-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
American/British silence is deafening!
- Thread starter sox63
- Start date
So what you're saying is that you dont believe governments have the right to govern their own countries?
Last edited:
So what you're saying is "you support bob?"
(how can changing legislation to shut down the media be a plus for democracy?)
... aah, or are you saying 'other governments' shouldn't interfere (or comment?)
um, isn't that Mbeki's stance (on bob?)
Last edited:
If country wants to govern this way, then it is their perogative, however when the US and the UK come and behave in a "holier than thou" attitude in say the Zim issue, I don't pay attention.
It is just being Hypocritical.
Compare American silence over this, to these comments:
Rice, accusing Chavez of pursuing an increasingly anti-US and leftist line since coming to power in the late 1990s, called on the OAS to prepare a full report on the state of press freedom in Venezuela, which she indicated was under siege.
"Freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of conscience are not a thorn in the side of government," Rice said.
"Disagreeing with your government is not unpatriotic and most certainly should not be a crime in any country, especially a democracy."
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B7D81EF6-3831-411A-98DD-D83619706119.htm
Rice, accusing Chavez of pursuing an increasingly anti-US and leftist line since coming to power in the late 1990s, called on the OAS to prepare a full report on the state of press freedom in Venezuela, which she indicated was under siege.
"Freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of conscience are not a thorn in the side of government," Rice said.
"Disagreeing with your government is not unpatriotic and most certainly should not be a crime in any country, especially a democracy."
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B7D81EF6-3831-411A-98DD-D83619706119.htm
I don't get all these Bush bashers.
They get mad when he interferes and then when he doesn't interfere they complain about the silence.
What exactly is it they want?
I say we focus on the crap at home like MBeki's silent democracy on 'ol Bob.
They get mad when he interferes and then when he doesn't interfere they complain about the silence.
What exactly is it they want?
I say we focus on the crap at home like MBeki's silent democracy on 'ol Bob.
Aren't Pakistan busom buddies with Bush? Don't they torture people on his behalf?
Regardless direct interference in another country is a shaky proposition. On the other hand anyone who claims to be a defender of freedom, as Bush pretends to be, should be immediately vocal about anything they believe is anti-freedom. And they should back up their belief.
The US doesn't like Chavez because he refused to put the interests of US businesses above those of the people of Venezuela. Now Chavez may have gone off the rails or he may not, but it doesn't change the fact that the US government's reason for opposing him had nothing to do with him being a petty dictator or the fact that the US government tried to foment a coup in Venzuela or that historically being a petty dictator was never something that really bothered the US government. In fact they assisted and supported quite a few. If the cold war were still on and Old Bob were anti-communist they would have been glad to provide any support he might need - training in torture, how to efficiently murder journalists or just a pat on the back for having such a great dictatorship.
Gordon Brown is probably too busy trying to get rid of some pesky freedoms in Britain to comment.
Regardless direct interference in another country is a shaky proposition. On the other hand anyone who claims to be a defender of freedom, as Bush pretends to be, should be immediately vocal about anything they believe is anti-freedom. And they should back up their belief.
The US doesn't like Chavez because he refused to put the interests of US businesses above those of the people of Venezuela. Now Chavez may have gone off the rails or he may not, but it doesn't change the fact that the US government's reason for opposing him had nothing to do with him being a petty dictator or the fact that the US government tried to foment a coup in Venzuela or that historically being a petty dictator was never something that really bothered the US government. In fact they assisted and supported quite a few. If the cold war were still on and Old Bob were anti-communist they would have been glad to provide any support he might need - training in torture, how to efficiently murder journalists or just a pat on the back for having such a great dictatorship.
Gordon Brown is probably too busy trying to get rid of some pesky freedoms in Britain to comment.