Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 171

• 0%

  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

  It is by no coincidence that the earth's last two treasure troves for black gold are to be found in Sudan and Iraq, where war, death and destruction abound. The exploitation of these nations by China and the United States has become too obvious to ignore,

  Reply

  11 Replies

  • 0%

    TonyByron4 months, 1 week ago

    Canada oil reserves ~200 billion barrels

    Iraq oil reserves ~120 billion barrels

    Sudan oil reserves ~5 billion barrels, hardly a "treasure trove" as you put it.

    Reply

    10 Replies

    • 0%

      djrevelky4 months, 1 week ago

      I agree, if it was all about oil then lets invade Canada!

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        TGrass30014 months, 1 week ago

        Canadian oil is in bituminous sands, also called tar sands or extra heavy oil. The crude bitumen extracted from these deposits is a viscous, solid or semisolid form that does not easily flow at normal environmental temperatures and pressures, making it difficult and expensive to process into gasoline, diesel fuel, and other products.

        As soon as it becomes easy and cost effective to extract fuel grade products from tar sands have no doubt that there will be massive coverage of "the secret weapons of mass destruction" by FOX news and by the neocons in the weekend news shows, but I am sure that will only be a "coincidence".

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          TonyByron4 months, 1 week ago

          "The crude bitumen extracted from these deposits is a viscous, solid or semisolid form that does not easily flow at normal environmental temperatures and pressures, making it difficult and expensive to process into gasoline, diesel fuel, and other products."

          At $110 dollars a barrel it is profitable. But since we are stealing oil from Kuwait, Iraq and Sudan (some claim Afghanistan) it doesn't matter to us anyway, does it?

          "As soon as it becomes easy and cost effective to extract fuel grade products from tar sands have no doubt that there will be massive coverage of "the secret weapons of mass destruction" by FOX news and by the neocons in the weekend news shows, but I am sure that will only be a "coincidence"."

          I have always been suspicious of those Canadians...

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            TonyByron4 months, 1 week ago

            http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/20/60min...

            http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23958032/

            Google is your friend.

            Reply
      • 0%

        Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

        Canada's not a second or third world country like the US has a history of picking on, they seem to like better odds than Canada would give them.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          TonyByron4 months, 1 week ago

          Jaydee, who are we stealing oil from? Or where are we buying it at less than than the going rate?

          We heard these tired arguments when we went into Kuwait to remove saddam's army. Many said we were only going there to steal the oil. Guess how much we are paying for Kuwaiti oil. Go on, guess.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

            Tony you don't need to steal oil from any one, all the oil companies need to do is take some of the oil off the market or make it risky to buy it and the price goes up making the cheap oil they have access to cost more and that increases profits. As for Iraqi oil only god knows how much has left that country because nobody else does.

            Reply
    • 0%

      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

      Tony:

      How ridiculous... oil reserves are different than undrilled oil. Are you really that berift of common sense or trying to become a propagandist? Well, you will need a little more work at it. LOL!

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        TonyByron4 months, 1 week ago

        "How ridiculous... oil reserves are different than undrilled oil. Are you really that berift of common sense or trying to become a propagandist? Well, you will need a little more work at it. LOL!"

        Oil reserves *are* undrilled oil by definition. Saudi Arabia's current oil reserves are far less than they were 50 years ago. Because much of it has been "drilled". Take a minute or two and digest that if need be.

        Stating facts is not propaganda. If you have a problem with my facts feel free to contest them.

        Reply
    • 0%

      Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

      Sudan's importance is not limited to its oil. The sub-saharan belt called the "Pan-Sahel" stretches from coast to coast, and most if not all of the countries in it have oil. But only the countries on the coasts have seaports. One of those is Sudan.

      Reply
• 0%

  jordan114 months, 1 week ago

  I can't, in good conscience, watch the Olympics. I feel badly for the athletes, but the greater value is in human rights. This propping up of the Chinese regime by the International community, including our government, is disgusting.

  Reply

  31 Replies

  • 0%

    GHOSTWHOWALKS4 months, 1 week ago

    Agreed.

    Reply
  • 0%

    nightcrawlerX4 months, 1 week ago

    I feel bad too. Boycotting the Olympics would not be fair for all those athletes who trained so hard for their passion, but on the other hand, the human rights... Hearing about the violence in Tibet, the protestations during the torch relay... so sad

    Reply

    29 Replies

    • 0%

      skeek4 months, 1 week ago

      I hate to interrupt this hysterical frenzy of xenophobia aimed at China but there is one solid fact that is consistently, some would say conveniently, overlooked.

      The Dalai Lama is on your CIA payroll. He has been since Day One. The information is easily found; use your search engine.

      What does this mean? Perhaps it suggests that beyond the jolly, giggling, quasi-mystical facade the man is a political operative, primarily in your country's employ, the purpose of which is the continuance of the Cold War. However it is precisely because of that facade nobody is prepared to ask him the hardball questions all political leaders should have to answer to.

      Let that sink in for a moment and perhaps you will come to understand the full implications of its meaning and how this relates to current events. I would hope that some of you are prepared to give this far deeper thought than an impulsive, emotionally-charged response but I am also realistic enough to know that it is highly unlikely.

      Reply

      28 Replies

      • 0%

        jordan114 months, 1 week ago

        A CIA involvement in Tibet wouldn't surprise me at all. Neither would finding that a 'spiritual' leader is less than perfect. Neither lets China off the hook for human rights violations.

        Reply

        7 Replies

        • 0%

          skeek4 months, 1 week ago

          Nor does it let the US off the hook for the same. It never ceases to amaze me the number of well-meaning Americans and their celebrities that take to the streets about the misdeeds of China, or a number of other nations for that matter, based on scant information, yet when it comes to the diabolical and nefarious activities of their own government they stay quietly at home feigning blissful ignorance.

          The CIA in Tibet has been ongoing for half a century, as has US interventionist policy been the mainstay for many of the world's nations. Such activities have led to the planned destabalisation of governments, the installation of proxy sycophants eager to do America's bidding for the opportunity to wield ruthless power, appalling wars, industrial carnage and chaos and the deaths of millions, yes millions. This attracts little interest amongst Americans themselves but when it comes to China every American is quick to condemn and pull out a pedestal to stand on. Such hypocrisy.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            skeek4 months, 1 week ago

            If you fail to see that the timing for this attack on China is politically motivated in order to ostrasise and further alienate a nation that represents the greatest threat to America's economic, military and cultural dominance in this world you simply are not looking hard or deep enough.

            Reply
          • 0%

            jordan114 months, 1 week ago

            Nor does it let the US off the hook for the same>>>>

            Where did I say it did? I've marched, I've written, I've emailed, I've posted, I've given my money to activist groups, I've voted critically & carefully, & stated my dissent to anyone within earshot for years. I owe you or no one else an 'apology' for picking on China.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              skeek4 months, 1 week ago

              My comments were not directed at you personally. The fact that you didn't say it made me draw attention to it. I sincerely congratulate you on voicing your protestations at your government's hypocrisy.

              I wasn't asking for an apology from you. I'm asking for one from the majority that brought Bush to power not once but twice and who have now put McCain ahead in the polls.

              I'm asking for an apology from a nation, your nation, that relentlessly imposes itself on all others while feigning insincere concern over China's claims to Tibet simply so that it can further advance its interests in a region very far from home.

              Reply
        • 0%

          Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

          "Neither lets China off the hook for human rights violations."

          Of course not. But we should realize that a return to power of the Dalai Lama and the religious class in Tibet would be an enormous step backwards, equivalent to a return to the dark ages.

          When the Chinese invaded, they put an end to slavery and to absolutely brutal oppression of the serf class by the religious and landowner classes. They called the serfs "horses that talk" and treated them no better than beasts of burden. Torture was commonplace. Landowners could take the wives and daughters of serfs for sex without repercussion. The illiteracy rate was 95% with most of the literate being the religious class. Tibet was a hellhole. China changed that. While many Tibetans likely want China out, it is highly unlikely that any besides the monks would want things back under the despotism of the Lamas.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            jordan114 months, 1 week ago

            When the Chinese invaded, they put an end to slavery and to absolutely brutal oppression of the serf class by the religious and landowner classes>>>

            The Chinese murdered thousands. Slaughtered them. Seems we're at a standoff, of which version of history is correct.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              skeek4 months, 1 week ago

              Yes we are. What is a fact is that the Tibetans up until China reclaiming Tibet in 1950, having never relinquished sovereignty, lived as slaves under the monarchy.

              What is also a fact is that the quality of life for Tibetans today is significantly better than it was prior to 1950 in relative terms with increased wealth and prosperity and improved infrastructure. All wealth prior to 1950 was in the hands of the monarchs alone. The same monarchy that people such as yourself wish to return to power.

              The West's history with China has been bitter for centuries. It is no surprise that any view of China will automatically be a negative one as it has been. Every significant Western power prior to the emergence of the USA as the world's dominant force has had a piece of China. Every Western power, including the USA, still wants to have a piece of China.

              Don't believe everything you read about China, especially from the West which has demonised China for centuries, and still does today.

              Reply
      • 0%

        LARK4 months, 1 week ago

        I saw in that man something very political under the cloak of mysticism. Now your post tells a lot about what the real thing is probably like. The US has him as a chess to criticize China; Dalai gets the pay, the attention and the hope to return as king.

        For well-meant ordinary citizens, I think it's important not to be used unknowingly. Whatever that is on your agenda, it is not good to let Dalai make use of human rights issue for separatism, for his personal power and to hurt innocent people.

        That man is evil but a good actor.

        Success of rioters and support of them will have dire consequences for the big population of innocent Chinese people and in a less direct way, the world at large.

        Reply

        17 Replies

        • 0%

          skeek4 months, 1 week ago

          The Dalai Lama is not so much evil as opportunistic.

          Tibet as part of China is not a modern day concept but an ancient one. Tibetan independence is a contemporary and fashionable idea. I saw this morning on BBC World however a Chinese American in San Francisco sum it up succinctly when he said that protesting for independence for Tibet from China is like asking for independence for Hawaii from the USA. It's just not going to happen.

          Some may then say the Chinese are brutal despite the fact that most of the deaths in the recent riots were of Han Chinese at the hands of Tibetans.

          The Dalai Lama has accused China of cultural genocide. A very emotive phrase but if we were to truly examine what it means the same could be said of America's cultural imposition on the world via Macdonalds, Starbucks, Hollywood and such like. Let's go back further to the Westernisation of the world and the push to convert all to Christianity, is this not cultural genocide also?

          I believe it is.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            TGrass30014 months, 1 week ago

            "Some may then say the Chinese are brutal despite the fact that most of the deaths in the recent riots were of Han Chinese at the hands of Tibetans."

            Do you have any collaborating evidence that has NOT been filtered by, or approved by the Chinese government?

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

              I just googled it and came up with this in which it says the Tibetan's started violence when Chinese officials were away and targeted "non Tibetans" in protests. Best if you read what it says for your self then google other stories to back it up but they are out there.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_unrest_in_Tibet

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                LARK4 months ago

                Why are Tibetans so non-accommodating? A likely reason is the Dalai Lama. At least, he did not do his job well as a spiritual leader. Worse still, he's the cause for all the trouble which has resulted in riots and bloodshed. Do you believe he's spiritual by nature because he's the ... reincarnation? He got ordained at the age of two because he belonged to one of the upper slave-driver families. Because of the upbringing he got good training in being a spiritual actor.

                Reply
        • 0%

          Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

          For fun, google "Dalai lama" and "CIA."

          U.S. intelligence has been funding the "free Tibet" movement for decades.

          Reply

          12 Replies

          • 0%

            PsychoHosebeast4 months, 1 week ago

            Don't we pretty much fund a lot of movements against opressive nations? Hell, don't we theoretically go to WAR to free people of oppressive tyrants? What's next, Richard Gere works for the CIA?

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              skeek4 months, 1 week ago

              To answer your first and second questions, no. It is however what your country says it does. The evidence to the contrary is strewn across the last half century. The Shah of Iran, the Iran-Contra Deals, Nicaragua, even Saddam Hussein himself, and of course there are many others. Surely you are not that naive. However as you have brought up Richard Gere, perhaps you are.

              Reply
            • 0%

              Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

              The thing is in doing so you also become an oppressive nation, what ever happened to self determination? USa is not the good guys, get over that idea.

              Reply
            • 0%

              Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

              "Don't we pretty much fund a lot of movements against opressive nations? Hell, don't we theoretically go to WAR to free people of oppressive tyrants?"

              No, we instigate instability when it furthers our ends. We have NEVER engaged in an altruistic foreign policy of spreading freedom and self-determination.

              We have backed Tibet to help destabilize the Chinese. Much like we arguably were running arms to Darfur to destabilize Sudan, and like we armed and trained the KLA to destabilize the former Yugoslavia, and like we armed and trained the Mujaheddin to destabilize the USSR.

              All of these efforts have to do with securing natural resources and access to markets. We have on a regular basis backed some of the foulest dictators on the skin of this earth.

              Reply
          • 0%

            Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

            natureboy

            How do you justify the treatment of the monks in Tibet by the Chinese government?

            Reply

            7 Replies

            • 0%

              Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

              How do you justify any violence?

              Reply

              6 Replies

              • 0%

                Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

                jaydee

                So... does that mean that you denounce the colonists for revolting against England and the American revolution?

                Reply

                5 Replies

                • 0%

                  Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

                  I have repeatedly said the American revolution was based on a lie, they told the people it was to be free from the Monarch and the oppression of his taxes which was simply put a lie. The King was not in power to make any rules from the 1700's on, it was the british Parliament which was run buy the rich merchant of the day, Nobility for the record ruled the other house but the balance of power remained in Parliament. The entire truth is American merchants saw the money going to England and thought why should they be out in the cold? All you did was trade one ruling class for another, English merchants for American merchants. As for the violence, America like all countries has the right to self determination so do I denounce them no, but I do denounce the lie they told to get public support. Is that clear enough for you?

                  Reply

                  3 Replies

                  • 0%

                    Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

                    Well, Jaydee's "New Book of History" is quite unique.

                    Reply

                    2 Replies

                    • 0%

                      Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

                      Where am I wrong?

                      Reply
                    • 0%

                      Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

                      Hardly. You should read Howard Zinn's "A people's history of the United States." The "revolutionary war" against the British was about trade, and the working people were not the ones situated to profit from the change, it was the merchant class and the already rich who stood to make out. Many of those fighting on the side of the "revolutionaries" were conscripted. Desertion was a problem.

                      There was a peoples revolution going on at the time, but it was manifested in incidents such as the whiskey rebellion and Shay's rebellion, not the war against the British.

                      Reply
                • 0%

                  skeek4 months, 1 week ago

                  " So... does that mean that you denounce the colonists for revolting against England and the American revolution?"

                  As I pointed out earlier, Hawaii's relationship with the US is a better analogy for the Tibet/China relationship although China's claim is certainly stronger, reaching much further back in time.

                  If your need to correct injustice in this world is so strong perhaps you should clean up your own backyard first by perhaps returning the stolen land you presently live on, America, and rightfully return it to its indigenous people. This would set the example that you are prepared to give up all that you have for justice's sake, lest your words and sentiments be deemed empty and hollow.

                  I fully understand however if that doesn't suit you right now and you choose to file it away in the too hard basket.

                  Reply
      • 0%

        PsychoHosebeast4 months, 1 week ago

        Not to be picky, but of course you don't mind supplying your sources... just curious.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          skeek4 months, 1 week ago

          More lazy than picky. As Natureboy said, google "Dalai Lama" and "CIA."

          Reply
• 0%

  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

  If anyone has poor performance on the YouTube video clip, here's the source:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKhjfkmDT1g

  Reply
• 0%

  tehranchik4 months, 1 week ago

  I hope everyone gets to see this little video too.

  http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/04/01/...

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

    tehranchik

    An excellent clip... Thanks for posting it.

    Reply
• 0%

  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

  Since I posted the video last night on YouTube, I have recieved 3 nasty emails...LOL!

  Some people must be afraid of losing money, if the Olympic games don't come off as they anticipated. It was good to see Spielberg withdraw his support of the games -- despite his initial role as an artistic consultant.

  Reply

  7 Replies

  • 0%

    simonsez4 months, 1 week ago

    I'm surprised you've only gotten three. You don't want us involved in Iraq ... why would you want us involved in Darfur.

    Why not let the UN do what they're supposed to do?

    Reply

    5 Replies

    • 0%

      Dicax_Maximus4 months, 1 week ago

      Cos the UN's about as much use as a match in the Arctic !!

      Reply
    • 0%

      djrevelky4 months, 1 week ago

      I agree, why is it that when the US invades somewhere due to human rights concerns it was a job that the UN should have handled?

      Why is that when the UN refuses to do anything then the US should handle it?

      The US can't police the world, let alone Iraq and Afghanistan...why do you want to start a war with ANOTHER Muslim country?

      Reply

      3 Replies

      • 0%

        Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

        The US is not trying to police the world, it's trying to run the world, big difference there.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

          What I think is sad/funny is that the peaceniks and lefties will support a military invasion in a heartbeat - you just have to call the soldiers "peacekeepers" and the invasion a "humanitarian intervention." This makes imperialism palatable for "progressives."

          The failure of Bush and Cheney was a failure of marketing - had they engineered it right, they could have invaded Iraq and had the so called progressives lapping it up.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            skeek4 months, 1 week ago

            Unfortunately you are right. This government has lied in many ways but in one way it has been far more honest than all the others in that it has made its ambitions for world domination far more transparent. Had they framed Iraq in a light not dissimilar to say, Tibet, the full support they initially received from the American people would have sustained even until now.

            Reply
  • 0%

    Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

    We are fortunate that there aren't to many people like that.

    Reply
• 0%

  rdy2rck4 months, 1 week ago

  China is "feigning" a lot of things and this is going to be a total PR disaster for them. This "coming out" party is not the kind they planned but I find it hard to believe the gov't didn't see this.

  I'm not going to watch the Olympics either but think the athletes should be allowed to compete. It's not there fault.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    PsychoHosebeast4 months, 1 week ago

    They seem to repeatedly act like they want to be part of the "world community," and then when the door opens for them, they behave like a bunch of inbred backwoods morons, with no clue how to get along with the rest of the world. I can't figure how the conclusion was reached that China would be a good place for the games this time around. Someone must've made a few bucks on that decision.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

      "Someone must've made a few bucks on that decision."

      Thats the same everywhere it goes, look up allegations from past games.

      Reply
    • 0%

      Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

      "Someone must've made a few bucks on that decision."

      Of course. The profit motive is our religion. Now, it is that of the Chinese as well. If they are to be criticized, it is for being our apt pupils.

      Reply
• 0%

  Dicax_Maximus4 months, 1 week ago

  I will not watch the Olympics. I will not see any of the adverts. I couldn't believe that China was even in the running, let alone won it. Wonder how much of their 1 (plus) trillion dollars of spare cash, they "donated" to the IOC members ???

  Yes, I've heard the argument that with so many international journalists & visitors it will "expose China" to the world. Well, unless the world lives in the rainforests of Papua New or the Amazon Basin, the world already KNOWS...

  Trouble is, it's just a bit too late to boycott China, considering that so much of our imported products come from there.....

  SC - Superb article & video, would that I could give you a hundred votes for the post !!!!!

  Reply

  4 Replies

  • 0%

    AnteUp4 months, 1 week ago

    Dicax Maximus ~

    Exactly. IMO China is testing. They didn't have to turn

    push to shove in Tibet right before the games - they chose

    to. Is a test of will? Of economic power? Who knows -

    but they will be calculating just how much they can get

    away with and still be celebrated by the world community.

    Beating the dogs to death with poles right out in the

    streets in broad daylight was a real indication of what

    value they place on our opinion of them.

    It won't happen, but if we (Bush) didn't go - what form

    of retaliation could China use against us? Do they have

    the ability to call in our loans? What do you think?

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Dicax_Maximus4 months, 1 week ago

      Ante - You just hit the nail on the head. The "west" cannot afford to PO China, if they could, the entire west would boycott both the Olympics & ALL Chinese goods....

      It isn't gonna happen, and THAT P's me OFF !!

      Were I an athelete asked to carry the torch or participate, I would decline (if, of course, I could get away with it financially - Hell I've got a family to feed as well)....

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        AnteUp4 months, 1 week ago

        Dicax Maximus ~

        Geezo, Dicax - how come FREE trade begins to sound so

        much like servitude? strangle-hold? got us by the short and curlies?

        I'm P'ed off too!!

        Reply
  • 0%

    Justice4All4 months, 1 week ago

    If the Olympics had not been given to Chine we would not have the opportunity of drawing attention to the issues in Tibet.

    Giving them the Olympics and then boycotting the opening cerimony is more powerful than watching the Olympics in Paris. The world is much more aware of what is happening in Tibet today thanks to the Olympics.

    Reply
• 0%

  texangelwings4 months, 1 week ago

  The Olympics should never been permitted to be held in China, until China improve their human rights practices!

  I heard a lady ask why the news media was calling China, Communist China. I wonder if there are more people besides that lady, who don't understand or know what a communist country is all about?

  Some of the pictures you displayed in your video, were like a documentary I watched not too long ago! The horrible treatment of animals in their markets and the citizens of China have to do what they do, just to survive!

  The video was very well done,it is sad commentary to the demcratic world. Thanks SC!

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    PsychoHosebeast4 months, 1 week ago

    "I heard a lady ask why the news media was calling China, Communist China. I wonder if there are more people besides that lady, who don't understand or know what a communist country is all about?"

    Non sequitur. She was most likely referring to the fact that we don't refer to "Communist Cuba," "Communist North Korea," or "Communist Vietnam." Referring to China as "Communist China" is archaic.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

      That's really quite funny. Vietnam ceased to be called a communist nation after we lost the war. LOL...

      Just words.

      Reply
• 0%

  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

  The Torch run is moments away in San Francisco.

  Reply
• 0%

  Charlson4 months, 1 week ago

  The Olympics just doesn't have the allure, for me, as it once had. So, I wouldn't be upset if the Beijing Olympics were boycotted. But then again, I'm not an athlete training years to compete. The Olympic committee that approved Beijing as an appropriate site was bought and paid for. It's them we should cruxify.

  Reply
• 0%

  engineer4 months, 1 week ago

  We went into Iraq for the same crimes China does. The difference --- Neill and Marvin Bush (Bush's brothers) are making a lot of money in China!

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    mrbs4 months, 1 week ago

    china is alot bigger too.they could loose a half billion people and still have a larger population then we do.even though we have them in tech and could hold them at bay we would end up destroying ourselves in the process of putting them down,especially with the pc way we fight wars now with one hand tied behind our back.

    Reply
• 0%

  Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

  I watched your video and had some strong reactions against it but put off commenting on it for a couple of hours to think about it and where it was coming from. Now you showed all relevant material and connected the dots in my opinion wisely. While it seemed to be focused on China's actions and the upcoming olympics you did show the US guilty of some of the same mistakes as well, and I know from past posts you do criticize US actions globally so you are not being hypocritical either. So I'm left wondering why it leaves a bad taste in my mouth so to speak? Maybe if people were to admit having the Olympic games in the US now would be equally offensive to human rights it would seem less of a vendetta and a national rant against an old enemy, the Communists.

  One can try and say the Olympics are not political but we all know the feather it puts in a countries hat so winning the chance to host them is political and helps a nations pride.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

    It must also be added that making grand gestures and boycotting the games or making an international incident at the games would be nothing less than a slap in the Chinese's face and make relations harder instead of better. Also we know China doesn't respond to that sort of action, plus the fact they hold the US dollar's value hostage at this moment in time. It has been my experience people respond to friends better than enemies so maybe to try a different approach, after all are they doing anything that we in the west have not done before?

    Reply
• 0%

  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

  I understand your sentiments Jaydee, however civil resistance to supporting any regime - here in the U.S. or in China, that denies human rights, fosters genocide, animal cruelty, and perpetuates totalitarianism should not be enabled. And for this same reason, the Olympics of 1939 in Nazi Germany were boycotted as they should have been. There were those people then, who were concerned about "slapping" Germany in the face too.

  HOw does one rationalize and excuse the murder of over 200,000 people -- and the homeless victims of a million and a half? To be so concerned about appeasing China's brutal regime lacks clarity.

  Reply

  15 Replies

  • 0%

    Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

    Again the US is guilty of the same crimes, would you support the same actions against the olympics in the US? Let me try this, if a group of Chinese were to protest the American Olympic team presents on the very same grounds as you are protesting the Olympics being in China what would you say to them?

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

      I would agree with them.

      Reply
    • 0%

      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

      Jaydee:

      The answer to your question is: yes, I would voice the same opinion and, in fact, in the article I stated that I was opposed to our government for its role in the middle east...

      Reply
  • 0%

    Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

    To achieve complete clarity, one should be aware that Tibet was not Shangri-La; Prior to the Chinese moving in it was a feudal theocracy, and a brutal one. The Chinese should get out, but we should also recognize that the Chinese ended the practice of slavery in Tibet, and took steps to end the oppression of Tibet's serf class.

    http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

    Reply

    11 Replies

    • 0%

      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

      And what nation was Shangri-La?

      The treatment of the monks in Tibet today and the suppression of the people of Tibet is the real issue today.

      According to your logic, no one deserves liberty and the dignity to live free from tyranny.

      Reply

      10 Replies

      • 0%

        Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

        You may want to look up some history of China and the Tibetans before going much farther with this, what some would call rant. China was never what you would call a formal country until after the second world war. It is a large collection of people speaking an incredible amount of different languages and in different regions. After the second world war China was in civil war with the Communist eventually winning because that style of life appealed to a peasant class as that is what most Chinese are. Tibet has a history where outsiders are not always welcome or even tolerated and in some ways the Chinese government has made things better but at a cost the Monks are not willing to pay. Just look up more and you will see what I mean.

        Reply

        8 Replies

        • 0%

          Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

          Your assuming too much, Jaydee. I am quite aware of its history.

          What is happening today to living people matters to some of us.

          Reply

          7 Replies

          • 0%

            Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

            Well if you know history then you know if the Chinese government were not in Tibet there would still be human rights violations occurring there. To put all the blame on China is not being honest.

            Reply

            6 Replies

            • 0%

              Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

              Your conclusions are wrong. (Accusing me of dishonesty)

              BTW I have not put all the blame on China; apparently you failed to read the article submitted or my comments on this thread. (You need to raise the level of your debate and cease with the personal attacks.)

              Reply

              5 Replies

              • 0%

                Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

                Where are the personal attacks? Is your ego that frail? All I did was suggest you farther educate yourself which is something we all must do from time to time. Your article say nothing of the violence committed by Tibetan hand or their historical belief in the Cast or serf society in which human rights are not recognized. Instead you painted a picture of a totally innocent and oppressed people which they are not.

                Reply

                4 Replies

                • 0%

                  Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

                  My ego is not that frail, but I prefer to commmunicate with people who have the class to communicate respectfully. You apparently do not understand that social grace.

                  "Conversation should be pleasant without scurrility, witty without affectation, free without indecency, learned without conceitedness, novel without falsehood.

                  Shakespeare

                  Reply

                  3 Replies

                  • 0%

                    Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

                    Shakespeare was overrated. My posts were very respectful to you so you have no ground for this little temper tantrum. If in your heart you believe I was rude or disrespectful copy it and past it in a reply to me and I will address it.

                    Reply

                    2 Replies

                    • 0%

                      Spadecaller4 months, 1 week ago

                      You are suffering from self-delusion and I am not surprised that you find fault with shakespeare too.

                      (Telling me that I am having an out of body experience is not what I would call "respectful debate.")

                      Reply

                      1 Reply

                      • 0%

                        Jaydee404 months, 1 week ago

                        Well as I already said you're not being your usual rational self, in other words behaving different from normal so much I wondered if someone else was using your name hence the out of body reference. If that was your problem than you will really flip when I say thats very soft skinned of you. I miss the old spade who would post a link to defend his point now and then,where is he?

                        Reply
      • 0%

        Natureboy4 months, 1 week ago

        "And what nation was Shangri-La?"

        Shangri-la" was a made-up name for a fictional paradise in a movie called "Lost Horizons."

        But you knew that, right?

        Reply
• 0%

  Dicax_Maximus4 months, 1 week ago

  SC - The US participated in the 1936 Olympics and it managed (mostly by the feats of Jesse Owens) to shove the "Aryan Race's" nose WAY down deep in the mud....

  Was that a political decision or simply sports ? I tend to think the former, but doubt if I/we will ever know for sure.

  I doubt if the same effect could be had in China's Olympics, much as I may wish otherwise.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    Mdiar4 months, 1 week ago

    Very interesting read through SC and I'll get to the video later (have to finish dissecting a pig in a bit)... I've known for awhile that I'm not watching the Olympics. Mainly because I normally don't watch them, I must admit. Didn't I hear something on the news earlier about 100k protesters in San Fran? Not in reply to Dicax, bloody Propeller!

    Reply
• 0%