Hillary - Human rights can't interfere with crises
- Thread starter ANC
- Start date
ViRedd
New Member
Yes ... and is there any doubt in anyone's mind that Hillary Clinton is a totalitarian? She represents a political party that makes a great hulla-ballou out of the word "greed." Remember that the next time you hear a "compassionate" politician talk about the need to "equalize the outcome," "do it for the children," or in "the name of fairness."
Vi
Vi
Microdizzey
Well-Known Member
So much global talk from these politicians. I still stand by the New World Order theory.
Man... Hilary is evil. Not only does she look psychopathic, she speaks wicked things. Human rights can't interfere with crisis? Is she insane?
So basically she's saying the government should be able to do whatever they want with us when crisis strikes. That's disturbing people. This should be sending signals and warning signs to everybody.
Man... Hilary is evil. Not only does she look psychopathic, she speaks wicked things. Human rights can't interfere with crisis? Is she insane?
So basically she's saying the government should be able to do whatever they want with us when crisis strikes. That's disturbing people. This should be sending signals and warning signs to everybody.
ViRedd
New Member
Yes, especially disturbing when one considers that the current economic "crisis" was caused by the misdirected monetary and political policies of government in general.
And ... Hillary is not insane. She, not unlike other totalitarians that have preceded her, know EXACTLY what they are doing.
Vi
ResistanceIsFertile
Well-Known Member
Didn't her old man justify his imperial adventurism as "humanitarian intervention"?
Disaster and crisis is where the money is these days. Protections are suspended, legislation gets rushed through, private contracts get awarded, all in the speed of the 24 hour news cycle.
Disaster and crisis is where the money is these days. Protections are suspended, legislation gets rushed through, private contracts get awarded, all in the speed of the 24 hour news cycle.
Microdizzey
Well-Known Member
She disgusts me! Here's a CNN report, for credibility. Before any ignorant retards come and attempt to argue.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/21/clinton.china.asia/index.html
Funny how this article praises Hilary for "being an outspoken, staunch critic of China's human rights stance."
But then she says dealing with crisis is more important than human rights. FLIPFLOP MUCH?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/21/clinton.china.asia/index.html
BEIJING, China (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton broached the issue of human rights with Chinese leaders Saturday, but emphasized that the world economic and other crises are more pressing and immediate priorities.
U.S. Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton meets Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao in Beijing Saturday.
"Human rights cannot interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises," Clinton said in talks with China's foreign minister.
Clinton made China the last and most crucial stopover in her Asia trip, signaling the new administration's first attempts to lay a foundation toward a China policy. It is Clinton's first trip to China as secretary of state.
She met with Chinese President Hu Jintao on Saturday and discussed the framework for further high-level and mid-level discussions.
"It is essential that the United States and China have a positive, cooperative relationship," Clinton told a group of reporters.
Earlier Saturday, Clinton met with Chinese Premier Wen Jibao in Beijing, where they discussed what they regard as the new defining Sino-U.S. strategic goals: the world economic crisis, regional security and the environment.
The United States and China are the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases.
Human rights, a traditional topic in discussions between the two countries, was broached during Saturday's meeting between Clinton and Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, who agreed to engage on a continuous discussion on the issue.
Clinton said both nations will continue to hold frank discussions on crucial human rights issues, such as Tibet and freedom of expression in China. In the past, Clinton has been an outspoken, staunch critic of China's human rights stance.
In a welcoming response, Yang said China was willing to discuss the often-contentious subject of human rights.
"Although differences exist, China is willing to conduct the dialogues with the U.S. to push forward the human rights situation on the premise of mutual respect and noninterference in each other's internal affairs," Yang was quoted in the Chinese Xinhua news agency.
On the economic front, both leaders emphasized the importance of working in cooperation as their economies are intertwined.
China, the world's top holder of U.S. debt, wants to ensure liquidity and security in its dealings with the U.S. treasury bonds.
"We did use foreign exchange reserves to buy U.S. treasury bonds. Our principle of using reserves is to ensure security and liquidity," Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told reporters.
China-U.S. trade volume rose by 10.5 percent in 2008 to $333.7 billion, Xinhua reported.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations, China is North Korea's largest trade partner. It has taken a leadership position in the six-party talks, a multinational diplomatic effort to denuclearize North Korea.
In Seoul, Clinton did not refrain form harsh words, restating the U.S. position toward North Korea.
"North Korea is not going to get a different relationship with the U.S. while insulting and refusing dialogue with the Republic of Korea," she said.
Mid-level military discussions will resume this month, Clinton announced Saturday. Last October, the Bush administration notified Congress of its plan to sell $6.5 billion in arms to Taiwan which caused China to suspend military talks with the US.
Clinton told CNN's Senior Correspondent Jill Dougherty that U.S. policy toward Taiwan will not change.
Chinese President Hu Jintao and U.S. President Barack Obama are scheduled to meet at the G20 meeting in London in April.
Funny how this article praises Hilary for "being an outspoken, staunch critic of China's human rights stance."
But then she says dealing with crisis is more important than human rights. FLIPFLOP MUCH?
ResistanceIsFertile
Well-Known Member
People actually bother to attempt to defend Hillary Clinton?
She's just jealous that she can't be as brutal as the Chicoms...yet.
She's just jealous that she can't be as brutal as the Chicoms...yet.
misshestermoffitt
New Member
What a sad world we live in. Corporate interests are ahead of human rights. I'm ashamed for her.
You know, the Clintons paid 5 million in taxes last year, how much money do you have to be bringing in to owe 5 million in taxes? I wonder who is funding her lifestyle?
You know, the Clintons paid 5 million in taxes last year, how much money do you have to be bringing in to owe 5 million in taxes? I wonder who is funding her lifestyle?
medicineman
New Member
Please tell me what is new about this.
And what is so horrible with this statement.
The United States will continue to press China on issues such as Tibet, Taiwan and human rights, she told reporters accompanying her.
"But our pressing on those issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises," she said.
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
I'm not happy at all with the Obama administration and the human rights issue ... seems they plan to carry on where the bush regime left off ... do we have to charge him with war crimes as well? This is why the dims were going along when they made illegal things supposedly legal ... but not under international law. They can't get around that. This is why it is so important to prosecute war criminals ... if we don't the shit will keep happening and will get worst.
Check it out ... I'm not the only one upset ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/22/obamas-refusal-to-reverse_n_168952.htmlObama's Refusal To Reverse Bush Policy In Afghanistan Angers Human Rights Groups
Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed "Obama's Guantanamo".
Sadly, Obama's claims for "change" were nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the misdirection of a magnificently articulate salesman.MR WRH
Cut the bullshit Vi ... don't make it sound like the dims are the only evil ones ... the repukes are neck and neck or ahead of the dims in that regard. Both corporate parties are bend on destroying america
Check it out ... I'm not the only one upset ...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/22/obamas-refusal-to-reverse_n_168952.htmlObama's Refusal To Reverse Bush Policy In Afghanistan Angers Human Rights Groups
Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed "Obama's Guantanamo".
Sadly, Obama's claims for "change" were nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the misdirection of a magnificently articulate salesman.MR WRH
Cut the bullshit Vi ... don't make it sound like the dims are the only evil ones ... the repukes are neck and neck or ahead of the dims in that regard. Both corporate parties are bend on destroying america
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
The only thing you'd be happy with is if Obama asked you personally to assume the position.I'm not happy at all with the Obama administration and the human rights issue ... seems they plan to carry on where the bush regime left off ... do we have to charge him with war crimes as well? This is why the dims were going along when they made illegal things supposedly legal ... but not under international law. They can't get around that. This is why it is so important to prosecute war criminals ... if we don't the shit will keep happening and will get worst.
Obama's Refusal To Reverse Bush Policy In Afghanistan Angers Human Rights Groups
Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed "Obama's Guantanamo".
Sadly, Obama's claims for "change" were nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the misdirection of a magnificently articulate salesman.MR WRH
Cut the bullshit Vi ... don't make it sound like the dims are the only evil ones ... the repukes are neck and neck or ahead of the dims in that regard. Both corporate parties are bend on destroying america
The Taxpayers are getting raped and your carrying on about human rights, in CHINA.
Besides, it certainly does make more sense to worry about getting the global economy back on track. Who cares if some one's going to die either due to slow starvation due to not having a job, or at the hands of an oppressive government. They'll be dead either fucking way.
misshestermoffitt
New Member
It's a domino effect, first poor people in China have no rights, then it drifts over here, and suddenly we have no human rights either. Look farther ahead at the larger picture.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
It's not even a matter of human rights, it's a matter of setting priorities Miss.
Priority One : Getting the Economy working.
I think I explained why in the last post, but I'll repeat on why it makes sense. Human Rights doesn't matter if the other alternative to being killed by an oppressive state regime is to starve due to a lack of income.
Either way you are just as dead.
Priority Two : The Liberals can go back to being themselves.
medicineman
New Member
Priority Two : The Liberals can go back to being themselves.
Well thanks TBT, you are so generous.
Well thanks TBT, you are so generous.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Well, the alternative is letting liberals continue to be themselves and making China some kind of big issue, and then wondering how long it'll be before you end up in a shanty town in Vegas if we just ignore the economy and focus on human rights.
I personally would sooner rather have the economy running smoothly again. That's a more stressful item than if China is treating their citizens properly.
So, like I said
Priority 1: Economy - not that Obama's going about it the right way... We aren't going to be able to just spend our ways out of this. Japan's tried and failed miserably and all they got to show for it was a debt that's 150% their GDP.
Priority 2: The Other Issues... (Like Liberals being themselves, that is complete and absolute traitors to the Republic.)
ViRedd
New Member
With Med being in first position, you have to be the second biggest idiot posting in this forum.
For the last ... and the upteenth time, speaking out against the misdirected policies of the progressives in the Democrat Party, in no way makes one a supporter of the progressives in the Republican Party.
Get a freakin' clue!
Vi
misshestermoffitt
New Member
If countries are allowed to violate peoples human right for the sake of the economy, where is the line drawn?
It's coming right back around to greed, "who can I screw to get mine?"
So TBT, you've bitched about the economy making it hard for you, you said in another thread if things don't straighten out you'll have to "move back home". So let's say you do have to move back home, should we violate your humans rights, since you aren't producing anything? I mean really, if someone has a job and you don't, do you still count? Are you still human? Do you still need food and water and shelter?
Also, what human rights are they wanting to violate for the sake of the economy? Are they going to start pumping their products full of poison again? Just to keep them cheap and try to make a sale?
The basic rights of many should come before the greed of a few.
It's coming right back around to greed, "who can I screw to get mine?"
So TBT, you've bitched about the economy making it hard for you, you said in another thread if things don't straighten out you'll have to "move back home". So let's say you do have to move back home, should we violate your humans rights, since you aren't producing anything? I mean really, if someone has a job and you don't, do you still count? Are you still human? Do you still need food and water and shelter?
Also, what human rights are they wanting to violate for the sake of the economy? Are they going to start pumping their products full of poison again? Just to keep them cheap and try to make a sale?
The basic rights of many should come before the greed of a few.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
God you really are dense as a castle wall at times.
Who made this thread so I can cuss them out for their stupidity, and lack of reading comprehension along with you, Miss?
The problem with your views is that you're assuming that what goes on in China actually fucking matters. People like you bitch and whine consistently about how we're in Iraq and then go and make hypocrites out of yourselves by obsessing over the internal politics of a independent sovereign nation.
It's none of our fucking business.
Here, repeat it with me.
It's none of our FUCKING business.
Maybe I should add onto that (in addition to repeating it again.)
It's none of our fucking business what other nations are doing inside their borders.
It goes beyond just not being any of our business, worrying about what's going on in China right now is the height of stupidity.
Here, perhaps this analogy will explain it.
Do you worry about what's going on in your neighbor's house when your house is on fire?
Or, better yet, for any one that's ever flown. One of the things that they make clear is that if the oxygen masks deploy, your supposed to worry about your own first, and then help any one else that needs assistance so you don't pass out while trying to help them.
Common Knowledge, why is it so hard for liberals to apply it?
misshestermoffitt
New Member
So let's say they take all these poor chinese people and chop them up and turn them into canned goods and then ship them over here for sale. Is it our fucking business then? Are you forgetting pretty much everything here in the stores is made there? What if they used dehydrated chinaman in the pill factories?
Everything is everyones business. Long beyond the length of your own arm and see the bigger picture. It starts there and never ends.
When the Nazis came for the Communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a Social Democrat.
When they came for the Trade Unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Trade Unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Everything is everyones business. Long beyond the length of your own arm and see the bigger picture. It starts there and never ends.
When the Nazis came for the Communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a Social Democrat.
When they came for the Trade Unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Trade Unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.