Author: davebrown

You got what you deserved, Big Liar [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-7-16 20:06:28 |Display all floors

Knowwhoyouare

You say:
many countries in this world, most?... do not believe in their leadership and the incumbents would not hold onto their power if any alternative is made available;

Well, in a democratic country, if the people lose faith in their leaders then they will be held accountable at the next election. With open debate before elections all the governments dirty laundry is well and truly brought out in public.
You also say:

most population do not know what is good for them and need to be told and further educated ANYWHER on a larger scale of picture.

Surely you do not believe this of your own people? Do you believe in the wisdom of the Chinese people? In your opinion if there was a free election in China next week, would the current Chinese government stay in power? I believe they possibly would due to the state of the Chinese economy at the moment, but I also believe there would be major change in a lot of areas as well due to increased accountability.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-7-17 06:48:25 |Display all floors

Okay, let me backtrack a little ….

So, that was it - your great democratic system of government?

As long as you can ELECT a government, it doesn’t matter that you do not have a choice.  Even a Moron government leading you downhill is Dignity.


---
Whampoa

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-7-17 07:06:12 |Display all floors

Reply to Umagaman ...

Umagaman said: “I love China and the Chinese people”

>>> we heard this before (you are not the first and will not be the last).  But would you love us for what we are and not for what you want us to be?  To love us for what we are (who we are, why we are and our systems, etc), we know you are at least sincere.  To love us for what you want us to be, you’re hypocrisy.  We read you – your double standard.

"since your are attacking my country's system of government, here is my perspective on yours:”

>>> That’s a tit-for-tat and I read you.  You may elect to say I ‘attack’ your country’s system of government but clearly it is a system fraught with serious faults and vulnerable to abuses which are rife.  I pointed out the ‘risk’ that comes with electing a government in a democratic system where you stand a 50:50 chance of having a wrong government voted in.   Like your buddy pointed out, even a MORON could be your government one day (in a democratic system of government –Possible!)

Remember, in a democratic system, the ‘choice’ is not yours alone but many.  It is a gamble whose ‘choice’ gets elected.  Choice also comes with responsibilities.  It could even be a choice of some external forces which do not share any responsibility.

2 years ago when America led by terror-cult Bush (elected by the people) unilaterally started the war attacking Iraq, tens of thousands New Yorkers took to the street to protest.  In the last election, Bush almost lost to Kerry.  He was saved only by the surprise T.V. appearance of Osama Bin Ladin who gave the Americans a big scare. So, is it your choice or the choice (or mistake?) of Bin Ladin that Bush got elected to continue his aggressive foreign policies and put the lives of his American people and other innocent people at risk?  Bush won by a mere 51%.  **So, that’s your choice and an informed choice, indeed. **   [??]

Blair won his second term with only 37% votes.  Today, London is bombed.  Al Qaeda was blamed but EXACTLY whose fault is it that you choose a government which engages in attacking and offending others?

The essence of democracy is about choice.  It is also about TAKING RESPONSIBILITIES.    In a perfect world, this will be an excellent choice of government.  A perfect world entails perfect information and perfect knowledge.  If only truths are spoken and everyone has equal access to truths and are free from fear and other undue influences, we make informed decisions.  But, this is not a perfect world and there goes your ‘unrealised’ dreams.

The facts remain that both Bush and Blair lied and continue to deceive their people and the world to ‘justify’ their war on Iraq.  To this day, there are no weapons of mass destruction (WMD), there is no truth in the 45-minute scare that Blair deceived his UK people (which cost of the life of UK’s TOP scientist, the late Dr David Kelly) and 9/11 was the acts of Al Qaeda and not Iraq which did not even support the Al Qaeda.  Of course, Bush and Blair did the big favour of laying the red carpet for the Al Qaeda who, in turn, voted them in.  Today, London’s bombing is just a small dessert from their godfather, Al Qaeda.


"The only reasons to stop a nations people from having a say in who leads them is if the incumbent leadership believes:

a. The majority of people do not believe in their leadership and the incumbents would not hold onto their power if an alternative was made available; or

b. The majority of the population do not know what is good for them and need to be told.”

>>> I don’t follow your point a. Clarify and I will respond.  

As for point b., simply ask yourself, is it by default that you love ‘morons’ and ‘people who do not know what is good for them and need to be told’?  Is that what attracts you to the Chinese people?  Love us for what we are and we will tell YOU what is good and no good.

---
Whampoa

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-7-17 07:22:02 |Display all floors

Reply Ubexer ...

"So we should have just let saddam and his cronies rape women, make dodgy one hand washing the other deals, and shred dissidents in giant industrial shredders forever?”

>>> Saddam Hussein was not a popular leader and I could say he was a much hated leader.  To topple him would be the wishes of the Iraqi populace.  However, to elect (or maybe not at all) a Moron to do the job or simply stood by to allow a Moron to ‘invade’ is tragic and calamitous.  A Moron or two Morons who came in gung-ho style with NO plans or NO ideas for YOUR future, but only THEIR agenda is, like I said earlier, replacing one moron with another.

Of course, we know the Iraqis are not to be blamed.  They are just unfortunate people.  They have great men (maybe fewer) and could have been rich.  They are just unfortunate to be vulnerable.

Are those true morons?  They are not.  They blundered only on things that were not on their agenda.  For the curious mind:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v27/n13/harr04_.html

***

"Yeah, democracy is bad....I mean like Blair kills people in the UK all the time....Whatever man”

>>> Blair never kills people in the UK all the time, but he may be the cause of the London bombings indirectly.

Blair kills people *outside* UK, quite definitely. The London bombings are just one of the consequences of his atrocities OUTSIDE uk.  It may hurt the people but they have to understand and learn to take responsibilities for their choice of their leader, even though he got the support of ONLY 37% of the people.  

That's democracy - a democratic system of government.

Good or bad, it goes both ways.  The important question is WHO?  Get real, little goons!

---
Whampoa

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-7-17 08:07:36 |Display all floors

Reply Albion ...

albion
+ Send message
+ Posts: 0
+ Joined:
   2005-05-11
  Get real ...
Whampoa ... you are so reeking of ordure.

Give me a democracy over a dictatorship any day.

Was it a democratic Japan that commited atrocities in China in the 1930s?

Was it a democratic Germany that unleashed the bloodiest war in history and commited genocide against Jews, Slavs and Gypsies?

Was it a democratic USSR that killed tens of millions of its own people through purges, show trials, enforced famine, and the Gulag?

Was a democratic China responsible for the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution?

As Churchill put it, "democracy is the worst of all possible systems, with the exception ofall the others."

2005-07-14 10:40

>>>

I quite agree with you, Albion, the above were about the situations then, despite your inability to spell correctly.

Japan and Germany were AGGRESSORS during the World Wars I and II.  They are democratic states.

USSR and China are Com munist countries.  They are not aggressors and their policies (even mistakes) were defensive.

Today, we see America and Britain, they are both democratic countries, democratically elected by their people and they both uphold aggressive foreign designs.

9/11 and the London bombings are just some fruits of their bearing.

I do not know how much Britain gains from their aggressive foreign policies though.  But, I do know the fruits for the Americans were immense.

For the curious mind:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v27/n13/harr04_.html

Nevertheless, I never like the poodle who kiss-ass the bulldog.  I guess it is enough that 37% of his people like him (the poodle), democratically elected (by the people and for the people).

---
Whampoa

***

[As Churchill put it, "democracy is the worst of all possible systems, with the exception ofall the others."]

>>> I like Churchill but I like HG Wells even better.  HG Wells got clairvoyance and he once predicted (to the jibes of his fellow men) that “writers will not write”. [We type and we dictate to our dicta-phone system.]

Churchill was a school-dropout and a politician, the PM of once Imperialist Britain, a democracy.

HG Wells was an author and some of his famous sci-fictions include ‘War of the Worlds’, the ‘Invisible Man’ and ‘The Time Machine’, among others.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-7-17 09:52:11 |Display all floors

true

It may hurt the people but they have to understand and learn to take responsibilities for their choice of their leader, even though he got the support of ONLY 37% of the people

I actually wanted the Conservative party to win, then maybe this wouldnt have happened, if UK borders had been more sealed.....

But they are all corrupt politicians....

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-7-17 18:19:17 |Display all floors

Whampoa

You say:
we heard this before (you are not the first and will not be the last). But would you love us for what we are and not for what you want us to be? To love us for what we are (who we are, why we are and our systems, etc), we know you are at least sincere. To love us for what you want us to be, you’re hypocrisy. We read you – your double standard.

If I did not like the Chinese as they are I would not be here trying to connect with you.  But similarly, I love my parents and my friends without necessarily agreeing with everything they do. I do not believe that disagreements over a system of government can stop us from connecting on a personal level.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.