Dear Guardian and Observer,
I am extremely surprised and deeply concerned about your recently published article '‘Extremist’ sect threatens protests against Dalai Lama during UK visit' http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/13/dalai-lama-uk-visit-extremi...
This is either very lazy journalism or intentionally inflammatory as it contains many factual inaccuracies and is almost slanderous in nature. My understanding is that your job is to find and report the truth so I'm hoping you'll appreciate the corrections below.
I have been a practising Buddhist for more than 17 years and not once before have I been referred to in such a degrading fashion. This kind of shoddy reporting of important human rights and religious freedom issues is exactly what inflames and divides people. I'm shocked that the Guardian and Observer would even publish it without thoroughly checking it first.
Firstly, I object to the use of the word "Extremist" – since when is it extreme to continue saying Buddhist prayers that were passed to you by pure Buddhist teachers, including the Dalai Lama's own teachers? How is it extreme to use our human right to freedom of speech when all other avenues have failed? The ISC has been trying for almost 20 years to get the Dalai Lama to engage in dialogue to no avail so peaceful protest is not extreme but an obvious choice. Speaking out against human rights abuses and religious discrimination is not extreme in my book. I would say that it is more "extreme" that a renowned mainstream British media institution would publish something so biased. I would also like to point out that whenever and wherever the ISC has held protests worldwide, they have received praise from every police department for their peaceful way of protesting and abiding of the laws.
I would also point out that this article, on multiple occasions, separates Shugden Buddhists from what it calls "Mainstream Buddhism" – perhaps the author is not aware that until the Dalai Lama banned the practice, it was mainstream! In January 2008, the Dalai Lama initiated a forced-signature campaign and public swearing of an oath within the Tibetan exiled monasteries, essentially saying that monks were to choose between their faith in their lineage teachers or him. If they didn't choose the Dalai Lama, they were thrown out of the monasteries and ostracized from the community as everyone else had sworn oaths not to associate with them. Over 900 monks were expelled from their monastery – remember that these are people already with refugee status being outcast again. If there is any division between Shugden Buddhists and other Buddhist communities, this comes directly from the Dalai Lama is precisely the discrimination the protests are about. Is the author (and the Observer) saying that only people who follow the Dalai Lama are "mainstream Buddhists"?
The article also incorrectly states that the protest is to coincide with a "ceremony to remember victims of the Nepal earthquake". This is a complete fallacy – the protest is to coincide with the Dalai Lama's talk at the Aldershot Football Ground which was originally organised and advertised as a talk and a ritual dance. If there has been the later addition of a prayer ceremony to take place during the protest, I'm certain the protestors will respectfully go quiet during that time as has happened in Australia recently. I personally have attended many prayer ceremonies dedicated to the victims of the Nepal earthquake and find this accusation a bit below the belt.
Also incorrect is the claim that "The UK protests are being organised by the New Kadampa Tradition" – all over the world, many Tibetan Shugden practitioners have attended the protests. The Dalai Lama's own government's website even has a 'hit-list' of Tibetan protestors on their website in an attempt to intimidate them into not speaking out! This is one of the reasons why Westerners engage in the protests – to give the Tibetans a voice and courage to stand up. I can recall at one protest I attended in 2008 in Germany, a Tibetan Lama tearfully thanked everyone for helping get their voices heard because he said most Tibetans are too afraid to speak out. There are many NKT practitioners who take part in the protests and there are equally many who don't; the NKT is not the ISC. The ISC organises the protests which will end as soon as the Dalai Lama lifts his ban on Shugden practice.
Another factual inaccuracy is the statement "In preparation for his visit, the ISC and its supporters have inundated Twitter with tens of thousands of anti-Dalai Lama tweets that have caused offence to mainstream Buddhists". There are plenty of people tweeting positive and negative things about the Dalai Lama all the time – any negative tweets are in no way "in preparation" for anything.
A hugely inaccurate and ironically divisive statement relates to the "increasingly divisive presence of the Shugden sect, which believes in an evil spirit that inflicts madness and death on its enemies". I mean, come on, that's just playground name calling. How is that Guardian or Observer standard reporting? I refer to my comments on how any division on this issue has only come about since the Dalai Lama banned the practice. Until then, everybody got along harmoniously. I have many contacts with multi-faith groups and other Buddhist communities. The only ones I don't have contact with are the ones who now refuse to have anything to do with me from their side because they have promised to follow the Dalai Lama's "advice" to not associate with Shugden Buddhists. Just replace "Shugden Buddhists" with the word "Jew", or "black people", or "Muslim" and you'll realise how divisive the Dalai Lama's ban is and why we feel the need to protest.
Of course, no inaccurate article about the Dalai Lama's ban would be complete without the ridiculously unfounded claims of Chinese funding. Again, this article makes wild accusations without providing one shred of evidence. It claims there are "Documents obtained by the International Campaign for Tibet" yet the link just goes to the ICT website. Surely if they had such things, they'd be plastering them all over the place! The reason they never find any evidence of Chinese backing is because there isn't any – it is CTA propaganda designed to cause division within the Tibetan community. Either you're with the Dalai Lama or you're with the Chinese. Ridiculous illogical arguments. It is entirely possible to disagree with a religious dictator without Chinese backing, based solely on the grounds of requesting religious freedom. The Dalai Lama hides his own apartheid behind this smokescreen.
And finally... according to the article "The New Kadampa Tradition did not respond to requests for comment." I'm not surprised because, as previously mentioned, the NKT are not the organisers. Did the author not ask the International Shugden Community for comment, seeing as they're the official organisers? I'm sure they'd be delighted to speak to him. The Guardian in Australia has details of their media spokesperson as they published a much more balanced article on the same ISC protests in Australia only days ago.
If you would like links and/or references for any of the comments I have made, please do let me know. I haven't included them here because there are so many it would've taken me all day!
I do hope that all these inaccuracies will be publicly corrected and I would be delighted if the Guardian and Observer would cover the protests in the light that they are intended – a peaceful way to bring the suffering of many oppressed people to an end and for harmony to be restored to the Buddhist community.
Warm regards
Deborah Kefford
