking of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. I remembered the changes I had made, and the fact that around the time I made the Wikipedia changes, my desktop had been infected by an unknown virus. At the time, I saw no connection. I used every virus removal tool I could find to get rid of the virus. Nothing worked. Eventually I dug into the details of how the virus worked and removed it myself. It was very educational.
Today I saw the connection and decided to see how this article had transformed over the years. I had an idea that if the article was offensive to Chinese "internet sanitizers", they would have persisted in trying to modify the article to cover the "face" of China. I was right. There were essentially two contributors who worked energetically to change the article to be less critical of China. They were successful.
I have revised details to make them somewhat more neutral. I could not resist the temptation to make some of the changes provoking.
I love China. But much more than that, I love transparency and honesty. If they want to hack my system again, let them try. Jimknock ( talk) 01:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)jimknock
This article needs copy-editing. The grammar and wording are awkward. I tried to do a bit, but it is not my forte. -- Voidvector ( talk) 18:01, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I came here to do some copy-editing and removed the copy edit tag from the article. However, there are a number of facts in the article that are not properly referenced. During my copyediting, I preserved the information that was in the article. But I lack expertise on what actually occurred. Adding more citations would increase clarity here. Magic1million ( talk) 07:37, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that this page may be found highly contriversal (especially by anyone sideing with the Chinese), and should be watched closely for vandalism. Politicalnerd08 ( talk) 22:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if someone could complete the timeline and add an image. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nangpa la ( talk • contribs) 12:24, 21 October 2006.
I too would be grateful if someone could somehow post another relevant photo or two, visible on the page; the whole operation with adding photos being too complicated for a non-experienced Wiki user. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by YakWrit ( talk • contribs) 22:21, 29 October 2006.
Any photos added need to have the relevant permission from the copyright holder(s). See Wikipedia image use policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AImage_use_policy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.249.48.109 ( talk • contribs) 10:01, 11 November 2006.
Comment posted by YakWrit 14:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC) , in view of the Nov. 26 "Controversy"-addition to the article. QUOTE Controversy There are some question, which according to experts, are not easily answered for the video.
Cho Oyu pass is a common escape route for fleeing Tibetans, and thus the probablity of a Chinese guard seeing fleeing Tibetans is very high. Therefore, if this incident is real, why has a similar incident not been reported by Tibetans in the past?
The Type 81 Assault Rifle rifles which are utilized by the PAP are automatic weapons with a maximum effective range of 500 metres and with only a moderate accuracy. Based on this, the accuracy at such a long range is unlikely. Why is there one clean shot, followed immediately by a Tibetan falling, then another clean shot, then another Tibetan falling, so on?
If the PAP was at a closer range to the Tibetans, then why did more than half of the refugees manage to survive there survivors? An automatic rifle would be very effective in killing or injuring anyone within the effective firing range.
Even a long-range weapon such as a Dragunov sniper-rifle or a copy thereof does not have such a long range. So, why is the gunshot and the fall at the same time? The Dragunov bullet travels at 830 m/s, while sound travels at 340 m/s (but would have been slightly slower in the cold temperature). The climbers said that they were one kilometer away, which means that there was approximately a three-second delay before they heard the actual gunshot. This would mean that in order for the Tibetans to have been seen falling at the same time as the gunshot, the PAP was 2.49 kilometers away from the Europeans in any direction, which also means that the nearest the PAP could have been was 1.49 kilometers, and this is assuming that the PAP could shoot through the mountain. Such a range is well outside the range of either the Type 81 or the Dragunov.
Lastly, why did the refugees continue at the same pace after the first 'victim' fell? It seems rather improbable that they would not run away from the gunfire. UNQUOTE
Questions/Comments for "BogdanM02"
1. What experts are you referring to? Have these experts (all) gotten in touch with the ICT, HRW, AI and possible other organizations officially investigating these killings? How and where did you learn of such "expert questions" in relation to the video footage?
2. Cho Oyu is not the pass. The pass is Nangpa La.
3. As to probability of seeing refugees: contrary to other groups of Tibetans escaping Tibet, this group trekked in daylight. Reason given for that decision was a.o. the large number of children that belonged to the group of refugees.
4. As to reportings in the past: there are "tons" of such reportings. What's new and what made this incident get media-coverage worldwide, is the fact that this time (western) mountaineers A] spoke out ; B] were able to provide photographs in line with eye-witness statements ; C] were able to provide video footage, again: in line with eye-witness statements.
5. Just exactly where, how, when and why did you learn about the weaponry used by the PAP?
6. As for your other questions under bullet # 2: was this the first time ever in your life, that you saw a video (or film) of a shooting incident filmed by only one cameraman and with only one camera?
7. Re. bullet # 3: please clarify first sentence. Re. 2nd sentence: on the ICT (Save Tibet) website under News, you'll find the page with the many additional photos, including the statement that the weapons fired single shots, not automatic salvos, at the time of the incident.
8. Re. bullet # 4: First part of the paragraph: please see my remarks about the one camera and the one cameraman. Are you familiar with the meaning of the notion "editing" where it comes down to films and videomaterial? Did you ask these questions to the ProTV.ro mediacompany in Romania? Because that's where they'll know who did the editing of the raw material. Re. 2nd part under bullet # 4: there is no such thing ever reported as "The climbers said that they". There are differences among the several eye-witness statements. First and foremost due to the (large) differences in their exact geographical position on Cho Oyu (either in basecamp, in ABC, or even higher up on the slopes of the mountain). Also, they did not all report on the exact same few minutes. Some reported about events later into the incident. And others even managed to confirm that on Sunday October 1, again Tibetan refugees were shot at by the PAP but this time not injuring (or killing) anybody.
9. Re. bullet # 5: A] Tibetan refugees know that if they stop running away, chances are they'll be caught (by the Chinese), imprisoned for many years, and while imprisoned: TORTURED. Possibly the children of this group have been less aware in particular of the TORTURE PRACTISES IN JAIL. That plus their age (less prepared for and decided on an escape-strategy) and smaller legs, may well be responsible for the fact many of the children fell into the hands of the PAP borderpatrol that day (i.e.: were unable to escape). B] Clearly you have very poorly researched the subject before submitting your questions, or you would have been aware of several personal statements by members of this group of refugees of how they were forced to leave the dead bodies behind. I recommend you check the "External Links"-section of the article. And your imo poor research makes your comments about so-called experts who question the video footage even more interesting. What did your "experts" ever truly study about the incident? Only the Chinese claim about self-defence? Please clarify. C] As to "continuing at the same pace": please find yourself a glaciated pass at approx. 19.000 ft altitude and where the snow is chest-high for yaks. And then start running, and report back here how you managed.
Over to you, BogdanM02.
. Posted by YakWrit 20:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC) - Communications with the ICT (Intl. Campaign for Tibet) meanwhile make clear that there is a considerable number of inaccuracies in the information supplied in this Wikipedia-article. The ICT is investigating the Nangpa La shootings of Sept. 30 ever since that news broke. So a number of corrections is expected to follow here soon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images YakWrit 01:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC) ctd. Dec. 14 - Back to the "disputed" image in the Nangpa La Killings-Wikipage: also I MUST say (checked some files meanwhile) that ever since that page was started (I know extremely well who started it, and when) there has ALWAYS been a clear reference beneath that photo of the soldiers and the Tibetan children in Cho Oyu basecamp about WHO SUPPLIED THE PHOTO: Pavle Kozjek, a mountaineer present in Cho Oyu BC. It was there all the time, that information. So who changed it into A THREAT to delete the image due to an "uncertain copyright status", as the page said untill I edited it? Some Chinese intelligence agent? Some Chinese national who doesn't believe in the plight of the Tibetan people and how they're more than on Sept. 30 only being MASSACRED if they try to flee their country over the Himalayas? Whó is responsible for deceiving Wikipedia-users? Who is trying to play down the Nangpa La massacre? What tools does Wikipedia.org have to determine the political agenda of those who edit and influence articles around here? How can readers as well as contributors AVOID to become the victim of foul play here? Because, as said, copyright-information as to the origin of that particular photo HAS NEVER FAILED HERE, untill someone must have deleted it!
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images"
why is the chinese border guard wearing tennis shoes in a snowy mountainous terrain?
Posted by User:jimknock 05:00, 03 May 2008 (UTC)
In the form I found it, this article was heavily slanted to portray the incident from a Chinese POV. The most egregious statement gave a list of people who were simply "missing". There was no mention of the obvious fact that there have been numerous inquiries about each of them and the Chinese have obviously refused to provide any information about the people they rounded up and led away. It is not confusing that since the snow was chest high people were not able to move more quickly when the Chinese opened fire. The children presented the smallest targets and were undoubtedly moving through snow that was over their heads.
The article said that the people were "illegally crossing" or some such nonsense. They were, in fact, leaving China and were fired upon by Chinese guards. This is a boarder crossing that is often used for trade. Usually groups of this kind cross in the dead of winter or at night in order to avoid the guards. This is really China's Berlin Wall.
The article failed to mention that the people were pilgrems going to Darmsala to see the Dalai Lama. The issue of religious freedom or a pilgrimage was not mentioned.
The article said that only one person was killed, another was wounded in the leg and one died in the hospital from a "lack of oxygen". Some observers said they saw seven dead. In fact, many are missing. I think it is reasonable to assume that they were shot at the time, or executed later. The youngest was seven.
I searched for other articles with the keywords of "China" and "Tibet". I found that others had been similarly written or revised to slant everything from the Chinese point of view. So, since I am not an informed student of Tibetan or Chinese history, I wrote to several Tibetan interest groups asking them to review Wikipedia articles and to try to correct the BS found here.
Today I checked an article regarding a different international dispute between Korea and Japan regarding Dukdo island. I found it was politically very nutral and was under some kind of special watch by Wikipedia editors to try to insure political neutrality. It would be nice if similar actions could be taken regarding this and other issues concerning the "face" of China. There is ample evidence that the Chinese government launches campaigns to scrub the web of negative information wherever possible. Unfortunately Wikipedia is uniquely vulnerable to this kind of ruthless misinformation.
Jim
I see Tibetan zealots have taken over this page. We can definitely say 2 people were killed and the rest either arrested or later released (in fact, I definitely recall reading one article about a boy who was beaten on the legs and later released, according to his own testimony). By writing the ludicrous garbage about the "missing, presumed dead," it just shows that people who feel they have a just cause feel they should lie and twist the truth to their own end. Dishonesty is never acceptable. The ends do not justify the means. In fact, what's implied here is a little racist and hateful. Isn't the Tibetan side supposed to be about embracing your fellow humans? Honestly, do you believe that these chinese border guards (or the authorities who took them into custody) killed these 7-14 year old kids? Really? If you do, then you display a level of hatred for them that denies them any humanity.
The Crossing is illegal. BBC "Each year an estimated 2,500 Tibetans make the dangerous and illegal crossing through the Himalayas into India." 199.246.40.54 ( talk) 13:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
this article is biased towards the tibetan side, wikipedia is neutral. but the article was clearly written by a pro-tibet side person Btzkillerv ( talk) 10:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
See this video clip and decide for yourself what actually happened: < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv-FOHeoHXM&feature=channel_page > —Preceding unsigned comment added by OptionM45 ( talk • contribs) 07:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
The Nangpa La shootings or Nangpa La massacre was a fictional incident created from a fake China-bashing video widely distributed on the internet sites such as Youtube. It is proven to be a lie after careful examination. This video showed two instances of "dead man" walking in the course of this footage. It was actually the "prostrating pilgrimage" taking place. Both were errors by the editor attempting making a China-bashing video. In the original video, one can clearly see the so called pilgrims who were "shot dead" rose again and walked away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OptionM45 ( talk • contribs) 07:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
what i'm saying is that it is biased towards the tibetan side, we should make it neutral, stop going off topic. Btzkillerv ( talk) 10:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I just finished reading Murder in the High Himalaya (2010) by Jonathan Green (journalist) published by PublicAffairs. It is the most complete and reliable account of the incident. Green has spent the past 4 years investigating, interviewing 100s of people and traveling to the locations involved. No one knows more about it than Green. In the book, Green shows only one person was killed, seventeen year old Kelsang Namtso. A few other people were injured, none seriously. Rumors of other people being killed proved false. Obviously the Chinese were trying to kill them all, given how many rounds were fired, and would probably have, except for the distance and poor weapons for sharpshooting. In any event, only one person was killed. Does this merit an article title of "shootings" or "massacre"? These are highly charged and POV given only 1 person died and a few minor injuries. I suggest we rename the article. One suggestion is the Nangpa La shooting incident or even just the Nangpa La incident. Another idea is to focus on Kelsang Namtso, since it really is all about her death. Call it Killing of Kelsang Namtso or Death of Kelsang Namtso or Kelsang Namtso shooting. Other suggestions and thoughts welcome, thanks. Green Cardamom ( talk) 06:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
(ps. in case anyone notices the connection between Jonathan Green/Green Cardamom - purely coincidental, no relation. I'm also of Caucasian descent, a native of USA, and never traveled east of Europe - I like rice pudding, and have no personal connection to the incident, in case these things matter to anyone.) -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 06:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- When Chinese border guards shot and killed a nun on her way to the land of Dalai Lama, Geir Lysfjord, aged 59, saw the whole incident from nearby. Together with the mountaineer Jan Arve Andresen, the Norwegian was a witness to the bloody drama that unfolded on 30 September this year [2006].
- A few hours after the shooting that left dead bodies on the glacier, 25 Chinese soldiers entered the base camp armed with automatic weapons, says Lysfjord.
- The following day they returned, this time with ten Chinese police officers.
- They went out to the dead bodies on the glacier. As far as I could see they tried to bury the bodies, but they failed, says Lysfjord to TV 2 News.
- The next day the bodies were removed. At the same time the base camp was searched in pursuit of more refugees.
Green Cardamom, at "allwords.com" the definition of "popular culture" is given as "the prevailing vernacular culture in any given society, including art, cooking, clothing, entertainment, mass media, music and style." These two items that you included in that section don't really fit that definition, since I do not think that either of these accounts of the Nangpa-La incident are currently "popular." They might be in the future, depending on how much exposure they get, and how many people care to view/read them. Merely belonging to a category of art, mass media, book publishing, etc., does not make something popular. This topic of the potential abuse of human rights in Tibet may get the attention of the masses only when it makes prime-time news.
I don't think that the majority of people make a conscious effort to educate themselves about specific issues through reading books or going to local film screenings for limited-release documentaries. Notice that the documentary was made by a partnership between the BBC (limited to Great Britain viewers for television) and an Australian company. This does not mean that mainstream America is viewing it. In this regard, another definition of "popular culture" is "frequently encountered or widely accepted; commonly liked or approved."
I would rather see these two items listed under "Further reading and viewing," as you already created a section for "Further Reading," which has now become partly redundant. Let's not prejudge whether these items are popular, because they may well not be! Skol fir ( talk) 23:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I just got a simple question on whole report of BBC . I saw it, and i recognized that the shot in the report appears the same moment,when the tibetan falls down. I really don/t know from which distance the cameraman is filming, but i think it must be about 2000 metres, and as much as i know, the sound needs 6 seconds on that distance to appear. So how can the sound of the shot be heard same moment ,when the shot tibetan falls down. Must there not been a time difference of 6 seconds, and why is there no 6 seconds in original video? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.119.32.77 ( talk) 19:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
In 2008 I watched a movie, I think it was "The Cup". An episode in the movie involved religious people being smuggled from Tibet to refuge in India. Using Google maps, I tried to find how and where they had crossed the Himalayas. In my search I stumbled into this article.
The article had obviously been propagandized by Chinese agents. Every aspect of the outrageous incident had been reduced to drivel. I essentially rewrote it. Some people jumped on me, but most of the changes stood the test of time and critical Wikipedia review. It was very gratifying.
In the last few days I noticed things about Chinese hacking of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. I remembered the changes I had made, and the fact that around the time I made the Wikipedia changes, my desktop had been infected by an unknown virus. At the time, I saw no connection. I used every virus removal tool I could find to get rid of the virus. Nothing worked. Eventually I dug into the details of how the virus worked and removed it myself. It was very educational.
Today I saw the connection and decided to see how this article had transformed over the years. I had an idea that if the article was offensive to Chinese "internet sanitizers", they would have persisted in trying to modify the article to cover the "face" of China. I was right. There were essentially two contributors who worked energetically to change the article to be less critical of China. They were successful.
I have revised details to make them somewhat more neutral. I could not resist the temptation to make some of the changes provoking.
I love China. But much more than that, I love transparency and honesty. If they want to hack my system again, let them try. Jimknock ( talk) 01:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)jimknock
This article needs copy-editing. The grammar and wording are awkward. I tried to do a bit, but it is not my forte. -- Voidvector ( talk) 18:01, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I came here to do some copy-editing and removed the copy edit tag from the article. However, there are a number of facts in the article that are not properly referenced. During my copyediting, I preserved the information that was in the article. But I lack expertise on what actually occurred. Adding more citations would increase clarity here. Magic1million ( talk) 07:37, 13 November 2017 (UTC)