Jump to content
Male HQ

Western media - to believe or not to believe


Guest

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Blow away said:

Please brush up on your knowledge of history before we can talk about the same thing. 
 

China being expansionist and US no? This will be the biggest joke of the century. 

 

If you want to look at history,  no place on the surface of the earth has been free of territorial conflicts, and no Higher Authority has assigned any land to any people.

 

An exception seems to exist, and this is the Land of Canaan that the God of Abraham gave to the Jews at an unknown biblical time around the time of the Exodus.  But this Act of God is only believed by the Jews, and there are no formal papers of the assignment of the land.  The Canaanites, who lost their land to the Jews, didn't believe that there was a GOD who dictated this.  And all humanity except the Jews believe the same.  Might have been an allegory, a fairy tale.

 

IN CONTEMPORARY TIMES  I don' know any serious conflicts America has with other countries over land.  No disputes that threaten military action.

 

Very different is the situation with China and the sea at its south.  Serious disputes exist of China with Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, and a couple of other Asian countries.  China is claiming against international law some sovereignty over this South China Sea.  Here China is the bully threatening the smaller countries with military confrontations.  China is building artificial islands in this sea at a record peace,  and filling them with military facilities.  It claims naval authority, which the US does not recognize because... there is no reason to recognize it.    Isn't this a much, much more belligerent attitude of China than the US?   And China has other serious disputes with bordering countries.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Blow away said:

 

If you don’t see that, please study the body language of the officials as well as the little things such as Sullivan passing a note to Blinken while Wang Yi was still talking. Or read the comments of some observant posters on YouTube.

 

 

I will pass on this study of body language.  I am still saturated with the body language of Harry and Meghan Markle.  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is a lot of change in the 1500s. fristly the decline of the mongol empire force them to promote islam, meanwhile in china the introduction of christianity due to the arrival of europeans.

siamese used to rule south east asian part of the continent melaka was due to an invasion of a fallen kingdom in sumatra too. to gain protection from chinese muslim admiral, they surrender themselves to become a vessel state and pay tribute in gold to ming china, and convert to islam to favor cheng ho. while all these are happening the renaissance period and culture started in europe. the focus in science and discovery cases the major shift from a religion oriented world to a science and technology world.

in those era, rules are very different. invasion and change of rulers are common, even in europe. the current system was mostly established after 2nd world war. PRC joins the UN only after US president visit to China and recognise PRC instead of ROC. which prompt many countries to join in with US. while GB was forced to recognise PRC as they revoke treaty signed unilaterally.

so if you ask me, all are crooks, read and analyse all info carefully as words usually have more than one meaning.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Curious
6 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

If you want to look at history,  no place on the surface of the earth has been free of territorial conflicts, and no Higher Authority has assigned any land to any people.

 

An exception seems to exist, and this is the Land of Canaan that the God of Abraham gave to the Jews at an unknown biblical time around the time of the Exodus.  But this Act of God is only believed by the Jews, and there are no formal papers of the assignment of the land.  The Canaanites, who lost their land to the Jews, didn't believe that there was a GOD who dictated this.  And all humanity except the Jews believe the same.  Might have been an allegory, a fairy tale.

If no higher Authority assigned land to any people, who actually has the right to any land? It is commonly agreed that the original peoples who lived on the land have a right to it. In that case, North America was owned by the North American Indian tribes, a people slaughtered by white English colonists who called themselves Americans and wanted to expand westwards into the Indian territories. Many Indians were massacred, many entered into treaties that were subsequently broken. Make America white was the theme of the time.

 

Who then had the right to the vast continent of Australia if not the native Aboriginal peoples who had lived there for more than 50,000 years? That is until the colonial British seized part of it and established penal colonies. Their degrading treatment of the Aboriginies over centuries was an absolute disgrace, one which resulted in a formal parliamentary apology recently.

 

Who had a right to The Philippines? The native tribes who had lived there for at least 3,000 years. With colonisation came the Butch, the British, the Spanish and the Americans, all claiming the islands as theirs.

 

Some group has to have been the first to own every piece of land on this earth. It was not and never has been a free-for-all grab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

If you want to look at history,  no place on the surface of the earth has been free of territorial conflicts, and no Higher Authority has assigned any land to any people.

 

An exception seems to exist, and this is the Land of Canaan that the God of Abraham gave to the Jews at an unknown biblical time around the time of the Exodus.  But this Act of God is only believed by the Jews, and there are no formal papers of the assignment of the land.  The Canaanites, who lost their land to the Jews, didn't believe that there was a GOD who dictated this.  And all humanity except the Jews believe the same.  Might have been an allegory, a fairy tale.

 

IN CONTEMPORARY TIMES  I don' know any serious conflicts America has with other countries over land.  No disputes that threaten military action.

 

Very different is the situation with China and the sea at its south.  Serious disputes exist of China with Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, and a couple of other Asian countries.  China is claiming against international law some sovereignty over this South China Sea.  Here China is the bully threatening the smaller countries with military confrontations.  China is building artificial islands in this sea at a record peace,  and filling them with military facilities.  It claims naval authority, which the US does not recognize because... there is no reason to recognize it.    Isn't this a much, much more belligerent attitude of China than the US?   And China has other serious disputes with bordering countries.   


You are confusing things here. China is not trying to attack any country here. It is having territorial disputes with her neighbours no doubt. 
 

Historical facts have shown that the US is at war with many countries for 95% of the time since it’s independence and yet you have totally ignored it. 
 

Please refer to some of the earlier posts that have listed those military attacks launched by US. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

If you want to look at history,  no place on the surface of the earth has been free of territorial conflicts, and no Higher Authority has assigned any land to any people.

 

An exception seems to exist, and this is the Land of Canaan that the God of Abraham gave to the Jews at an unknown biblical time around the time of the Exodus.  But this Act of God is only believed by the Jews, and there are no formal papers of the assignment of the land.  The Canaanites, who lost their land to the Jews, didn't believe that there was a GOD who dictated this.  And all humanity except the Jews believe the same.  Might have been an allegory, a fairy tale.

 

IN CONTEMPORARY TIMES  I don' know any serious conflicts America has with other countries over land.  No disputes that threaten military action.

 

Very different is the situation with China and the sea at its south.  Serious disputes exist of China with Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, and a couple of other Asian countries.  China is claiming against international law some sovereignty over this South China Sea.  Here China is the bully threatening the smaller countries with military confrontations.  China is building artificial islands in this sea at a record peace,  and filling them with military facilities.  It claims naval authority, which the US does not recognize because... there is no reason to recognize it.    Isn't this a much, much more belligerent attitude of China than the US?   And China has other serious disputes with bordering countries.   

Please explain why the US invaded Iraq?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

 

Do you know that the attack was never sanctioned by the UN and the evidence presented by the US turned out to be false?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Curious
22 minutes ago, Blow away said:

Please explain why the US invaded Iraq?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

 

Do you know that the attack was never sanctioned by the UN and the evidence presented by the US turned out to be false?

It was not just false - it was manufactured. Bush Jnr and his neocon ultra conservative right wingers were desperate to get rid of Saddam Hussein. They did not let the UN mission to Iraq complete its findings because it knew that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. If that had been made public, Congress would never have agreed to war.

 

Even worse than going to war and killing 600,000 plus Iraqis was that the US was totally unprepared to govern the country after it had toppled Saddam. It placed the cigar chomping, cowboy boots wearing Paul Bremer, a man who had not been in government for 14 years and with zero experience of Iraq, in charge. His first orders were to ban Saddam's Ba'ath Party and, worse still, disband the Iraqi army. That directly led to the creation of Al Qaeda. So the US government had learned absolutely nothing from its illegal intervention in Iran in the 1950s which directly gave rise to the Ayatollah Khomeini. These and other US actions certainly destabilised the Middle East.

 

One reason widely touted for the disastrous Bush escapade in Iraq was allegedly to bring democracy to the Middle East. What a disaster that has been! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Guest Guest Curious said:

It was not just false - it was manufactured. Bush Jnr and his neocon ultra conservative right wingers were desperate to get rid of Saddam Hussein. They did not let the UN mission to Iraq complete its findings because it knew that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. If that had been made public, Congress would never have agreed to war.

 

Even worse than going to war and killing 600,000 plus Iraqis was that the US was totally unprepared to govern the country after it had toppled Saddam. It placed the cigar chomping, cowboy boots wearing Paul Bremer, a man who had not been in government for 14 years and with zero experience of Iraq, in charge. His first orders were to ban Saddam's Ba'ath Party and, worse still, disband the Iraqi army. That directly led to the creation of Al Qaeda. So the US government had learned absolutely nothing from its illegal intervention in Iran in the 1950s which directly gave rise to the Ayatollah Khomeini. These and other US actions certainly destabilised the Middle East.

 

One reason widely touted for the disastrous Bush escapade in Iraq was allegedly to bring democracy to the Middle East. What a disaster that has been! 


https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/28/iraq.usa

 

There will never be any reason for any country to invade another country unless there is something to benefit from the invasion.

 

let’s all stop being naive that it’s for the sake of democracy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Guest Guest Curious said:

 

If no higher Authority assigned land to any people, who actually has the right to any land? It is commonly agreed that the original peoples who lived on the land have a right to it. In that case, North America was owned by the North American Indian tribes, a people slaughtered by white English colonists who called themselves Americans and wanted to expand westwards into the Indian territories. Many Indians were massacred, many entered into treaties that were subsequently broken. Make America white was the theme of the time.

 

 

There might not be an agreement about "original peoples".   Simply because the definition of "original" is elusive.

 

There is no doubt that ALL the known land on this planet WAS TAKEN by people.  And surely not in a very formal way, like sold and bought. There were no original owners. The American Indian were surely not the "original people",  they came after some other people.  The same as the Australian natives,  and even prehistoric tribes. 

 

Today, the recognition of land ownership should not be based on "original owner" but on stability. On which people have lived on the land in modern times,  going back to a limited number of generations.  And what guarantees this recognition?   Only military power and some good will of nations to avoid wars.

 

4 hours ago, Blow away said:


https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/28/iraq.usa

 

There will never be any reason for any country to invade another country unless there is something to benefit from the invasion.

 

let’s all stop being naive that it’s for the sake of democracy. 

 

You are right that there should be a benefit to be drawn from the invasion of another country.  But the benefit does not need to come to the invader.  

 

You don't need to yield to the common cynicism.  America also got into conflicts for the benefit of the world community.  Remember that America DID NOT colonize Iraq and did not take its oil.  (this was Trump's idea).  And the regime of Saddam Hussein was not a benefit to humanity.   Didn't he invade Kuwait,  and on his way out he had all the Kuwait oil field torched?   This was an environmental catastrophe, and it took a lot of expert work to control these blown-out oil wells and put out the flames.  The only positive of Saddam Hussein is that he brought stability to the region, and he gave pride to the Arab world.  He definitely was preferable (for a while) than what came after him.

 

It was the malice, malevolence, deception and lying of the members of the conservative GOP who deserve ALL the blame.  G.W. Bush was a pitiful puppet in their hands.  They tricked America, the country they were controlling, into a belief that the war was necessary.  And the rest is history.

 

The Iraq war is grand part of my total repudiation of the US republican party, the GOP.  Another big chunk of it is that they brought Trump to power.  I am now and will be for a good time a complete opponent of the GOP party.    This does not mean that I endorse the Democrats unconditionally, but I see these as "the least evil".  And this is also a reason that I don't worry about "illegal immigration" and the huge influx of refugees from Central America and Mexico.  These ones are good people,  a little lazy and not fully educated,  but good natured and raised in a religion I consider among the best,  Catholicism, Christianity.  These Latinos are not very competent by themselves, we see how bad the governments are in Mexico and all Latin America.  But as a minority in this multicultural nation America,  they are productive and mostly trouble free. Their big gift could be that by their numbers they reduce the white-supremacist and other supremacist Republicans to another minority!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Curious
13 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

There might not be an agreement about "original peoples".   Simply because the definition of "original" is elusive.

 

There is no doubt that ALL the known land on this planet WAS TAKEN by people.  And surely not in a very formal way, like sold and bought. There were no original owners. The American Indian were surely not the "original people",  they came after some other people.  The same as the Australian natives,  and even prehistoric tribes. 

There you go again trying to teach English. Definitions! 

 

That land should be "owned" in a formal way by being sold and bought with pieces of paper as proof is just outright silly. I defy you to find any original owners that way,

 

If the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines were not the "original" people, who were? Name some. Delve into wikipedia and tell us. I can tell you some. The dinosaurs.

 

13 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Today, the recognition of land ownership should not be based on "original owner" but on stability. On which people have lived on the land in modern times,  going back to a limited number of generations.  And what guarantees this recognition?   Only military power and some good will of nations to avoid wars.

Land ownership should be based on stability???? Are you so ____ you really believe that? So you are happy for the tyrant Putin to rule the huge land mass that is Russia because he brings stability? What about China? That's a pretty stable country. Other countries will rightly rant and rave about Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan blah blah, but no one can argue it is not stable. And I guess you can call North Korea stable. After all it has not had an expansionist foreign policy  since the Korean War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Guest Guest Curious said:

 

If the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines were not the "original" people, who were? Name some. Delve into wikipedia and tell us. I can tell you some. The dinosaurs.

 

 

Since you are "Guest Curious,  your curiosity should lead you to investigate the "original people".  Stay tuned, it gets interesting!   The American Indians and the Australian Aborigines were  NOT the first, the original:

 

https://humanorigins.si.edu/education/introduction-human-evolution#:~:text=Humans first evolved in Africa,different species of early humans.

 

Humans first evolved in Africa, and much of human evolution occurred on that continent. The fossils of early humans who lived between 6 and 2 million years ago come entirely from Africa. Most scientists currently recognize some 15 to 20 different species of early humans.

 

So some other people "owned"  America and Australia before the Indians and Aborigines.  Did these bought the land from the previous owners?  This is doubtful  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

These ones are good people,  a little lazy and not fully educated,  but good natured and raised in a religion I consider among the best,  Catholicism, Christianity.  These Latinos are not very competent by themselves, we see how bad the governments are in Mexico and all Latin America. 

Sorry but what? You think people who travel hundreds of miles to risk taking their chances crossing into a country that will likely not welcome them with open arms are ‘a little lazy’? And do countries with bad governments mean that all people from these countries ‘not very competent by themselves’? If so, please let some of the ASEAN neighbors know your feelings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
On 3/19/2021 at 4:27 PM, Blow away said:

Please don’t say I love China. 

 

On 3/19/2021 at 7:33 PM, Blow away said:

 

When you wrote things like I am garnering support for China it just weakens your reasoning. All I did was to show how western media is bias and hypocritical. It just happened that China is their whipping boy now. Me exposing western media and me garnering support for China are 2 different issues. Please do not make things up. China doesn’t need my support or yours. Its economy will surpass US in a matter of years with or without our support. 

 

 

For someone who wants to claim that he is not trying to garner support for China and told people not to say that he loves China as in the way above, he sure has a lt of things to say about China to (exactly) garner support for China n the posts below ... 

 

 

On 3/18/2021 at 11:51 PM, Blow away said:

 

As for fake news by China, the (un)fortunate thing is that most people outside of China don’t read Chinese so they are less exposed to Chinese fake news.

(Excuse me ... how is this "unfortunate"? 

 

On 3/19/2021 at 12:55 AM, Blow away said:

The world sans the US and its alliance actually welcomes a China that breaks the US hegemony. 

(Excuse me ... are you speaking for the "world" now?  How is this not garnering support for China? 

 

On 3/19/2021 at 4:19 PM, Blow away said:

 

1. Trade war was started by USA. (Excuse me ... and why did USA do that??)  

2. Australia benefitted economically from trading with China yet tried the hardest to punish China in the political arena. What China is doing is understandable. (But of course very wrong to Australia. How dare China not buy things from us and let us condemn them at the same time!)  (Is Australia part of the "world" supportive of China?) 

 

3. Where Hong Kong and Taiwan are concerned, if you have no sense of history and the manipulative ways of the Weetern powers, then your views are biased. I agree that it’s internal affairs. Ultimately Hong Kong is part of China and the Hong Kongers have to accept that either China becomes a democracy or Hong Kong becomes part of the a communist regime. If they cannot change China to become democracy, then the only option for them is to migrate. (The riots were started by HK themselves. And you are using the West as whipping boys now? )

 

 

 

On 3/19/2021 at 4:39 PM, Blow away said:

.

all this talk about China being a threat to global order is bullshit. Check out the well established fact that out of 243 years of independence, US has spent 225 years at war. 

https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/www.thenews.com.pk/amp/595752-the-us-has-been-at-war-225-out-of-243-years-since-1776

 

who is the real bully? Who is a threat to global peace? 

 

one just needs to open their eyes to see. But first take off the tinted lens. (Who is having tinted lenses now?) Anyway, I'd let the rest of the forumers see for themselves how some China-supporters are now infiltrating this forum now, and the type of lies and propaganda they are trying to spread to garner support for China nowadays)

 

 

 

On 3/20/2021 at 11:45 AM, Blow away said:


Actually this does show something. Those who understand only English will have no access to the perspectives of those who use Chinese exclusively. This is why it is important that the mass media be as objective and less bias as possible.

 

Unfortunately the western media is not doing a very good job where China is concerned now.

 

On 3/21/2021 at 6:58 AM, Blow away said:

The post was taken from a comment found in this video

 

Many people have no knowledge and respect for history. In the case of Singapore, we only to study Singapore and Malaysia history in secondary school. After that we don’t have to study history. So most Singaporeans don’t know world history. It’s very obvious when you read the posts of some posters here.

 

I (and some posters) have used historical facts to show you that China is not expansionist and US is the one that is a threat to global peace. The western media have ignored history and created much fake news to portray China as aggressive and expansionist.

 

I would love to hear some facts and evidence from you that don’t come from western fake media to revise my idea of how China is expansionist and US is not. 

 

On 3/21/2021 at 7:13 AM, Blow away said:

I am going to say once and for all how ignorant and disrespectful (to history) to say that China was expansionist in wanting to conquer Hong Kong. It just shows how successful the western (fake) media in twisting people’s minds. 
 

Hong Kong has always been part of China. 
 

it was the British who attacked China in opium war. Why? Cos China refused to let it sell opium to Chinese and make obscene profits while Chinese die from addiction. 
 

But China lost the war and Hong Kong was ceded to Britain.

 

Was the British interested in turning HK into a democracy. No. It was only interested in making money out of HK and China thru HK.

 

When it was time to return HK to China, that was when they started to plot against China by using HK as a pawn to cause trouble for China.

 

What China has done is to simply prevent the interference from the western powers to destabilise China through Hong Kong.

 

All this fight for democracy in HK is just a facade. How come they didnt fight for democracy when HK was still under UK? It only became fervent after it was returned to China. 

 

On 3/21/2021 at 7:40 AM, Blow away said:

When I started this thread, I only wanted to show the biggest fake news producer is the western media. Yes all countries including Singapore and China produce fake news. But the west being the greatest power now is the greatest news producer.

 

As the power shifts from the west to the east, the west media needs to create more fake news to prevent the shift. So it’s no surprise that China is now bashed most and also most misunderstood.

 

But like the saying goes, evil will never win righteousness. So in the end, China will return to supremacy. It’s GDP is expected to double in 15 years. 
 

Then someone here says I am garnering support for China. It will be hard to engage in any form of meaningful discussion with him/her. When someone chooses to stoop to getting personal, you know that they have no knowledge of history or evidence to back up what they want to say. They will end up doing name calling.

 

What I have written has nothing to do with I love China or not. I am merely laying down historical facts and current affairs (with the help of some posters here) and helping people to see beyond the fake news from the western media. 
 

Surely if you are going to have children you would want them to learn Chinese well. If you think of doing business you would want to do business in China. 

 

To get personal and say that China is evil so I will not speak Chinese or use made in China products is stupidity of the highest order.

 

On 3/21/2021 at 8:23 AM, Blow away said:

I know i am going nonstop about this but take a closer look. It has a lot of significances and impact on future global politics.

 

(It’s very fun when you think of how politicians apply the art of war on negotiations. Yang did an amazing job here.)

 

It is the first time the whole world gets to see with their own eyes the confrontation between China and US. In this case the western media has little room for fake news as everyone can see for themselves as long as they have internet access.

 

And what do we see? A brash and confident China that does not play to the script of the US. A less confident and less sure US that turned from offensive to defensive in a matter of minutes.

 

If you don’t see that, please study the body language of the officials as well as the little things such as Sullivan passing a note to Blinken while Wang Yi was still talking. Or read the comments of some observant posters on YouTube.

 

China will actually become more popular on global political stage amongst the developing countries especially those bullied by the US. 

 

Those who hate China will hate it even more.

 

 

 

22 hours ago, Blow away said:


You are confusing things here. China is not trying to attack any country here. It is having territorial disputes with her neighbours no doubt. 
 

Historical facts have shown that the US is at war with many countries for 95% of the time since it’s independence and yet you have totally ignored it. 
 

Please refer to some of the earlier posts that have listed those military attacks launched by US. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
22 hours ago, Blow away said:

Please explain why the US invaded Iraq?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

 

Do you know that the attack was never sanctioned by the UN and the evidence presented by the US turned out to be false?

 

 

World Report 2020: China’s Global Threat to Human Rights | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)

 

Everything you need to know about human rights in China | Amnesty International | Amnesty International

 

EU Prepares China Sanctions Over Human Rights Abuses - Bloomberg

 

Human rights in China - Wikipedia 

 

 

 

People living in glass houses really should not be throwing stones. 

 

Rock Houses, Throwing Glass! - GIF on Imgur

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Curious
2 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

So some other people "owned"  America and Australia before the Indians and Aborigines.  Did these bought the land from the previous owners?  This is doubtful  :lol:

Since you are so precise in wanting others to speak good English, let me give you a brief lesson - did these BUY the land or HAD they bought they land? Clear?

 

That link you kindly provided clearly points out that humans "first came to Australia probably within the past 60,000 years."  And who are the descendants of these first humans in Australia, the ones you say should have a piece of paper confirming their right to ownership of the land on the ground of stability? The following link makes clear there were probably around 500 indigenous peoples in Australia starting 60,000 years ago.

 

Australian aboriginals are "the custodians of the world's most ancient living culture." Fact. At the time of British colonisation, there were at least 250 native languages spoken by aboriginal peoples in Australia. As with the native American Indians, they were not just one people or one tribe, but a great many.

 

On what basis did the British hold any right whatever to Australia and to make the native Aboriginal people second, third and fourth class citizens in their own country? Guns. Purely guns. And what were the other effects of colonisation on the native peoples other than stealing their lands? The same as the effect of the Spanish and Portuguese in Central and South America. To massacres from previously unknown diseases like smallpox, influenza and measles came outright sexual abuse by the colonisers and venereal diseases.

 

And you claim that land ownership should be based exclusively on stability. That, Mr. Steve5380 is patently a very unfunny  joke.

 

https://australianstogether.org.au/discover/australian-history/colonisation/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read and watch a multiple sources of news media on one topic.

A good news media would anyalsize the given data and let you make up your own mind.

Keep in mind that the information reported is only as accurate as what is available at any given time. 

It can change as more eye witnesses come out to confirm or refute.

 

Not all Western Media is wrong or Right.

They all make mistakes.

It's all about track record. Have they been consistently right or wrong? Which news media has built a reputation of being consistently correct? 

Learn to be more astute and read everything. Do not live in an echo chamber. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Polymerase
7 minutes ago, superflawless said:

Read and watch a multiple sources of news media on one topic.

A good news media would anyalsize the given data and let you make up your own mind.

Keep in mind that the information reported is only as accurate as what is available at any given time. 

It can change as more eye witnesses come out to confirm or refute.

 

Not all Western Media is wrong or Right.

They all make mistakes.

It's all about track record. Have they been consistently right or wrong? Which news media has built a reputation of being consistently correct? 

Learn to be more astute and read everything. Do not live in an echo chamber. 

Kudos to you for bringing in some sensibility amidst all this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, superflawless said:

Read and watch a multiple sources of news media on one topic.

A good news media would anyalsize the given data and let you make up your own mind.

Keep in mind that the information reported is only as accurate as what is available at any given time. 

It can change as more eye witnesses come out to confirm or refute.

 

Not all Western Media is wrong or Right.

They all make mistakes.

It's all about track record. Have they been consistently right or wrong? Which news media has built a reputation of being consistently correct? 

Learn to be more astute and read everything. Do not live in an echo chamber. 

 

1 hour ago, Guest Polymerase said:

Kudos to you for bringing in some sensibility amidst all this nonsense.

 

Amen to you two! The rest of the discussion here is utterly ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Guest Wtf said:

Sorry but what? You think people who travel hundreds of miles to risk taking their chances crossing into a country that will likely not welcome them with open arms are ‘a little lazy’? And do countries with bad governments mean that all people from these countries ‘not very competent by themselves’? If so, please let some of the ASEAN neighbors know your feelings. 

 

WTF,  how many Hispanics do you know personally?   I bet that I know more than you do :lol:

 

When you generalize, you always leave out people from both extremes of the probability distribution curve.  Contemporary history of the governments in south and central American nations will confirm what I wrote.  Those who undertook the perils of the travel from their original countries to the US border are the more capable, the same as the Cubans who escaping Castro came into the US are also among the more competent.  But my early generalization was about the average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
On 3/19/2021 at 12:55 AM, Blow away said:

The world sans the US and its alliance actually welcomes a China that breaks the US hegemony. 

 

EU agrees China sanctions over Xinjiang abuses; first in three decades

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-china-sanctions-idUSKBN2BE1AI

 

EU just imposed an entire list of sanctions against China. So much for the world which welcomes a China that breaks whatever US hegemony. ROFLMAO. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

EU agrees China sanctions over Xinjiang abuses; first in three decades

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-china-sanctions-idUSKBN2BE1AI

 

EU just imposed an entire list of sanctions against China. So much for the world which welcomes a China that breaks whatever US hegemony. ROFLMAO. 

 

I do agree with many forummers here that it’s no point discussing anything with anon guests such as this person here. This will be my last time replying to her.

 

When someone lacks general knowledge, it’s very hard to engage in any serious intellectual discussion.

 

The world has 7 continents and 195 countries. The US and Europe do not represent the world. 
 

Consider this

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=2115

 

The sanctions mentioned by this anonymous poster is just a slap on the wrist which only serves to highlight Europe’s position on human rights without having any real effects on their relationship with China.

 

Money still speaks louder in this capitalistic world led by the west. 

 

Australia is now suffering from the trade sanctions by China.
 

The only way to defeat China is for the US to combine forces with Europe to build military, technological and economic strengths and form something bigger than EU so that it can decouple from China totally. 
 

US tried to do that with South Korea and Japan but failed.

 

It’s now trying to do that with Europe but may only succeed on ideological front.

 

Again, it’s nothing to do with anyone or any country loving or hating China. It’s all about pragmatism. Whether you hate China or not, you still use made in China products everyday. 
 

Every country just wants to prosper and working with rather than against China is still a sensible thing to do.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interpretations and opinions remain just that but facts speak for themselves.

 

Nearly Twice As Many Countries Support China's Human Rights Policies Than Are Against It

 

https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/which-countries-support-china-on-hong-kongs-national-security-law/


https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2021/03/06/70-countries-extend-support-to-china-on-hk-policy-at-un-human-rights-council

 

https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/70-un-nations-support-china-human-rights-policies-1537327%3famp=1

 

Based on facts and figures alone, it’s the west and Japan alone who are going after China’s throat.

 

But they will never succeed as China receives overwhelming support from developing countries.

 

I am not expressing opinions on whether China has excellent human rights records where Xinjiang is concerned as I have never gone there or made any study. I am not in any position to make any comment here.

 

What China is doing now is to draw everyone’s attention to US poor human rights records and it having no rights to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs. It is this that is much supported by other countries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Blow away said:

 

What China is doing now is to draw everyone’s attention to US poor human rights records and it having no rights to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs. It is this that is much supported by other countries. 

 

 

But the US does not have poor human rights records.  You may confuse this with some racism that frequently pops up,  like revealed by the movement "black lives matter".

 

There is racism everywhere.  But the reason it pops up in the US is that people have the personal freedom to expose it.  And the media has the freedom to expose it too.  China has plenty of racism against Africans and Uyghurs, but this is not openly discussed in China.  China lacks laws against racial discrimination.

 

In contrast, America has done and is doing great things against discrimination.  The Black slaves were emancipated centuries ago,  much discrimination against them was eliminated many decades ago by the civil rights movement after Martin Luther King,  and today the democrats are looking into extending laws that protect Blacks from racism.  The American Indians,  maybe an equivalent to the Uyghurs in China, were given their lands in reservations.   This is different from South America where the Indians were just dispossessed of everything and killed.  So the Blacks are every time more protected,  same with the American Indians, and soon the Asians as well.  There are strong anti-discrimination laws that protect minorities and as of late, LGBTQs as well.    Are laws in China protecting LGBTQs? 

 

I am so proud of America's progress in human rights.  There are Blacks in important government positions now like never before.  In the two gyms where I work out there is always a preponderance of Blacks, and they are accepted no less than the Whites.   So much for the internal human rights in America.

 

About America's interference in other countries' internal affairs,  this is perfectly acceptable and is not different from what other countries do.  Didn't Russia and China interfered in the US elections?  Doesn't China and Russia launch cyber attacks against  America,  China to steal technology and intellectual property, and Russia to create chaos?

.

 

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Blow away said:

Interpretations and opinions remain just that but facts speak for themselves.

 

Nearly Twice As Many Countries Support China's Human Rights Policies Than Are Against It

 

https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/which-countries-support-china-on-hong-kongs-national-security-law/


https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2021/03/06/70-countries-extend-support-to-china-on-hk-policy-at-un-human-rights-council

 

https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/70-un-nations-support-china-human-rights-policies-1537327%3famp=1

 

Based on facts and figures alone, it’s the west and Japan alone who are going after China’s throat.

 

But they will never succeed as China receives overwhelming support from developing countries.

 

I am not expressing opinions on whether China has excellent human rights records where Xinjiang is concerned as I have never gone there or made any study. I am not in any position to make any comment here.

 

What China is doing now is to draw everyone’s attention to US poor human rights records and it having no rights to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs. It is this that is much supported by other countries. 

If you want to talk facts and figures, can you please improve your numeracy skills - 54 is nowhere near twice as many as 39. These are the numbers in the Diplomat article, which also notes that the majority of the support from China came from the Middle East and African countries - this doesn’t leave only ‘the west and Japan alone going after China’s throat’ (totally neutral and balanced statement from you there lol), which was somehow another conclusion you drew.
 

Before talking about media distortion, you should perhaps look at the accuracy of your own statements in this thread, many of which are generalisations, distortions or overly emotional arguments. All of which you are entitled to make but not from the position that your opinion is the ‘truth’ here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2021 at 11:45 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

But the US does not have poor human rights records.  You may confuse this with some racism that frequently pops up,  like revealed by the movement "black lives matter".

 

There is racism everywhere.  But the reason it pops up in the US is that people have the personal freedom to expose it.  And the media has the freedom to expose it too.  China has plenty of racism against Africans and Uyghurs, but this is not openly discussed in China.  China lacks laws against racial discrimination.

 

In contrast, America has done and is doing great things against discrimination.  The Black slaves were emancipated centuries ago,  much discrimination against them was eliminated many decades ago by the civil rights movement after Martin Luther King,  and today the democrats are looking into extending laws that protect Blacks from racism.  The American Indians,  maybe an equivalent to the Uyghurs in China, were given their lands in reservations.   This is different from South America where the Indians were just dispossessed of everything and killed.  So the Blacks are every time more protected,  same with the American Indians, and soon the Asians as well.  There are strong anti-discrimination laws that protect minorities and as of late, LGBTQs as well.    Are laws in China protecting LGBTQs? 

 

I am so proud of America's progress in human rights.  There are Blacks in important government positions now like never before.  In the two gyms where I work out there is always a preponderance of Blacks, and they are accepted no less than the Whites.   So much for the internal human rights in America.

 

About America's interference in other countries' internal affairs,  this is perfectly acceptable and is not different from what other countries do.  Didn't Russia and China interfered in the US elections?  Doesn't China and Russia launch cyber attacks against  America,  China to steal technology and intellectual property, and Russia to create chaos?

.

 


have you watched this Steve?

 

what do you make out of this? It would be interesting to hear from your perspective as an American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest Curious
On 3/23/2021 at 10:45 AM, Steve5380 said:

But the US does not have poor human rights records.  You may confuse this with some racism that frequently pops up,  like revealed by the movement "black lives matter".

I suppose it takes an American to be completely blind to what goes on in America. What are human rights?

 

- the right of the population as a whole to have a worse education record than Vietnam, the desperately poor country which won the 20 years war against the mighty USA?

- a citizenship where 38 million have to be given food stamps to survive?

- a country where it costs people an arm and a leg to get medical treatment if they are not in employment with medical benefits or cannot afford horrendously high insurance premiums or massive deductibles?

- a country where gun massacres are common and there are far more guns in private hands than in any other civilised country in the world?

- a country where no one can run for political office unless they have access to millions of dollars?

- a country which cannot make up its mind about immigrants and when and if they should be permitted to become citizens?

- a country where anyone can set up a cult, call it a religion, get often poor people to buy into their idiotic dogmas and still have to pay no taxes to the federal government?

- a country which has over 36% of the population clinically obese and a further 32% overweight?

- a country where "black lives matter" only because for centuries black lives did not matter, where the millions of individuals who made the economy work were many millions of individuals were bought and sold as slaves, subject to public lynchings, forced separation on buses in cafes, toilets and many other public places?

 

America has a poor civil rights record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mistrust is the wrong

If you intend to generally mistrust any  Western media, then you probably run into problems. Mistrust is probably the wrong approach.

 

You  must verify where the media stands.

 

There are still quite some mainstream centered media in the US. Not all have this left or right bias on them.

 

Surely, the New York Times is pushing more on the left side, but media like the Wall Street journal or The USA Today are still very much centered.

But need to admit, the New York Times does good reporting, meaning it covers a lot of the issues in the US.

However, I would "counter-read" on issues from different sources like the mentioned more centered too.

 

I personally read different news outlets from different countries in Europe and US. Then draw your conclusions.

 

While a newspaper like Le Monde is more left leaning, the Frankfurter Allgemeine is more right leaning.

 

The Guardian (UK) might me more centered left and Europe friendly than others but still it is good reporting on what happens.

But the Fox media from UK, I wouldn't trust it. Least in the US.

 

Get a good mix of reliable media, which are known to be more centered.

 

Even the best reporting can turn out to be wrong. That has always been.

What I noted the past 10 years is, many outlets take sources from the news feeds, and that is often not reliable.

With the fast speed at the world the media is running on such "information", many news then comes with a bias, because who is pushing certain

contents. You would not know.

 

For Asia, I guess there is nothing reliable at all because the media is mostly linked to the government.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Guest Guest Curious said:

I suppose it takes an American to be completely blind to what goes on in America. What are human rights?

 

- the right of the population as a whole to have a worse education record than Vietnam, the desperately poor country which won the 20 years war against the mighty USA?

- a citizenship where 38 million have to be given food stamps to survive?

- a country where it costs people an arm and a leg to get medical treatment if they are not in employment with medical benefits or cannot afford horrendously high insurance premiums or massive deductibles?

- a country where gun massacres are common and there are far more guns in private hands than in any other civilised country in the world?

- a country where no one can run for political office unless they have access to millions of dollars?

- a country which cannot make up its mind about immigrants and when and if they should be permitted to become citizens?

- a country where anyone can set up a cult, call it a religion, get often poor people to buy into their idiotic dogmas and still have to pay no taxes to the federal government?

- a country which has over 36% of the population clinically obese and a further 32% overweight?

- a country where "black lives matter" only because for centuries black lives did not matter, where the millions of individuals who made the economy work were many millions of individuals were bought and sold as slaves, subject to public lynchings, forced separation on buses in cafes, toilets and many other public places?

 

America has a poor civil rights record.

 

You are completely wrong in your last phrase.  You are also wrong in thinking that we Americans are completely blind to what is going on.

 

There are many things to criticize America over.  But you are bunching everything under "human rights", which is completely wrong.

 

Since when is it to give free food to those in need against "human rights"?  Maybe the "right" to die of starvation?

And "making up its mind about immigration"?   Singapore has much, much more stringent immigration requirements than the US.  And so many other countries.

Since when is obesity a violation of human rights?  Is there a natural right to be slim? 

Yes, there was slavery in America.  But contrary to many places where slavery was not a big deal it became a crisis in America.  And few countries have resolved and are continuing resolving this crisis better than the US.   

 

If America has a poor civil rights record,  then we have to admit that THE WHOLE WORLD has a poor civil rights record.  There are less civil rights in Singapore than in the US.

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guests hm

Interesting to note for this Guest Curious to always bump up with a post as soon as Steve 5380 wrote something at BW and tries to rebut his posts. 

It is too obvious.

 

Maybe he should change his nick from Curious to Notorious...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daring
5 hours ago, Guest Guest Curious said:

I suppose it takes an American to be completely blind to what goes on in America. What are human rights?

 

Quite daring for a Singaporean to write about Human Rights. 

 

Could you elaborate on the Human Rights situation in Singapore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Blow away said:


have you watched this Steve?

 

what do you make out of this? It would be interesting to hear from your perspective as an American.

 

I think that the title is wrong.  It should be instead:  "America has been having many crises, but it handles them well".

 

Look at the recent electoral crisis.  A totalitarian individual claimed that the election "was stolen",  and refused to concede the election.  But he was unsuccessful. Even authorities of his own GOP party dismissed his false allegations.  Only his extremist's followers supported him and they assaulted the Capitol trying to keep him in power.  This was a total failure,  and now Trump stands as a non convicted felon who failed at everything. 

 

The crises of the refugees from Latin countries will be resolved at the border soon, and hopefully at their countries of origin given the necessary time.  The crisis of the Dreamers will also be finally resolved.   The crisis of black lives wasted by police will also be solved.  

 

The resolution of the recent electoral crisis is the catalyst for resolving so many pending crisis created by the malignant government of the last 4 years. 

 

If you reflect a little, you will find that America does not have a lack of human rights,  of civil rights,  BUT JUST THE OPPOSITE.  There are TOO MANY civil rights. 

 

The abused right of Americans to bear arms is the main reason for all the frequent mass shootings.  This "right" is an evil leftover from the fights of independence.  It clashes tremendously with the right of every decent American NOT TO BE SHOT.

 

In all civilized countries,  children and teenagers are withheld civil rights until they are "adults".  Until then, they are under the supervision of their parents, who have the authority to determine what they should do.    IMAGINE a society where children older than 8 years, for example,  have the same rights as adults.  Schools would be left half empty if with students at all.  Children would be free to eat the worst junk foods and candy. Their teeth would decay for lack of care and their bellies would grow out like pregnant.  Any money that would fall into their hands would be spent in unnecessary consumer products that satisfy their fancy.   And their vote would be... totally infantile and influenced by the worst demagogues, deceivers, swindlers. (Trumps) 

 

You notice in the last paragraph so many similitudes with the attitudes of so many "adult" Americans?  Why is there obesity if not for lack of discipline?  Why was Trump elected by so many suckers?  Why is Miami Beach so overrun with young spring break revelers  (probably all adults) not wearing masks?   Maybe "adulthood" should be redefined as reached at 40 y.o.?  Or perhaps later?    Of course this is not possible,  but you notice the negative effect of too many abused civil rights.  And not only in America. 

 

And finally,  you don't hear of any crowds of refugees from America,  trying to escape their "lack of human rights". 

If they would exist, they would be overrun and trampled by the crowd who wants to get in!  :lol:

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I think that the title is wrong.  It should be instead:  "America has been having many crises, but it handles them well".

 

Look at the recent electoral crisis.  A totalitarian individual claimed that the election "was stolen",  and refused to concede the election.  But he was unsuccessful. Even authorities of his own GOP party dismissed his false allegations.  Only his extremist's followers supported him and they assaulted the Capitol trying to keep him in power.  This was a total failure,  and now Trump stands as a non convicted felon who failed at everything. 

 

The crises of the refugees from Latin countries will be resolved at the border soon, and hopefully at their countries of origin given the necessary time.  The crisis of the Dreamers will also be finally resolved.   The crisis of black lives wasted by police will also be solved.  

 

The resolution of the recent electoral crisis is the catalyst for resolving so many pending crisis created by the malignant government of the last 4 years. 

 

If you reflect a little, you will find that America does not have a lack of human rights,  of civil rights,  BUT JUST THE OPPOSITE.  There are TOO MANY civil rights. 

 

The abused right of Americans to bear arms is the main reason for all the frequent mass shootings.  This "right" is an evil leftover from the fights of independence.  It clashes tremendously with the right of every decent American NOT TO BE SHOT.

 

In all civilized countries,  children and teenagers are withheld civil rights until they are "adults".  Until then, they are under the supervision of their parents, who have the authority to determine what they should do.    IMAGINE a society where children older than 8 years, for example,  have the same rights as adults.  Schools would be left half empty if with students at all.  Children would be free to eat the worst junk foods and candy. Their teeth would decay for lack of care and their bellies would grow out like pregnant.  Any money that would fall into their hands would be spent in unnecessary consumer products that satisfy their fancy.   And their vote would be... totally infantile and influenced by the worst demagogues, deceivers, swindlers. (Trumps) 

 

You notice in the last paragraph so many similitudes with the attitudes of so many "adult" Americans?  Why is there obesity if not for lack of discipline?  Why was Trump elected by so many suckers?  Why is Miami Beach so overrun with young spring break revelers  (probably all adults) not wearing masks?   Maybe "adulthood" should be redefined as reached at 40 y.o.?  Or perhaps later?    Of course this is not possible,  but you notice the negative effect of too many abused civil rights.  And not only in America. 

 

And finally,  you don't hear of any crowds of refugees from America,  trying to escape their "lack of human rights". 

If they would exist, they would be overrun and trampled by the crowd who wants to get in!  :lol:

.

Really appreciate your replies. As you could see, the way you look at things is very different from the way things are portrayed in the video.

 

Likewise the way China is portrayed in the western media is very different from the way Chinese view China as well as how many non Western people view China. 
 

 

 

bad boy

 @dragon ball  I am from Afghanistan 🇦🇫 I want to tell you a bit of my side. Would you go to someone's house(an stranger) without their permission and justify your actions(mainly destructive) by telling them I am fixing your problem for free(bring peace) and at the end expect everyone to believes it? That's what America and its allies do. They invade countries,kill people and take their resources.

 

 

dragon ball

 @bad boy  you don’t even know why America invaded in the first place. And that war wasn’t against the afghan ppl itself.

 

look at the comments above taken from the video that Nightingale shared. Basically people are not seeing eye to eye with many things. Many Americans still think that the US is justified in attacking other countries. They don’t even consider it an act of attack. This is where the problems lie and will never get resolved. Cos the western media instead of reflecting on their own wrongdoing, will never stop to deflect and project on other countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest human right is to live in your country which is not invaded by another country. 
 

And the biggest violator of this human right is undoubtedly the US in the past 100 years.

 

it is a blessing to world peace to see the decline of the US as it can only mean a reduced ability to invade other countries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Blow away said:

The biggest human right is to live in your country which is not invaded by another country. 
 

And the biggest violator of this human right is undoubtedly the US in the past 100 years.

 

it is a blessing to world peace to see the decline of the US as it can only mean a reduced ability to invade other countries. 

 

- I agree with your first phrase in your post.   But a country is too big.  The human right is that of the INDIVIDUAL,  to live in his home, house free of aggression.  From there, the right may be extended to the town,  the city and only lastly to a country, although most countries are a mixture of good and bad,  righteous and evil.

 

- The biggest violator of your "human right" in the last 100 years was not the US.  The last 100 years started with the actions of Germany under Hitler.  HE invaded Poland under the pretext to recover territories taken away from Germany after WWI.  This launched WWII.   The US did not invade any country, didn't start anything, but was the ally of England and sent supplies to them.  This prompted the Germans to attack and sink merchant US ships.  Japan lighted the fire of war by attacking the US in Pearl Harbor.  This prompted Germany to declare war against the US, and the US in turn declared war against Germany.   In all this, the US did not "violate human rights".

 

In 1949 China became communist.  You favor this communism in China?  Wasn't this movement also expansionist? The communists didn't violate your "human rights"? 

 

The Korea war started in 1950 when China sent its communist militias into N Korea and started to advance into S Korea.  Wasn't here your "human right" violation by China?


China's communist militias took control of North Vietnam.  The US supported South Vietnam.  And this lead to the clash of the Vietnam war.

 

In 2001 Al-Qaeda blew up the two towers in New York.  (wasn't this a violation of your "human right"?  Al-Qaeda took refuge in Afghanistan, which was under the Taliban regime.  The US demanded the turn-over of Osama Bin Laden, which the Taliban refused.  Fearing further terrorist attacks from Al-Qaeda the US attacked the Taliban and deposed them from power. 

 

The attack of the US against Saddam Hussein was well deserved but it was a mistake by the wrong people in the US government.

 

- The last phrase in your post is a wishful thinking that may be completely wrong.  Your idea that without the US there would be less invasions of countries is a dream.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
4 hours ago, Blow away said:

The biggest human right is to live in your country which is not invaded by another country. 
 

And the biggest violator of this human right is undoubtedly the US in the past 100 years.

 

it is a blessing to world peace to see the decline of the US as it can only mean a reduced ability to invade other countries. 

 

I think you got it wrong. 

 

The rights to live in your country which is not invaded by another country is territorial rights, which is what is happening between China and Taiwan now. That's a fight for territorial rights. 

 

The rights to live in your own country and not get invaded by your own people is human rights, which is violated against the protesters in HK and the three million Uyghurs detained in concentration camps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

- I agree with your first phrase in your post.   But a country is too big.  The human right is that of the INDIVIDUAL,  to live in his home, house free of aggression.  From there, the right may be extended to the town,  the city and only lastly to a country, although most countries are a mixture of good and bad,  righteous and evil.

 

- The biggest violator of your "human right" in the last 100 years was not the US.  The last 100 years started with the actions of Germany under Hitler.  HE invaded Poland under the pretext to recover territories taken away from Germany after WWI.  This launched WWII.   The US did not invade any country, didn't start anything, but was the ally of England and sent supplies to them.  This prompted the Germans to attack and sink merchant US ships.  Japan lighted the fire of war by attacking the US in Pearl Harbor.  This prompted Germany to declare war against the US, and the US in turn declared war against Germany.   In all this, the US did not "violate human rights".

 

In 1949 China became communist.  You favor this communism in China?  Wasn't this movement also expansionist? The communists didn't violate your "human rights"? 

 

The Korea war started in 1950 when China sent its communist militias into N Korea and started to advance into S Korea.  Wasn't here your "human right" violation by China?


China's communist militias took control of North Vietnam.  The US supported South Vietnam.  And this lead to the clash of the Vietnam war.

 

In 2001 Al-Qaeda blew up the two towers in New York.  (wasn't this a violation of your "human right"?  Al-Qaeda took refuge in Afghanistan, which was under the Taliban regime.  The US demanded the turn-over of Osama Bin Laden, which the Taliban refused.  Fearing further terrorist attacks from Al-Qaeda the US attacked the Taliban and deposed them from power. 

 

The attack of the US against Saddam Hussein was well deserved but it was a mistake by the wrong people in the US government.

 

- The last phrase in your post is a wishful thinking that may be completely wrong.  Your idea that without the US there would be less invasions of countries is a dream.

 

 


I stand by my last sentence. I am sure many people in developing countries think likewise. It’s becoming a reality.

 

I am pretty sure that you do not know China well. Neither have you visited China.

 

If you have not updated your knowledge about China and based your understanding on Western media, then you would not have  known that it has ceased to be a communist regime.

 

So your statement that I support communism can’t be further from the truth.

 

in any case I do not see eye to eye with what you have written. They are mostly misguided and misleading. Perhaps we can look into them future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Observers
7 minutes ago, Nightingale said:

 

You are wrong.  The term human rights is very broad.

Human rights are moral principles or norms for certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected in municipal and international law.  They are commonly understood as inalienable, fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings", regardless of their age, ethnic origin, location, language, religion, ethnicity, or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

 

Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings - they are not granted by any state. These universal rights are inherent to us all, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. They range from the most fundamental - the right to life - to those that make life worth living, such as the rights to food, education, work, health, and liberty.

 

https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/pages/whatarehumanrights.aspx

 

So when you invade a country and cause misery to its people, you are violating human rights.

Now when the HK protestors clobbered passersby and some even set fire on them, weren't they violating human rights?  When they vandalised the train stations, police stations and public properties, block traffic such that the economy is adversely affected and people could not go to work, wasn't that a violation of human rights?  The protestors were asking for secession from China.  If California or New York state were to do the same, do you think the US govt would allow it?

 

As for your concentration camps, you are merely parroting the lies of the Western media.  Have you been to Xinjiang?  And if you did, did you interview any of the locals about their lives?

'As for your concentration camps, you are merely parroting the lies of the Western media.  Have you been to Xinjiang?  And if you did, did you interview any of the locals about their lives?'

 

Did they even allow freedom of movement at Xinjiang?

此地无银三百两 just like North Korea.

 

You should watch those travel vblog by the chinese themselves.

When they only pass around Xinjiang, they get double checked.

You can sense the hints about human rights violations from their apologetic comments.

 

Or you are another 50c, pretend that you don't see

报喜不报忧, until wuhan virus devastated mankind 犯下滔天大罪,千古罪人

也连累我们华人

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Guest Observers said:

'As for your concentration camps, you are merely parroting the lies of the Western media.  Have you been to Xinjiang?  And if you did, did you interview any of the locals about their lives?'

 

Did they even allow freedom of movement at Xinjiang?

此地无银三百两 just like North Korea.

 

You should watch those travel vblog by the chinese themselves.

When they only pass around Xinjiang, they get double checked.

You can sense the hints about human rights violations from their apologetic comments.

 

Or you are another 50c, pretend that you don't see

报喜不报忧, until wuhan virus devastated mankind 犯下滔天大罪,千古罪人

也连累我们华人

 


Nightingale this is a classic example of a 5 cent worth of writing. Just study the language used 

1. 50c

2. Wuhan virus 

3. just like north korea

4. sense the hints

 

it is a good example of someone who doesn’t use logic and evidence to put forth a cogent argument. My advice is not to engage them in any discussion as many have advised against. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If this doesn’t convince you the bullying tactics of the west esp the US, and that they do not care a single iota for the humanity in other countries, then nothing ever will. 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Nightingale said:

 

But racism is part of the poor human rights record.  Sure, many races exhibit racism, including Chinese in China, Indians in India, Japanese in Japan, Malays in Malaysia etc.  But then you don't see Chinese policemen deliberately approach a Black or non-Chinese stranger in the streets and start harassing him or her.  I saw a video of a Black man walking his dog in the street.  When he saw 2 White policemen approaching his direction, he quickly returned to his nearby car and put his dog in with a window ajar to let his pet breathe.  He then stood outside his car.  Sure enough, the policemen confronted him and wanted to handcuff him.  The dog sensed its owner in danger, jumped through the small gap of the car window and barked at the policemen, one of whom fired at it, killing it instantly.  I saw another video about White policemen stopping a Black driver apparently for speeding but they decided to handcuff him even though there was nothing provocative.   Then a few years back, there was this infamous incident where a doctor of Vietnamese descent Dr David Dao was dragged out of United Airlines and beaten up, ending up in concussion, broken nose & loss of 2 front teeth.  I am not even talking about how the Whites usurped Red Indian lands and decimating their tribes.

 

All these countless acts happen daily and when the police have been proven to act beyond their rights, they were let off easily.  That's the reason why my Singaporean friend refused to work in North America even though he graduated there.  He had seen enough of this ill treatment.  To him, the Anglo-Saxons are full of bigotry. (this is just an over-generalisation of course)

 

In the most recent case, Narayange Bodhi was from Sri Lanka and his attacker was a Black.

 68-year-old  Man  Pummeled  by  Anti-Asian  Bigot  on  NYV Subway

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/ny-stranger-punch-manhattan-subway-20210321-itxysblgfzdqtcl27mnrvws65u-story.html

 

9/11  Survivor  Who  Helped  Subway  Victim  Says  Attack  was  Racially Motivated

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/9-11-survivor-who-helped-subway-victim-says-attack-was-racially-motivated/2955575

 

It is timely that President Biden spoke out against anti-Asian hatred.

 

 

Amnesty International?  It has something bad to say about Sg too.  Please refer to the recent video showing how Yang responded to Blinken regarding human rights in the Alaskan Dialogue.  All these are excuses to hit China because they simply cannot accept the fact that China is rising and even though such a rise is peaceful, they would love to exaggerate things to portray China as being the evil Yellow Peril.  Of course the surrounding countries like Japan and India feel uncomfortable.

 

 

You are right but then it's hard to verify as an outsider e.g. information regarding Uyghurs.  How many of us travel to Xinjiang and can understand Mandarin, let alone Uyghur language?  Even those Westerners who went there see with tainted glasses.  When they see barbed wired fences (which are common in many educational institutions), they subjectively jump to the conclusion that the re-education camps are actually concentration camps.  It takes a personal trip to Xinjiang, like what my friend did, to discover the truth.  He was fortunate enough to talk to a native Uyghur graduate via a not-so-perfect Mandarin to know how the Uyghurs were given preferential treatment e.g. more children per family, more points to enter university.  He travelled as far west as the Russian border to see Xinjiang for himself.

 

In other words, the average Singaporean who is greatly proficient in English will rely on the Western media and even the local media are prejudiced and parrot the news distorted by the West e.g. Chinese govt suppressing the Muslim religion, disallowing worship in mosques etc.  One Chinese driver at Shenzhen complained loudly to my friend after discovering that he's a Singaporean, accusing our govt of being prejudiced on news regarding China.

 

So while you are right in saying we shouldn't close both our eyes to Western media, it is equally true that their media is predominantly anti-China because of its rise.  Even though Biden enjoyed his trip to China many years ago as a VP, it would be suicidal if he were to declare today that many news items about China are lies or distortions, including China violating WTO rules, stealing technology, Huawei's 5G spying, human rights in HK & Xinjiang etc.

 

Why  Does  the  West  Fear  China?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4brRWThi4Lg

reposting in case it’s missed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Context
1 hour ago, Nightingale said:

And for those of you who wants to keep harping on human rights, take a look at this.

UN introduced a bill that called for global action against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia & related intolerance & the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action: resolution adopted by the General Assembly

Voting Summary:

Yes: 106.

No: 14. Abstentions: 44. 

Non-Voting: 29.

Total voting membership: 193.

More than 100 countries voted “Yes.”

 

Guess who voted against it ~

USA, UK, Australia, Canada

These are the countries constantly calling out other countries on human rights & freedom.

 

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3896183?ln=en

Interesting.

 

The US did so not without reason, though. 

 

https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-on-a-resolution-on-the-durban-declaration-and-program-of-action

 

They have also been consistent:

 

https://usun.usmission.gov/u-s-explanation-of-vote-on-a-global-call-for-concrete-action-for-the-total-elimination-of-racism-racial-discrimination-xenophobia-related-intolerance-the-comprehensive-implementation-of-follow/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Observers
2 hours ago, Blow away said:


Nightingale this is a classic example of a 5 cent worth of writing. Just study the language used 

1. 50c

2. Wuhan virus 

3. just like north korea

4. sense the hints

 

it is a good example of someone who doesn’t use logic and evidence to put forth a cogent argument. My advice is not to engage them in any discussion as many have advised against. 

Yes, Nightingale and you are typical 50c.

Wuhan virus is the truth, you want deny it like the CCP or just wish it away?

 

Do you want to deny that it's like North Korea? Try it instead of waving it away. Absolute power corrupts absolutely here and in N Korea.

 

You have not been here yourself, yet you question others?

Only way we can deduce indirectly from the people who have been there.

Like typical 50c, you just repeat the propaganda videos and大外宣 without analysing against other videos.

 

And also, when we bring up the wrongs of CCP, 50c will try to divert attention to other countries' wrongs. Then no need to explain their own wrongs. This is so juvenile logic only useful for those under oppression who need an excuse to support their oppressors.

2 wrongs don't make a right.

The difference is whether you can say it without getting imprisoned like North Korea.

Even if it's the truth like that Liwengliang, they still refuse to acknowledge their wrongs.

你们这些走狗,违背良知,扶贪作孽,天理不容

Simply ask yourself, how much wealth does Xi emperor has? You know what is his officially declared pay?  You want to deny? Or pretend to divert away to how much Biden has again and again. All that obvious question in China and what happens? 2 billion people must be blind or stupid or become 50c for safety.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
23 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

I think you got it wrong. 

 

The rights to live in your country which is not invaded by another country is territorial rights, which is what is happening between China and Taiwan now. That's a fight for territorial rights. 

 

The rights to live in your own country and not get invaded by your own people is human rights, which is violated against the protesters in HK and the three million Uyghurs detained in concentration camps.

 

13 hours ago, Nightingale said:

 

You are wrong.  The term human rights is very broad.

Human rights are moral principles or norms for certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected in municipal and international law.  They are commonly understood as inalienable, fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings", regardless of their age, ethnic origin, location, language, religion, ethnicity, or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

 

Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings - they are not granted by any state. These universal rights are inherent to us all, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. They range from the most fundamental - the right to life - to those that make life worth living, such as the rights to food, education, work, health, and liberty.

 

https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/pages/whatarehumanrights.aspx

 

So when you invade a country and cause misery to its people, you are violating human rights.

Now when the HK protestors clobbered passersby and some even set fire on them, weren't they violating human rights?  When they vandalised the train stations, police stations and public properties, block traffic such that the economy is adversely affected and people could not go to work, wasn't that a violation of human rights?  The protestors were asking for secession from China.  If California or New York state were to do the same, do you think the US govt would allow it?

 

When the protestors beat up HK policemen, the People's Liberation Army refrained from intervention.  On the contrary, Trump ordered troops to shoot at the Black Lives Matter protestors.

 

As for your concentration camps, you are merely parroting the lies of the Western media.  Have you been to Xinjiang?  And if you did, did you interview any of the locals about their lives?

 

 

Here comes Nightwhore with his usual style of blaming the victims instead of the culprits.

 

Last time, he will make long long posts of the wrongdoings of Singaporeans to support the wrongdoings of the PRCs in Singapore. And now, to support the bloody CCP even in their human rights violation of the Hong Kong protesters and the people in XinJiang, he can even tell people that the Hong Kong citizens are the ones who are guilty of human rights violation? 

 

No wonder he is called the 叛徒走狗卖国贼 all the time. If he loves the CCP so much, why don't he just move to China and live there instead? He can find lots of stinky feet to lick and smell over there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Here comes Nightwhore with his usual style of blaming the victims instead of the culprits.

 

Last time, he will make long long posts of the wrongdoings of Singaporeans to support the wrongdoings of the PRCs in Singapore. And now, to support the bloody CCP even in their human rights violation of the Hong Kong protesters and the people in XinJiang, he can even tell people that the Hong Kong citizens are the ones who are guilty of human rights violation? 

 

No wonder he is called the 叛徒走狗卖国贼 all the time. If he loves the CCP so much, why don't he just move to China and live there instead? He can find lots of stinky feet to lick and smell over there. 

If you are only capable of hurling personal insults and curses, it’s a sign that you are not capable of decent discussion. 
 

please do yourself a favour. Stop responding to this thread if makes u swear at others. 
 

I will not take part in this discussion anymore as it has degraded into name calling. 
 

It’s supposed to be something interesting as we exchange different views and learn more about history, east vs west ideologies as well as some significant current affairs. But when some anon posters hijack the thread, that’s when it loses its meaning. Exactly what some fake western news do, chant the same thing many times till it becomes true. 
 

China is evil. China is evil...

China is going to invade the whole world ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest reason

Would be good to know why this thread ended up in the Flaming Room

and due to what reason?

 

Was it because one troll Guest used this special nickname for that one Member with the bird name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guest reason said:

Would be good to know why this thread ended up in the Flaming Room

and due to what reason?

 

Was it because one troll Guest used this special nickname for that one Member with the bird name?

This is one reason why I don’t wish to take part in the discussion anymore.
 

I have no issue with others not agreeing with what I wrote and vice versa. It doesn’t have to get personal.

 

For instance Steve and I have totally different views on many things here. But that’s perfectly fine. Do I have to get upset with him? We don’t have to and we didn’t hurl insults at each other. 
 

Some people still mix personal feelings with their opinions when discussing non personal issues. 
 

its no point having any discussions with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Blow away said:

This is one reason why I don’t wish to take part in the discussion anymore.
 

I have no issue with others not agreeing with what I wrote and vice versa. It doesn’t have to get personal.

 

For instance Steve and I have totally different views on many things here. But that’s perfectly fine. Do I have to get upset with him? We don’t have to and we didn’t hurl insults at each other. 
 

Some people still mix personal feelings with their opinions when discussing non personal issues. 
 

its no point having any discussions with them.

 

Yes @Blow away, we have totally different views,  but we recognize that there is an universe of different views about everything.  It is a matter of perspective.

 

We know many things to criticize about our respective regions in the world.  The Western press lies, the Eastern countries lie.  And we finally discover this by digging deeper under the surface of the news,  something we can do today thanks to the Internet.  (not that all the Internet is truthful).  Sometimes the action of a country is bitterly criticized, unaware that there were valid reasons for the action.  We could keep discussing for a long time until we end being expert historians,  but there are better ways to use our time.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...