Anti-CNN (1 Viewer)

[xeuyrawp]

I happen to be azn and i think this is weird:

http://www.anti-cnn.com/

I can think of worse ways to while away spare time, i guess...

p__D

Whilst I admit you're azn, you're certainly not Asian.

 

[Dongle]

I love how people always bring that up as if it
a) nullifies their own country's human rights abuses
b) is as bad as their own country's human rights abuses.

In turn, does that nullify the human right abuses of the USA? Isn't moral absolutism the basis of the Western 'humanitarian' agenda? Seriously, do you condone Guantanamo? If you did, it wouldn't suprise me. It's understandable, after all, that it is within the self-interest of the West's War on Terror.

There is no such thing as true altruism. I'm not naive. 'Human rights' is ultimately just another tool of geopolitics. Why else would the USA lecture the rest of the world on it while holding terrorism suspects without due process?

 

[xeuyrawp]

Stop signing your fucking posts. You have a 'signature' for a reason.

Yeah... It gets annoying after a while, so people have to bully you.

Btw, it has miraculously appeared in his sig! He won't have to sign it anymore.

 

[P_Dilemma]

Whilst I admit you're azn, you're certainly not Asian.

London bridge is falling down!

Yeah... It gets annoying after a while, so people have to bully you.

Btw, it has miraculously appeared in his sig! He won't have to sign it anymore.

You must really love me if a simple signature annoys you so much. Try doing nothing.

p__D

 

[Slidey]

In turn, does that nullify the human right abuses of the USA? Isn't moral absolutism the basis of the Western 'humanitarian' agenda? Seriously, do you condone Guantanamo? If you did, it wouldn't suprise me. It's understandable, after all, that it is within the self-interest of the West's War on Terror.

I certainly care if the USA is abusing human rights. I have no great love for America but by the same token I do have a grudging respect for them.

Create a thread about Guantanamo bay; really, I'd like to hear about why it is so bad. Please do this.

But don't bring it up as an example of why the human rights abuses anywhere else somehow mean less because of it.

There is no such thing as true altruism. I'm not naive. 'Human rights' is ultimately just another tool of geopolitics. Why else would the USA lecture the rest of the world on it while holding terrorism suspects without due process?

You can be a bitter bastard all you want but many people on this Earth genuinely care about human rights.

 

[Born2baplacebo]

See. We've already got a problem that the thread starter created.
ASIAN !
GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY !

 

[Dongle]

I certainly care if the USA is abusing human rights. I have no great love for America but by the same token I do have a grudging respect for them.

Create a thread about Guantanamo bay; really, I'd like to hear about why it is so bad. Please do this.

But don't bring it up as an example of why the human rights abuses anywhere else somehow mean less because of it.



You can be a bitter bastard all you want but many people on this Earth genuinely care about human rights.

I can appreciate that you as an individual genuinely care about human rights.

However, it bugs me to see so many people use it as a guise to advance their own political agendas and project their moral egos elsewhere on the world, while pretending they themselves are angels.

Guantanamo....eh. It's a tough one. Balancing government and civil liberties is a tricky issue. I haven't really formed my own opinion about this (besides its relevance to the USA's human rights standing）. On one hand, there's idealism - due process, blah blah blah. On the other hand, there's pragmatism - who cares about a few Arabs when most of them are probably guilty anyway, and probably ready to kill again?

 

[danlan]

I love how people always bring that up as if it
a) nullifies their own country's human rights abuses
b) is as bad as their own country's human rights abuses.

Obviously America's invasion of Iraq is far more immoral.

 

[abbeyroad]

I love how people always bring that up as if it
a) nullifies their own country's human rights abuses
b) is as bad as their own country's human rights abuses.

Yeah we all know towelheads and Chinamen don't count right?

 

[Slidey]

Yeah we all know towelheads and Chinamen don't count right?

That's rather racist, not that I expect much from you.

 

[KFunk]

There is no such thing as true altruism. I'm not naive. 'Human rights' is ultimately just another tool of geopolitics. Why else would the USA lecture the rest of the world on it while holding terrorism suspects without due process?

I think that's an overly dark view. Really it depends on who happens to be wielding the term 'human rights'. Certainly it is used by hypocrites and manipulators who use it when it suits them to advance their ends. However, there are plenty of individuals and groups out there who genuinely believe not simply in 'human rights', but in 'universal human rights' and who will put their money where their mouth is. There are even bound to be idealistic individuals who are part of these institutions/governments which misuse human rights discourse but who are nonetheless unable to fight against the 'status quo' (to tap into some rhetoric which is currently in vogue)

 

[abbeyroad]

But don't bring it up as an example of why the human rights abuses anywhere else somehow mean less because of it.

No, it's not an example of how the human rights abuses elsewhere mean less because of it, but it is a prime example of how hypocrites such as yourself will turn the other cheek whenever it's convenient. Torture, sleep deprivation, desecration of the Koran...need I say more? Let's not bring up the Abu Ghraib prison and the atrocities committed by the Coalition since the end of the invasion. The United States and the Coalition are just as evil as China when it comes to human rights abuses. The only difference is that the United States and its allies are oppressing the citizens of another country while China is oppressing it's own.

Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989
this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prison
and this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_post-Saddam_Iraq

Then come back and tell me that they are fundamentally different.

Human rights theory is based on moral absolutism, not moral subjectivism.

 

[abbeyroad]

That's rather racist, not that I expect much from you.

That's rather dull, not that *I expect much from you. It's generally a good idea to get your sarcasm detector checked regularly. Some folk's deteriorate rather quickly.

*damn typos.

 

[P_Dilemma]

How has he turned his face to them you idiot?

I'm sure he condemns any anti-human actions equally, but notices that the spotlight is currently on China for human rights violations, as the spotlight is still on the US in Iraq and in Guantanamo bay?

You do realise saying "BUT THEY DO IT TOO" isn't a justification in this situation and all you're doing is continuing the cycle.

I'm sure he condemns these crimes against humanity equally. You're not poking holes in his argument of moral absolutism, you're just looking like a twunt with his fingers in his ears.

Thank you! I'm glad you're capable of sane arguments as opposed to indiscriminant discrimination.

I'll put this up here for the record; i happen to be asian. That does not equate to me agreeing with china's stances on human rights. I believe that a lot of what has happened, and what is happening, in china is appalling. And i believe it's a good thing that people around the world, and us guys and girls here, are beginning to take notice and express our discontent.

Just keep in mind that just as not all muslims are terrorists, not all asians like what's happening in china.

Heard of taiwan? They're asian too.

p__D

 

[abbeyroad]

How has he turned his face to them you idiot?

I'm sure he condemns any anti-human actions equally, but notices that the spotlight is currently on China for human rights violations, as the spotlight is still on the US in Iraq and in Guantanamo bay?

You do realise saying "BUT THEY DO IT TOO" isn't a justification in this situation and all you're doing is continuing the cycle.

I'm sure he condemns these crimes against humanity equally. You're not poking holes in his argument of moral absolutism, you're just looking like a twunt with his fingers in his ears.

One would think that Einstein can read.

Create a thread about Guantanamo bay; really, I'd like to hear about why it is so bad. Please do this.

He wanted to hear about why it is bad. And:

But don't bring it up as an example of why the human rights abuses anywhere else somehow mean less because of it.

I provided the counterargument that it was an example of how people can turn the other cheek when it suits them.

If you can read, you'll understand that my post was addressing the hypocrisy of some of those "freedom fighters". Not about "BUT THEY DO IT TOO", as
"But they do it too" holds as much weight as "My dog ate my homework."

I am sure he appreciates the opportunity to speak for himself without Einstein butting in.

I am sure he is more intelligent and can come up with better retort.

Your post does nothing other than showcasing your general idiocy and illiteracy.

Oh and the spotlight is not "still on the US in Iraq and in Guantanamo bay" right now, as everyone's too busy freeing Tibet and comparing their e-penises on the interwebz.

 

[abbeyroad]

Case in point; yours about any troll post I've ever made.

Ok I yield. You can piss so much further ahead and your e-penis is much bigger than mine.

 

[abbeyroad]

Then why are they both issues that are debated on the global scene as well as the largest issues to be dealt with by the candidates in the US Elections.

Just because the China situation is totally dominating the airwaves does NOT mean that the other issues aren't being covered.

I wasn't aware of Slidey's other posts, but I have no problems defending him against your nonsensical tit-for-tat.

I understand your position, you're trying to weigh the gap between blind nationalism and the attacks on China by those who seek to jump on any bandwagon because that's what they do.

There are niceties in every situation, particularly this one, there are gross transgressions on the rights of the individual by multiple nations, but bringing up alternatives, and other examples, fails to dilute his initial arguments.

Admittedly it would seem that people are less informed about the atrocities in the US and Iraq purely due to the mainstream media's approach to the situation, but that doesn't mean that the criticisms are any less valid.

The global scene is fixated on China instead of the United States because:
a) You don't normally associate human rights abuses with democracies.
b) China is ruled by a bunch of commies.
The candidates are running for President of the United States, if they don't address those issues, who will?
The world's fixation on China is based on the fear of communism. I am certain that if China was a democracy, people's attention would be directed elsewhere. But then again, if China was a democracy, none of this would happen in the first place.

It's a Sunday night, for the love of beer, what do you expect me to do? Hold hands with you folks around a camp fire and smoke pot?

I understand your understandingness and raise you by 10.

Thank you. The centre is always needed for stability.

Yes, as you failed to weaken mine. But of course, we agree to disagree.

That is the most observant remark I've seen in both the Olympics thread and this thread. It's seems that the media has a certain tendency to portray Communism as evil. It is not, communists are.

 

[Slidey]

No, it's not an example of how the human rights abuses elsewhere mean less because of it, but it is a prime example of how hypocrites such as yourself will turn the other cheek whenever it's convenient.

Well done on bringing up something completely irrelevant.

Bringing up America when discussing violations in China does not help your case. There is plenty to discuss about America, but it does not relate to China. People like you like to compare China and America so as to shift the focus away from China.

 

[abbeyroad]

Well done on bringing up something completely irrelevant.

Bringing up America when discussing violations in China does not help your case. There is plenty to discuss about America, but it does not relate to China. People like you like to compare China and America so as to shift the focus away from China.

How disappointing, I expect better.

I am not trying to shift focus away from China. I am bringing to light the ugly side of America that few know of, and none like to see. No one is trying to deny what is going on in China here. I was pointing out that fundamentally, China and the United States are the same when it comes to disregarding human rights. Neither of them have more rights to accuse the other. Do I make myself clear now?

 

[Slidey]

Not really. You're still bringing up America in a thread about China, and arguing that America is as bad as China. Regardless of whether or not that's true, it looks very much to me as though we are no longer talking about China's human rights issues.

As I said, create a thread about America, and I will discuss America there, including this discussion:

Re moral absolutism: I don't contend American human rights abuses are any better than China's, but I do contend they are far less numerous. To me, and many people in this world, this matters. While I love idealism, in reality concessions must be made. China's abuses are more numerous per capita (and in raw terms) with no institutions in place to actively question them (which is actually one of its human rights abuses - suppression). To me, this makes them the priority.

Further, plenty of people are at work (both in America and worldwide) to fix and criticise America's human rights issues, and this doesn't concern me because as a liberal democracy, America has constructs with which its people can hold their government accountable (which is currently being done on many fronts, one of which is the war with Iraq, as judges demand the FBI hand over back-up records of emails sent about the Iraq war, as a small example).

Another interesting point is the current extensive examination and questioning of the American government's ability to claim something beyond the law by stating documents are matters of national security and thus can't be used as evidence.

Any government whose people can hold her accountable without concern for their safety is not a concern of mine, regardless of how favourably you might view the processes of democracy.

If you wish to discuss China's freedom of press (well, lack of it), go ahead. If you wish to criticise America, go here: http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?p=3409839#post3409839