The Tibet Fund The Tibet Fund website
Tibet Sun Onlinenews
ON THE WEB, 8 December 2017
Countering claims by President of Central Tibetan Administration Lobsang Sangay that 1.5 million dollars taken from The Tibet Fund to purchase the Office of Tibet in Washington DC was a grant but not a loan, The Tibet Fund stated the amount was a loan.
A press release issued by The Tibet Fund in New York on Thursday said that the amount was a loan, but both the Board of The Tibet Fund and the CTA hoped and expected that at some point the loan would be forgiven and the full amount would then be deemed a grant.
The 1.5 million dollars became a controversy after the Tibetan Cabinet mentioned the issue as one of the reasons to terminate former North America Representative Penpa Tsering at the end of November.
In the Cabinet’s ten-point statment of reasons to terminate Penpa Tsering, point eight was related to the 1.5 million dollar and said that it had been “clearly explained” by Lobsang Sangay to Penpa Tsering that the amount was not a loan, but an amount that The Tibet Fund had contributed and did not expect to be paid back.
Penpa Tsering has been charged for reporting to the auditors of CTA that a loan payment for the OoT DC office was outstanding, without consulting and seeking guidance and approval from the Cabinet and DIIR (Department of Information and International Relations).
The Cabinet has said that all the funds received and spent towards the purchase of the Office of Tibet building in Washington, DC, are clearly documented, audited, and fully accounted for.
During a press conference on Tuesday, Penpa Tsering denied asking the auditors to mention the issue in their report or trying to make that an issue, but rather had sought the auditor’s guidance to find a solution for the issue so that there may not arise any problem in the future.
The press release, signed by the Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Tibet Fund Michael Lemle, clarified that: “The Tibet Fund entered into a $1,500,000 loan agreement with the Office of Tibet on 31 March 2014 to facilitate the CTA’s purchase of a building in Washington DC. The loan is scheduled to be repaid in thirty years.”
“All of the terms concerning the loan were agreed and confirmed in written documents consistent with customary legal practice in New York. At the request of the Office of Tibet, the loan was made to the Tibetan Community Development Fund Inc.”
The Chairman had written to the CTA on 6 July 2017 that at the time the loan was made, both parties expected that at some time in the future the loan would be considered a grant.
The Tibet Fund would then consider forgiving the loan if the terms of the loan were honoured by CTA, and if the CTA and The Tibet Fund relationship remained mutually supportive.
Best way to end this ugly saga is to establish an independent commission to investigate. We already have clarifications from both LS and PT on record. PT has 97-page documents in his defense. I am sure Sikyong and his kashag too have that many or more documents of proof to support their stand. No more of “he said, she said” as proof. Need hard solid evidences to support one’s stand. An independent and unbiased investigation will dig truth from facts and strengthen transparency and our democracy and unity.
Did some fool here say that U-Tsangpas can’t tolerate Khampa as leader?
They forgot the popularity of most respected Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche who was even requested to become the Kalon Tripa for third time even if the Charter didn’t permit.
They forgot, Juchen Thupten and Sonam Topgyal.
They completely forgot around 57% of people voted for Khampa LS and around 43% for Amdowa PT, where is U-Tsangpa candidate? And what is the total percentage of Khampa voters in exile?! 20-30%? Who were the rest of people who voted for LS?!!!
Please, do not call me a fool, when you are asking a stupid question, if I, a proud U-tsangpa not only tolerated Khampa leader but enthusiastically and openly supported LS, in spite of U-tsang Association’s extremist sectarian khampa haters wanted a different result.
Your shenanigans of quoting all the numbers in your questions looks good because there are more of U-Tsangpa like me than your sad sectarian kinds!
I heard dog whistle politics by U-tsang sectarian extremists about popular and most respected Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche. (1) voting for Kalon Tripa: Better of the two evils (2) LS was nurtured and guided into what he is today by the Rinpoche.
In my opinion, neutrality seems the best policy. If not, U-Tsang Cholka should stands for source of our proud heritage of Buddhism in Tibet, being closer to holy land of India. Why not demand a minimum qualification from any candidate: a respect for “The foundation of Buddhist ethics for lay people: The Five Precepts”. I believe U-tsang pa fools with ulterior motives would do the opposite!!!
Penpa Tsering la’s inability to quit alcohol and colorful story of taking undue advantage of Kathak lama’s unfaithful wife, thereby ruining the lama’s family, business and life without mercy.
But for the last election, I did not remember two Cholkas intentionally or unintentionally hotly ganged up against the third. I could not help ignore the perception created. It reeks full of ugliness not worthy of all the self-immolations happening outside and inside Tibet.
Last but not the least, please don’t hide your name like a TakShim (tiger inside, pussy outside) anonymity.
Dawa Phuntsok, you may be well-meaning, but to me your comment reeks of divisiveness and is ill-advised.
Where did you ever read of Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche nurturing and guiding this sectarian LS? Instead, it is well known that PT was indeed mentored by Rinpoche and was also once nominated for Kalon’s post.
I am a U-Tsangpa residing in Dharamshala, I don’t know any U-Tsangpa who HATES Khampas! We U-Tsangpa have always supported anybody who appears to be the best candidate in the fray/election. We have even sometimes campaigned against candidates belonging to U-Tsang province. We have voted irrespective of which province the best candidate belongs to.
I feel like, either you are absolutely unaware, or you just could never see love and unity in the community.
The numbers and facts I had presented earlier were a civil attempt to help you understand the fact that there was no rift among people of different provinces. Of course it is hurt a little by recent mis-management by LS.
Honoured sir. To me it seems like you are going against your own tribe to prove that you are not regionalist? Is it not a good time for that? Do we know how many Khampas voted for Tethong or PT? Or how many U-Tsangs voted for LS? With all regard for your opinion, I believe that U-Tsang should use the same methods that Khampas have used for the past six decades, and that is regionalism. I hope you will consider my views. With all respect, your fellow Tibetan.
And Khampa Sangay was the one who informed CTA about Taiwan phogsa and did many damages to Khampa unity. So, he is not even a true Khampa. Overall, he looks like not a pure Tibetan because of his association with Benjamin Wey. Next time, we need a real Tibetan Sikyong.
Karma Gelek Yuthok in his address after PT’s clarifications, still maintained that this money is not a loan!
Also, opposition to LS is being interpreted more and more as being anti-Khampa and anti HHDL. In reality, LS is the one person who is most anti-His Holiness the Great 14th Dalai Lama. He acts as if he is highest born and his supporters equates him with His Holiness. LS can never ever be an inch of what His Holiness is. LS’s contribution to the cause is not even an iota of what His Holiness have done so far for the cause.
I have never seen a so called leader as disrespectful to His Holiness as LS. In the history of the cause, LS has become one of the most hated leader and least trusted. His lies after lies and comments after comments to disunite the community are appalling.
LS is anti Tibetan, anti Tibet and anti HHDL.
Two things are clear as of now. First, it has became clear that there isn’t any good reason for sacking PT. Secondly, its reasonably not likely that LS sacked him out of animosity for personal vengeance alone. Because he isn’t that fool not knowing the potential adverse consequences of such a baseless decision in which he is stuck now. He wouldn’t throw himself in difficulties knowingly. So, still the exact reason for sacking PT is still hidden somewhere deep down there. And the reason, whatever, is worth knowing for public. Because he risked every potential challenges, went ahead and took the sacking decision! Something interesting! People should keep pinching until it gets disclosed to surface.
Kashag may have the authority to terminate but anyone has the right to defend against injustice. Authority may not always equate with righteousness. So-called 99 percent support in election may not translate into same support in every Sikyong’s decision.
I still cannot wrap my head around the fact that loosing a fine leader for no reason can happen in our democracy and people pretend as if nothing happened and still talk about moving forward as a community. How can one unsee an injustice?
An independent inquiry commission is a must to bring this event to a peaceful resolution. PT may not be reinstated but it will hopefully settle the current disharmony.
The rebuttal by Penpa Tsering La is all a smokescreen to prevent us from seeing through his shenanigans! In my opinion, the whole ill feeling among the exiled Tibetan community started with the 2016 Sikyong election. The election has consequences, and Penpa Tsering La and U-tsang Association extremists hate khampa running the show.
I enthusiastically participated in supporting the incumbent Sikyong. Penpa Tsering La showed up at our place (Madison, WI) during the campaign and spoke for two hrs approx (9 to 11 PM), stating that exiled govt under the Sikyong was being run so badly that it may GO BUST very soon. I challenged Penpa Tsering La, if the situation is so serious, why he did not made it known to HH the Dalai Lama, moreover his talk creates discord among Tibetan people, govt, and HH the Dalai Lama. Rather than answering my question, he implied me being a disingenuous sectarian Sikyong supporter. I tried to defend myself being a non-sectarian U-Tsang man, but he denied me the opportunity.
My serious complaint against Penpa Tsering la is that after getting appointed as NA Dhoncoe, his supporters (friends and chamchas) getting phone calls:-informing them that HH the Dalai Lama not the Sikyong gave him the post. Myself heard it (@Deer-Park-Gonpa) before Penpa Tsering la arrived in the USA for the post. It is an open secret all over the Internet now.
This Implies hypocrisy of HH The Dalai Lama: declared fully retired but acting otherwise. PT should know better having privileged confidential.
All Tibetans holding green book, or at least 99%, would wholly trust HH the Dalai Lama to be the final arbitrator for any worst of the worst situation. We don’t need the dog-whistle politics of Penpa Tsering la and U-Tsang Association’s extremist khampa haters. If any commission required this one should take precedent over others.
TRUTH ALONE TRIUMPHS!
With due respect, you sound more like the narcissist and vindictive Lobsang Sangay and his die-hard cronies, who love to shoot the messenger when they don’t have anything to respond to facts and logic. The only thing they know is character assassination, something you are doing when you blame Penpa Tsering and U-Tsang Association for regionalism and sectarianism in our society. At best, it sounds more like pot calling kettle back. Can you give at least one example or proof of how Penpa Tsering is a Khampa hater?
When a liar lies or a thief steals, they never do it openly, and in politics it is done in the form of dog whistle. When Penpa Tsering la was given Ari-Dhonchoe post, he told his chamchas that Khampa Sikyong did not give him the Ari-Dhonche post but only HH the Dalai Lama. If you really need an example or proof, let’s demand an inquiry commission. May be Penpa Tsering la has good alibi of being drunk or misstatement.
Why Sikyong Sangay lied. Read below
Budget Scrubbing:
Sangay did not register the 1.5 million as debt/liabilities in order to affect the over all CTA annual budget. For example, if CTA is running at a deficit of US$ 1 million, in reality the annual deficit amount is 2.5 million dollars since he had concealed the loan amount. So Sangay was deceiving both the Parliament and public by scrubbing the actual annual deficit.
Violation of Legislative ruling on budgeting:
Sangay broke legislative rulings by 1.5 million dealings without the mandatory approval of Tibetan parliament.
Fraudulent accounting practices:
Sangay, directly or indirectly through his friend Kaydor Aukatsang, approved fraudulent accounting practice at the Office of Tibet by not showing the 1.5 million as a payable amount/liabilities. When Tibet Fund gives US$ 1.5 million as loan both in their accounts and in loan agreement, it must be entered as a loan in the OOT/TCDF ledger and financial report. Till Tibet Fund converts the loan to grant, it should appear as loan in the OOT/TCDF account. As of now, it is a loan and there appear major discrepancy in the OOT/TCDF accounts.
Misappropriation of public property:
The Washington building was registered under TCDF with Kaydor as its principal officer. He also had his advisor Pema Chinjor as board member and a member from the US investing firm Areista Capital, Yodon Dhondon, as supporter. Tibetans around the globe are worried that this group will appropriate TCDF for personal profit after he resigns from the Sikyong post.
It appears you sounds better performer than Lobsang Sangay. I suggest you prepare from now for the next Sikyong candidate.
One’s own assumption and then on that basis making serious allegation should be very careful. In such like this manner, some misguided people get carried away by reading these sorts of untrue comments on social media led to divisions of ourselves.
Then Dhoegyal followers and Chinese regime by seeing these sorts of comment further incite inflammatory among Tibetans create hatred among us due to misguided informations.
You are right. No one is a greater showman and a performer than our Sikyong. Lies in details, chronology of events, lies through half-truths and what not. Everybody including Sikyong supporters know that Sikyong has been caught lying this time many times. Sadly only Sikyong himself is in denial and blames everything on others and denies the true facts as assumptions.
To add some important information: Yodon Thonden was recently presented with “exemplary philanthropy award” by Sangay and Kaydor, ostensibly in the name of Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamshala. The so-called award was presented to Thonden, her husband Kevin Toner, and their foundation, and Isdell Foundation, for having “contributed over seven million dollars to various Tibetan projects in India, North America, Europe, and Tibet.”
With Thonden’s role in the shady deal involving the Washington building, we now need to question the timing and purpose of this award. Thonden and her husband might have raised money for some Tibetan groups, but there are many like them who have done the same thing. Why this special gesture to raise her profile in the eyes of the Tibetan public, and that too in the exile Tibetan capital Dharamshala?. Is she also part of this larger conspiracy to appropriate funds meant for Tibetan refugees in the years to come?
Since she and her husband already have long experience dealing with funding, Sangay and Kaydor might have enlisted her support to effectively share the pie. Here is the link to the award ceremony (the picture says it all!] http://tibet.net/2017/10/central-tibetan-administration-presents-exemplary-philanthropy-award-to-yodon-thonden-kevin-toner-and-the-isdell-foundation/
Wait! Wait! This is going full circle now. I read Maura Mohniyan’s article again. Maura talked about Sangay-Kaydor hiring lobby firm Sconset Strategies in Washington who has clients like Aristeia Capital, an investing firm belonging to Yodon Thondon’s husband Kevin Toner, and one controversial Chinese millioniare Benjamin Wey. We do appreciate Yodon la and her husband for their philanthrophy but what is really going on between Sangay-Kaydor-Yodon with TCDF?
Tibetan Community Development Fund + 1.5 million $ + Sconset Strategies lobby firm + hedge fund investor Aristea Capital + Benjamin Wey + Sangay-Kaydor-Yodon-Chinjor = Million dollar questions
Words to study:
Accounting
Concealment
Investment
Commission
Ulterior Motive
Termination
The best way to uncover truth is to compare the available information after PT’s clarification to Kashag’s 10 termination reasons and Sikyong’s Toronto talk. Also remember PT’s comments about how Sikyong twist facts, present selective information and generally lie. Based on 1 percent true information, Sikyong will make 100 percent stories and make it seem as the truth. When public catches him with a lie, he will go back to the 1 percent and twist it again.
Continued here because my earlier comment was edited by the web administrator due to 300 word limit.
I personally feel that these are internal matters and should have been handled accordingly. I am worried what kind of ramifications it will have on either OoT or Tibet Fund. Maybe I am just overreacting…
The issue of $1.5 mil grant vs loan is how one perceives it. The Kashag and The Tibet Fund board of directors seem to have some kind of understanding that at some point the loan will be converted to grant money. The financial statements of Tibetan Community Development Fund, Inc., reported to IRS clearly show the amount as payable, which is available online to verify.
We need to understand the nature of the loan/grant from Tibet Fund. Sikyong did elaborate in Toronto that the loan from Tibet Fund will eventually be converted to a grant and will not have to pay back a dime. The recent clarification from The Tibet Fund does confirm the same, even though their clarifications seemed a little unclear.
But one thing that is very clear so far is OoT or TCDF, Inc., has not paid a dime in interest or loan repayment to Tibet Fund. If one reads carefully at NOTE 6 – OPERATING LEASES (in Tibet Fund Financial Statements), it clearly states that “Tibet Fund leases office space in Washington, DC from the OoT under a cancellable operating lease (I am not aware of the fact that Tibet Fund occupies any part of the building at OoT). Lease expense is recorded based on the signed lease agreement and the Lease terminates in 2043. The rent expense for the year was $15,000 which is OFFSET by interest income of equal amount (Note 7)”, meaning $ 1.5 mil loan amount at 1% interest rate is $15,000 per year in interest payable by OoT/TCDF to The Tibet Fund, which is offset by rent expense of $15,000 per year which the Tibet Fund proclaims leasing office space from OoT/TCDF. So, even though there is a transaction between the two entities there is no actual money paid or received.
[edited for 300-word limit. — Web Admin]
Bravo, you understood perfectly, that was exactly what Sikyong explained in Toronto and very early on in Brussels among all representatives. There was no actual cash handled in the transaction.
Unfortunately, it was Penpa Tsering’s negative motive against Sikyong and created all these 1.5 million dollar saga. It appears Penpa Tsering himself does not know the reality. He did not even listen or did not understand Sikyong’s clarification with simple language, with simple Tibetan language communication was unable to receive in Penpa Tsering’s mind or ear how can he represent Kashag. It was proven underperformance and not fit into his job right from beginning Kashag has charged him.
The 10 points is just a numbers game which does not hold any water. It’s a preset game played by LS by hijacking Kashag on proxy to dismiss PT. The color of the game is becoming visible day by day, if we are not suffering from color blindness. LS is now literally obliged to taste toxicated glass of vin. One intriguing and surprising part of this episode is the persistent silence maintained by the big guys of democracy — the intellectuals of the exile Tibetan community. Do they view it as an issue of an individual.
The whole issue is penny-wise / pound-foolish thing. Nobody is blamed for stealing, only wording semantics due to discord between boss and his subordinate. Someone with responsibility trying to generate finance to fund Office of Tibet. I appreciate buying of the Office of Tibet, rather than beating around the bush by people with ulterior motives.
An interesting Facebook post:
A new twist in the old $1.5 million saga.
A few questions come to my mind upon reading the attached documents. This information is available on public domain but i suspect many people will not know of its existence. This is not an accusation, i am just trying to understand the reasoning and purpose behind some of the actions undertaken
1. Why was the Office of Tibet building bought under ‘The Tibetan Community Development Fund’ when majority of activities carried out in North America are by/under the Office of Tibet
2. Why is the property still registered under the care of Kalsang Aukatsang and not under current Chairman/ Director or whoever holds signatory authority
3. Why did the Office of Tibet request the loan to be drawn to the Tibetan Community Development Fund instead of the Office of Tibet
4. Why were Kaydor and Pema Chonjor appointed to the Board of Directors so soon after their tenure?
5. Makes me wonder if this was the reason why Penpa Tsering was kept in the dark regarding all these financial dealings because it was behind the doors and a greater plot was at play?
6. Is this why there is no information available on any loan related document with the Office of Tibet?
7. Also is this why Kaydor is posted as Director of Social and Resource Development (SARD) to control all funding agencies in the near future and manage the Tibetan Community Development Fund as a funding agency parallel to Tibet Fund after their political career.
Ram Leela:
All very important questions. Think of three more relevant questions and then post it as opinion piece with a title: “10 important questions to Sikyong Sangay and his post Sikyong money making and controlling Tibetan polity scam” or something like this. It will get more and direct attention. Very important questions for members of Parliament and the press to ask too.
You have done the homework for them. All they have to do is just ask and protect Tibetan democracy.
The list of questions posted here by ‘Ram Leela’ is very important. It needs serious attention and consideration, not only from the Tibetan public, but also from the Tibetan Parliamentary representatives. These are the questions that need to be raised in the upcoming March 2018 Parliamentary session in Dharamshala.
The control exercised by Sangay’s cronies such as Kaydor and Pema Chonjor over ‘The Tibetan Community Development Fund’ and the OOT building despite the change of guard at Office of Tibet is highly suspicious. Another concern is the way Kaydor was appointed to the SARD position.
The Tibetan Parliament must discuss this as a priority issue and call for a thorough, transparent, and independent investigation into the matter at the earliest to stop Sangay and his cronies from engaging in corruption.
If you look at the original record of the loan in 2014 here:
http://tibetfund.org/docs/2014%20Financial%20Statement.pdf?a04e24
The loan was given by THE TIBET FUND to THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND,
not OOT.
THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND, as a non-profit, has failed to lodge annual financial reports to the IRS since 2014, the same year the loan was supposedly received.
Kelsang “Kaydor” Aukatsang is/was the principal officer of THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND. Ask him where the papers are? Where the audited financial accounts are? Where???
I believe this is also what Penpa Tsering la also asked.
Please find out.
Lobsang Sangay not speaking truth.
The Press release from Tibet Fund confirms that US $1.5 M is indeed a loan. This is completely opposite to what Sikyong LS told public in Toronto, Canada, on Nov 19, that it is not a loadn. According to press release of Tibet Fund, US $1.5 M is still a loan as of Nov 19, 2017. If Sikyong knows that it is a loan on Nov 19, 2017, then why was he saying it is not a loan during his public talk in Toronto? Why is he lying to Tibetan Public?
I do clearly believe that he did not pocket the US $1.5 M. So why not say it is a loan?
On Nov 20, 2017, I gave my own two reasons on this website why Sikyong is refusing to say US $1.5 M is a loan. Now with this Tibet Fund Press release, it looks like my two reasons make complete sense.
I keep saying that I feel Sikyong LS does not like PT personally and he is using Kashag’s name to terminate PT service.
I have already proved Point # 9 and Point # 2 are invalid. The Press release from Tibet Fund proved Point # 8 is invalid. I can go about proving all remaining points as invalid.
It is now time for our Chitues to grill Sikyong LS and asked why he put out 10 baseless reasons for terminating PT service. I am not asking Chitu to help Penpa Tsering to re-appoint him as NA Dhonchoe. I am requesting Chitues to work as true people’s representative and let Sikyong LS know that many Tibetans are not happy with how he handled NA Dhonchoe post.
There is a youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoBCYCykSPI&t=6s) put out by Thokmey of NY about his opinion of why Sikyong LS terminated PT service. If what he says is true, then we have a major trust issue between Sikyong LS and HH the Dalia Lama.
[[300-word limit]]
Yes, an independent inquiry commission is necessary to find out the truth. In the midst of Sikyong’s misdoing, many innocent people and organizations like Tibet Fund suffer from rumor mongering. PT is unfairly given termination and our community is still in turmoil.
The election has consequences: winner and loser. A sore loser always produces discord and turmoil, especially trusted with an important position under the winner by making hay out of nothing. Sikyong worked hard to buy the Office of Tibet, but Penpa Tsering la created the fuss: penny wise / pound foolish.
It seems that you have to tweak words such as ‘loan’ and ‘grant’ to pay less tax? Obviously, few grants of dollars are saved that way.
LS or any other staff have not pocketed any amount from this fund, and the funds were received by OoT, and the funds were utilized to purchase the office building, and the physical building is there, so I wonder what risk is there? If the Tibet Fund considered it as a loan it will claim refund with interest whether it was shown as loan or grant in the OoT Statement. I wonder what risks are there? What are the possible problems OoT might face in the future because of it being not shown as a loan?
Well if you don’t understand the gravity of this matter I guess you can’t be helped…
Gravity of the matter is HH The Dalai Lama is still alive . Please do not pretend otherwise.
The election has consequences: winner and loser. A sore loser always produces discord and turmoil, especially trusted with an important position under the winner by making hay out of nothing. Sikyong worked hard to buy the Office of Tibet, but Penpa Tsering la created the fuss.
LS has come out to be total liar!!! Liar Liar Pants on Fire!!!
The contract says that it ‘hoped’ and ‘expected’ the loan “will become grant”. Hoped and expected! And “would consider” to forgive “if the terms of loan were honoured by CTA and “if” the two parties “remained mutually supportive”
It is a “LOAN” till it is forgiven. Why is it not in CTA’s payable statement?!! LS is a liar.
What if this doesn’t happen? What if Tibet Fund’s board changes and the relationship doesn’t remain same as it is now? What if the loan is not forgiven?
In all these fights — what I realised is that we need to stop depending on foreign aid. We Tibetans, need to be more successful financially and not remain dependant on foreign funds and grants.
Well, I really appreciate everyone who is working for the Tibetan cause despite the fact that most people in the Non-governmental organizations in the West earn a lot of salary. More than CTA staffs combined.
No-one is doing anyone any favor. Transparency is a must.
Most Chinese look at Tibetans as weak because our community is so dependent on others. Let’s change that. Let’s take the opportunities of education and become successful individuals who can contribute to the Tibetan cause in more ways. Let’s lobby for our cause. Let’s look for our ourselves and let’s not get distracted. Let’s not get divided.
All entities should avoid ambiguous terms and conditions in such major contracts. Clarity and particulars should be maintained. Everyone is mature enough to understand that, in both parties. This agreement should be redrafted!
I believe it is a public statement from Tibet fund for the overall loan issue. The agreement on the loan is the one that was signed between Tibet fund’s Board Vice-President Geoffrey something and Ari Rep Kaydor, and which Mr. PT showed during his clarification.
PT is proved right that 1.5 million is a loan. Tibet Fund is also right to carry it as a loan in their financial statement until they make it into a grant. So why LS made it seem like it was contribution from the beginning and the loan would be written off in five or six years? Tibet Fund said that no agreement was reached on the number of years for writing off the loan. In my opinion, till the loan is changed into grant, the amount should be carried in both Tibet Fund and Office of Tibet as loan. This is where PT was concerned.
This didn’t approve PT, it shows that PT understood only the external part and not the internal part, thus he had asked auditors, whereas LS understood both the external and internal.
Right! LS understood both the external and internal and still lied.
LS is responsible for buying the Office of Tibet, Penpa Tsering La responsible “Pound foolish / penny wise” for all the discord for losing the election. Nobody says money is stolen.
How can PT possibly understand the internal part if knowledge is barred by LS? Is that not called s a b o t a g e ?! And consider this is not some little private dealing but involving institutional matters on foreign land. Incredible…
LS is not only a patho lair, he neglected his responsibility. In every official/legal correspondence, documentation is paramount. Evidently, there was no documentation on the loan/grant from CTA or OOT part prior to July this year. And by the way, Tibet Fund’s statement on $1.5M is ambiguous. Things are getting murkier. LS is right this time.. oops