Tibet
March 17th, 2008 at 8:43 am by David FarrarI’m passionately in favour of a free trade agreement with China. But I’m even more passionately in favour of free speech and the right to protest. Now let us look at the different responses from Australia and NZ:
“We urge the Chinese Government to allow peaceful expression of dissent. We call on Chinese authorities to act with restraint and to deal with protesters peacefully.”
- Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith“The Government is concerned at the reports of violence and is trying to obtain more accurate information. It calls on all sides to exercise restraint.”
- Prime Minister Helen Clark
Yeah those damn protesters need to be more restrained as they get shot.
Photo from Al Jazeera.
It would be good to have the NZ Government also stress the right to peaceful protest.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:05 am
A mass boycott of the Olympics would seem like a good idea.
Oh that’s right, we wouldn’t want to upset the Chinese so we will just sit quietly and utter a few words of protest and move on.
This is a disgrace, if the cost of a FTA is that we need to pretend that this sort of thing isn’t happening – is it really worth it?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:05 am
I don’t think it’s possible to support free speech and free trade with China at the same time. Free trade just legitimise, and even profits from, their repression. We should end free trade talks immediately, break off diplomatic relations with Communist China in protest, and confiscate all Chinese government property and hand it over to Taiwan.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:11 am
I agree Burt, how could any country enter into a free trade agreement with these cruel animals is beyond belief.
Vote:Do they have a 100m tank racing final planned for the Olympic games? Gas masks and guns – it’s the Panda at play !!
March 17th, 2008 at 9:16 am
I’m sorta’ new to NZ so I might be confused but isn’t Helen Clark from the liberal left side of things? Or has she gone right on everyone and now supports business over human rights? So confusing…
Can you just imagine the howls of protest if John Key was the source of that quote and sucking up to China while ignoring Tibet? We’d never hear the end of it.
So much for your ideals Labour. It’s about power, nothing more.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:18 am
I hope John Key can shut his dumb mouth on this or make a stand ? Haha pigs will fly !
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I’m sorta’ new to NZ so I might be confused but isn’t Helen Clark from the liberal left side of things? Or has she gone right on everyone and now supports business over human rights? So confusing…
Now now TMC, you dont bad mouth your idealogical kinsmen.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:21 am
D4J
Only a dim-bulb couldn’t have seen the writing on the wall when that two faced cow of a PM had a serendipitous meeting with the Dali Lama in Aussie rather than meet him here. What a disgrace, by allowing our country to be pushed around by the Chinese we condone their appalling human rights track record and help them spread their propaganda that there is nothing to see. Perhaps the NZ govt could just censor our TV as well so we can pretend that this is not happening.
Don’t get me started on the Fallon Gong.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Helen’s just showing her true colours.
Vote:She will be red with envy that the Chinese can use tanks.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Perhaps our Helen would have “more accurate information” if she hadn’t slithered and scuttled away to avoid officially meeting the exiled Tibetan leader during his visit last year.
Her disgraceful evasion of the Dalai Lama was a low point for her year – exposing her as a gutless apologist for China, and paying no more than lip service to the crushing of the human rights of the oppressed Tibetan people. It is no wonder that she gained no accurate information from her “accidental” bumping into the DL at Sydney Airport – passing him/saying “hi” on the way to the toilet does not constitute a meeting, and shows no respect for a man of his position and status (the true leader of the Tibetan people).
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:25 am
And what would we lose from a free trade deal with China anyway? Most things made there are useless, dangerous or both. So it’s not even a trade off. The free trade deal is mostly just a way for Helen to give a helping hand to her fellow leftists.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Burt ;
Vote:Don’t get me started on those shady Chinese Warships coming to visit when our good Yankee buddies can’t dock !!
She is pure evil.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:27 am
So New Zealand’s FTA with China will be a world first . . . and it will also put New Zealand at the forefront of condoning China’s treatment of Tibet. Helen and Goff, and John Key as well, seem able to treat the two issue as utterly independent, but how will they educate the rest of the world to see it that way.
Is this how Helen wants us to better remember Paschendale, as she said last year we should – and is this a really great way to remember Ed Hillary? Trade, sport or Tibet? Screw Tibet!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Be reasonable DPF – there are photo opportunities to be had in the next couple of weeks signing the FTA, it’s election year, and she’s behind in the polls – be reasonable man, what’s a girl got to do??!!!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Make a stand John Boy Key ? Have your balls dropped yet Burnside Boy?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:29 am
pushmepullu
We will have a great big lever to keep wages down when we have a FTA with China. Who would employ somebody here in NZ for $20/hour when labour at about $20/Month can be used.
However I guess we get to sell them lots of coal so that will make a tidy profit while providing raw materials for mass pollution.
Move on – nothing to see here.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:36 am
The Greens are right – calls for restraint on all sides as weasel words. Peaceful protests were met by tanks and gunshots – unfortunately for the Chinese, the Tibetan people appear to have regarded this as a final straw. But the saddest thing to see is the decline of Helen Clark, from a once principled politician into somebody obsessed by power at all costs. She has become one of the dwellers under the mountain – she believes in nothing.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Where is sonic or any other lefty retard defending China’s human rights record?
Ouch, that was a good scud or is it move along nothing to see here but fucking more tanks and red commie soldiers ?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Shit, I feel sick agreeing with Keith Locke but I guess if a broken clock can tell the right time twice a day… But nice to see we’re really focused on the important issues down here in Middle Earth:
[Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10498577
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Quite ironic that the communist greens care about this?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:44 am
The Prime Minister has also refused to “shoot her mouth off”, saying that the protests would draw a reaction anywhere in the world. Well the reaction has been to shoot the protestors. Does she anticipate that happening anywhere else in the world? Is that a green light to shoot protestors in New Zealand? I presume not. But if it’s not okay in New Zealand, why is it okay in Tibet?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:45 am
OH look the PM has spoken out.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4441779a10.html
So have I got this correct: She will say something if protestors have been killed… But hey lets not be silly and talk about actually making a stand… nothing to see here move on – the TV channel suddenly going black has nothing to do with this. Move on.
It’s time for an election – this sell out of a PM needs to be removed from power before we are sold to the Chinese for target practice.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Milo, I’m pretty sure Helen would quite happily shoot protesters if she thought she could get away with it.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:50 am
To Helen, Phil and Winston,
Regarding your problem with Tibet: why don’t you park a bus in front of it – that has worked in the past.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:52 am
“We urge China to respect the fundamental and universally recognised right of all of its citizens to peacefully express their political and religious views,” she said.
What a hypocrit!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:52 am
This shows that Helen Clark and the Labour Party are just as pragmatic and unprincipled on foreign affairs as any previous National Government.
In the late 1990s PM Jenny Shipley complained that human rights advocates (and the Labour Party) were calling for ‘Megaphone Diplomacy’, and that such an approach was unhelpful. Now it seems that Helen Clark isn’t much different to Shipley. Labour and National always fall into a foreign policy approach that is about following the ‘national interest’ above anything else.
It’d be interesting to see some quotes from former opposition leader Helen Clark as well as Phil Goff about the 1990s National Government putting trade ahead of human rights. What a lot of unprincipled hypocrites.
Bryce
Vote:http://www.liberation.org.nz
March 17th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Actually, the PM’s rhetoric is very revealing. She says she is prepared to speak out if peaceful protestors have been killed. Does that mean that it’s okay to shoot violent protestors? So would she have deployed machine guns against the Sprinbok tour protestors?
The PM need to come clean. When is it okay to shoot protestors? And in which countries?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Read between the lines: These are people from Tibet – we know from what China tells us that they are not peaceful people. They are violent and dangerous and want to overthrow the Chinese govt. She’s covered he butt – all we need to do is believe the news reports from China and we can go into the FTA in good faith….
Hooo-Ra for Helen – International woman of integrity!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 9:57 am
I can only hope that John Key and Rodney Hide will stand up for civilisation and principle on this. Put the Free Trade Agreement with China to a referendum – it could be the issue that brings the government down!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:00 am
“She also said today it was ridiculous ” ;
Yes Helen it is tragically not funny, because if the Yanks were doing this you would have your wretched knickers in a twist and your socialist lap poodles would be barking and pissing everywhere like the crazy mongrels that they are.
So you’re walking on a “diplomatic tight rope”, can’t the bitch read the internet for information? Does she watch TV?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Well she raised it so strongly that she wouldn’t meet the Dalai Lama in NZ – What a cow.
And of course the human rights issues are not going to change when no other country takes a stand against them – A boycott of the Olympics would be a start, and dumping the FTA would also be a start. Easier to move on I guess. A forth term for Labour is more important than human rights.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Luckily in New Zealand the police wouldn’t have to go house to house looking for wounded protestors, the way they do in Tibet. Instead, the could have just read the names and addresses off the protest placards. Thank Heaven for the Electoral Finance Act.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:04 am
This puts a sour taste in the mouths of every kiwi that ever fought for the freedom of expression and human rights in previous World Wars.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Bugger Tibet, Helen wants her FTA with the Chinese “organ harvesters” more than anything,
…..her future in the UN depends on it!
Also kills two birds with one stone (excuse the expression), as our lamentably low take-up rate with our drivers licence/organ donation will be cured with an almost infinite supply of body parts ex-China. Some organs will definitely be from Fallun Gong members, some may well be from murdered Tibetan protesters, but those are mere details – it will all help prop up our failing health system. Win win!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Get them organ harvesters working to order.
Winston needs a new soul, he sold his last one to Helen. Helen needs a new heart, her current one has turned to stone in pursuit of a forth term.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Body parts are obtained in Chinese prisons by the ruthless old fashioned way.
Vote:I need a new heart Mr.
Here is your money.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:22 am
“…National leader John Key said the Tibetan riots were “far from satisfactory”, but trade negotiations with China were “independent” from human rights concerns…”
So our political leaders – reflecting the business elites – speak with one voice. Frankly, the naked greed and grubby lust for money that has seized our political and business leaders over China turns my stomach. Chinese workers deserve the same wages and conditions as NZ workers. China is heavily industrialised now, the “inequality helps China grow” argument holds no water anymore, if it ever did in the first place. Chinese deserve the same human rights as us. If people truly believe that values of democracy and human dignity are universal, we’d all be disgusted with the way every western leader kow-tows to the butchers of Beijing and their corrupt provincial oligarchies.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Toms, I realise Key is not sounding promising, but I have faith that when he wins in November (if not sooner!) he will reassure us and take a principled stance.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 10:38 am
If the FTA with China is so independent of what is happening in Tibet, as all to the main players claim – Helen, Goff, Winston and John Key – show us how independent! Condemn the treatment of Tibet.
Vote:No? QED.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:40 am
It’d be interesting to see how many of the so-called “left” blogs deal with the Tibet human rights situation. This is a real test for their principles.
Meanwhile, the leftwing Against the Current blog has come out firmly, saying “HELEN CLARK: EMPTY WORDS ON TIBET”. A couple of snippets:
* Prime Minister Clark’s response to the current Tibetan uprising is political and moral cowardice on a grand scale.
* While the New Zealand government is quick to criticise oppressive government regimes in countries like Zimbabwe or Fiji, its an entirely different story when it comes to China.
* Last year PM Clark described the Zimbabwe regime as ‘appalling’ and in 2005 she commented she ‘would not be seen dead’ in that country.
See: http://nzagainstthecurrent.blogspot.com/2008/03/helen-clark-empty-words-on-tibet.html
Bryce
Vote:http://www.liberation.org.nz
March 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
China deserves all the stick it gets on this. Nevertheless, I’ll bet that at least 99% of those expressing an interest on this topic are wearing Chinese underpants as they type.
Vote:How to deal with that?
March 17th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Firm decisive treatment of Fiji when Frank jilted Helen and Winston after ‘productive’ Wellington talks, and harsh words to Israel – even broke of diplomatic connections – when a couple of agents fiddled with New Zealand passports – but then I don’t think we had free trade agreements pending with either country.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 11:02 am
On the other hand it could be a really cool photo opportunity: signing the FTA with China.
Trevor Mallard organises a bus to be parked between Helen and the Chinese President to avoid photos showing the two of them in the same shot.
Oops! – better use the word ‘photo’ instead of shot.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 11:30 am
I am simply ashamed.
Vote:G
March 17th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Exactly!
But that is not what this post is about. It’s Two Minutes Hate. Clark is Goldstein.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 11:49 am
First of all, China has a lot to do to improve its human rights. My cousin was there (the square) in 1989. Things have improved a bit, but it’s a country, with a written constitution says communist party IS the leading party.
However, Dalai Lama can’t be allowed to play his innocent card any more. This political jerk is behind the riot. A peaceful protest will never involve turning vehicles up side down, rioting loot, wrecking shops and killing ppl. This is what exactly happend before 6.4 in 1989 when the army intervened. There is a line and if you cross it, it’s no longer a peaceful protest! It was started by the group of monks that are close followers of Dalai Lama. What a shame he continue to claim he has nothing to do with it, or he supports 2008 Olympics.
A week ago, a minority girl (who was trained the same way as Al Qaeda since she’s a child) was trying to burn down a plane to hit a olympic stadium in Beijing. Could these incidents be isolated? maybe, maybe not.
As much as I hate the lack of democracy and human right in China, I have to say, the communist party retained their power and provided a fairly stable environment (after 1976) for over 1.3 billion people, that include the people in Tibet. Tibet has been under the Chinese central government for centuries, even the ROC in Taiwan has never abandoned their claim over Tibet.
Mongolia, to Russia, as Tibet, to Britan/India. Mongolia was under Qing’s goverment same as Tibet during Sun Yat-sen’s revolution. But it claimed independent under the influence of Russia in 1921, then later, much of it’s land was combined into Russia’s map. This is exactly what’s gonna happen with a “Tibet nation”.
Boycott the Olympics or not, the ultimate goal is to put pressure on the communist party on the democracy and human right issues. However it’s not going to be happening anytime soon – says the constitution. The government should really leave that to the atheletes, the FTA, well, it’s probably not a good time to proceed on it any further.
IMO for some of you western ideologist, you have to first accept that China is different. PRC is a young country (not even 60 years old) suffered from years of war and (western!) exploitation and almost no foreign aid (unlike Japan) for a long time after WWII, there are over 1.3 billion people and nothing can be improved overnight. New Zealand was the first western country to allow female to vote and that was just 115 years ago.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 11:50 am
“But that is not what this post is about. It’s Two Minutes Hate. Clark is Goldstein.”
Oh, so sorry Andrew Ban, it’s all about money over morals. Silly me!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
All noise over Fiji Helen, cat got your tongue on this one.Bloody sickening hypercritical mongrels.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Longbow: The Republic of South Africa had a written constitution — and reams of duly debated as passed legislation — legitimating apartheid. SA was certainly one of the most stable and prosperous nations in Africa — as long as you were white, and didn’t make any trouble by saying that apartheid was fundamentally unjust. Then, you could be charged with ‘terrorism’ for printing a story in a dissident newspaper, being a middle-class housewife standing in silence ‘armed’ with nothing but a black sash and a plaque, harassed and intimidated.
I also think its entirely fair comment to compare and contrast the swift — and hardline — position our government can take on human rights abuses in Fiji and Zimbabwe, and ask what the difference is.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Craig – i was saying you can’t really improve the democracy in China without first changing the consitution.
There are other smaller parties in China, also involved in the politics somewhat, there are many high ranking officials in the government are from those parties, but they could never touch the “leading party” position of the communist party, and the communist party leads the army (which Mao said something like ‘those who have the gun (army) shall have the power’ although he never carried a gun himself). it’s like “vote for all you like, as long as it’s voting for me”.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
3-Coil
“It is no wonder that she gained no accurate information from her “accidental” bumping into the DL at Sydney Airport – passing him/saying “hi” on the way to the toilet ”
Perhaps she was looking for her husband….
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Before we divert ourselves completely from Tibet onto general hatred of Helen Clark, let us not forget that Our Hero Mr John Key seems to be singing from exactly the same page:
National leader John Key said the Tibetan riots were “far from satisfactory”, but trade negotiations with China were “independent” from human rights concerns.
(Full article here)
Vote:http://www.stuff.co.nz/4441779a13.html
March 17th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
New Zealand is virtually an open economy to trade already, apart perhaps for a couple of small residual duties, such as tht on footwear. There’s nothing in a free trade agreement with China as far as our imports go.
What about for our exporters? What about those we already have free trade agreements with — Hong Kong and Singapore??? Have they become rip-roaring markets for our exports? I don’t think so…
Then there’s the controversial bit. Reports earlier indicated China was keen to get access to New Zealand for its labour. That is it could send people to work in New Zealand. Perhaps this is why the agreement’s secret.
Great Leap Plumbers and Whang Bang Ho Builders are coming! Is this what we will really get from the FTA?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Labour’s hypocrisy runs wild again.
Did you notice how we can’t ban the use of mobile phones in cars because (despite the proven-high number of deaths and injuries it causes ever year) we need more information on the risk it poses.
Now we can’t speak out against China’s hideous abuse of human rights in Tibet because we need more accurate information.
But stranger than strange — we *can* ban the sale of Party Pills because they *might* represent a threat to public safety.
Now I don’t take party pills (or any other drugs) but I really wonder if our MPs decisions aren’t made more on what’s best for them as individuals and a party than on what is best for the nation.
I doubt many MPs take party pills so they’re happy to ban them — but maybe they’re a little keener on using their mobile while driving — so best not ban that just yet.
Likewise I suspect that Helen (and therefore the whole Labour party) wants to be remembered as the one(s) who forged an historic FTA with China — so best not too make noise about the human rights issue.
But the biggest tragedy and injustice of all is that we have another 4 million 2-legged sheep who just stand by and let this happen again and again.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
4 million Kiwi sheep head up the slaughterboard sticking pen ramp again. Ba,ba, ba.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Captain Crab – at least she knows where to go looking for him if he goes “missing in action”!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Hmmm. Weasel words from John Key:
And from Helen Clark:
But good on Keith Locke and the Greens for standing up for human rights.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Toad is Keith Locke still in the communist party?
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
No wonder Helen’s face looks so sour these days given all the ideological ‘dead rats’ she’s had to swallow from her youth.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
It is interesting that this corrupt govt has no problem insulting the Yanks but seems to struggle to say anything negative about China, I wonder why that is.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
d4j, Keith Locke was in something called the Socialist Action League in the 70′s and 80′s, but gave that away over 20 years ago, and in 1989 joined Jim Anderton’s New Labour Party. The New Labour Party became one of the Parties in the Alliance, and when the Alliance split in 1987, Keith left to join the Greens. You can read his bio here.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Toad that’s nice, but I cannot say anything good for the greens, as they have acted like a gutless Liarbour fungus supporting this not very nice gummint fuckwits on everything. Got my drift and didn’t that thick wacko walk on down some Nimbyland street in the nude? I would have SMACKED his bum Sue !!
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Toad – so tricky Keith left the New Labour Party (1987) BEFORE he joined them (1989). He obviously knew it had no future.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
And I was being polite, d4j!!!
And the Greens haven’t supported the current government on anywhere near everything. They have abstained on confidence and supply and have opposed them on quite a number of Bills. Greens decide whether to support particular government initiatives on a policy basis, not through political expediency or because of some backroom deal.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
3-coil, pardon my typo – meant 1997, not 1987.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
“And I was being polite, d4j!!!”
Vote:Tell the Monkey Man Toad as the Walls are coming down all the way to hell and I don’t give a dam.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
toad
That’s very very funny. Are you a visitor for the fringe fest. You really did make me laugh.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
toad
The Green’s supported the EFA. Umm let me think – just what part of being a party based on political activism was supporting that about?
Perhaps the Green’s always thought it was a bit on the nose that when they were younger and protesting that they didn’t write their name and residential address on their plackards….
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Buying some pride and self respect regarding our stance on human rights with a trade deal or Olympic participation or some similar strong stand would be considered by most NZders a fine deal.
Vote:March 17th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
did anyone see if the Tibetan protesters had their names and addresses on their placards?
Just shows how worthless the lives of our soldiers are. We support the US in the fight to create democracy in Afghanistan (really!) but this involves real cash (supposedly). Fiji and Zim are not big in trade so those we can criticise. All politicians should be questioned just to see how hypocritical they are, even those that want a hard line on china are generally weak in other areas, Chavez to name one.
Cheers
Vote:March 18th, 2008 at 9:40 am
burt:
Because the EFA moved in the direction of this Green Policy burt. The policy was ratified in April 2007 long before the EFA entered Mark Burton’s dreams (or nightmares, because his mishandling of it cost him his Cabinet post). And the policy was developed through the democratic input of Green Party members, which is more than I can say for those of any other party.
Vote:March 18th, 2008 at 9:58 am
I was not impressed when I heard Helen’s comments reported on Morning Report (NatRad) this am.
She said that the FTA should stand on its own two feet, implying that it should not be affected by any other political issues.
I really wonder if she’d say the same thing if it were Nazi Germany we were talking about instead of China?
Is there much difference at this stage — except perhaps in scale?
The Chinese are engaged in the annexing of a sovereign power in Tibet and the cultural genocide of an entire nation.
Doesn’t sound too much different to the actions of Hitler back in the 1940s to me.
The reality is that you can’t separate human rights abuses and trade — at least not if you want to sleep straight in your bed at night.
How is it that we can impose sanctions against *some* nations for their political leanings and human rights abuses, yet we can embrace another nation which is even more oppressive and dictatorial?
Vote:March 18th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Yes, aardvark, what Clark’s comments here remind me of is Muldoon’s staunch defence of continuing to give succour to apartheid South Africa through trade relations and sporting contacts. The old “trade/sport etc have nothing to do with politics / human rights” line.
And before the righties here get too excited by the Green attacks on Clark over this, remember that Key, McCully and Groser are backing her to the hilt in this. Puts those of you who do have some genuine concerns for human rights in a difficult position. Might have to consider voting Green!
Vote:March 18th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Who in their right mind would vote green ? You utopian dropkicks give normal folk with a backbone the screaming shits.
Vote:Splat goes another toad !
March 18th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
This just in from Silicon Valley:
“The Chinese government, concerned that its citizens might stumble on some reports out of the violent unrest in Tibet that might not jibe with the party line, has resorted to its usual tactic for dealing with uncomfortable information — it shut it off. Inside China, access has been cut to Google News and YouTube. According to the Times Online, there are also reports that Yahoo’s news pages are unavailable. Access to other sites — including CNN, Wikipedia, the photo-sharing site Flickr and the sites of the Los Angeles Times and Guardian — has also been severed, while still others, including the Times Online, are being selectively censored.”
See: http://svextra.com/blogs/gmsv/2008/03/bitter_fruit_served_on_an_old_china_pattern.html#respond
Vote: