Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

[mark45y]

Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day.

It is a really back page news story. If you look at an American newspaper you would have a hard time finding it.

The only newsworthy thing about the story is the obvious hypocrisy of Hillary talking about human rights.

If one wanted a story about human rights today the Nobel prize story was headlines all over the world in both print and TV.

So, it led me to wonder why on earth anyone would read and post a story that had as its only news interest the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and the US.

So I looked at the copyright of the story and it is BNO News.

BNO News is a news agency based in Tilburg, the Netherlands.

Who reads BNO news based in the Netherlands to find news stories designed to point out American hypocrisy?

1. This topic was published in WORLD NEWS by the editor in charge on board of Thaivisa; whoever that is and whyever they decided to publish the OP.

2. I did a quick check and BNO (never heard of) was bought by MSNBC who, in turn, are owned by: NBC Universal with 82% of the Shares and Microsoft 18% of the shares:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

3. I also did a quick Google: Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

and guess who's on top? Thaivisa !

BTW: Mark45y; you are a Master in not answering and replying to my previous posts and questions but sidetracking onto different paths and roads all the time

LaoPo

My question was on topic. So what makes the news on Thai Visa so much different than BBC or Al Jazeera? Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Be honest and answer my question without trying to divert attention to more war crimes. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

You answer my question and I'll answer yours.

[LaoPo]

Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day.

It is a really back page news story. If you look at an American newspaper you would have a hard time finding it.

The only newsworthy thing about the story is the obvious hypocrisy of Hillary talking about human rights.

If one wanted a story about human rights today the Nobel prize story was headlines all over the world in both print and TV.

So, it led me to wonder why on earth anyone would read and post a story that had as its only news interest the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and the US.

So I looked at the copyright of the story and it is BNO News.

BNO News is a news agency based in Tilburg, the Netherlands.

Who reads BNO news based in the Netherlands to find news stories designed to point out American hypocrisy?

1. This topic was published in WORLD NEWS by the editor in charge on board of Thaivisa; whoever that is and whyever they decided to publish the OP.

2. I did a quick check and BNO (never heard of) was bought by MSNBC who, in turn, are owned by: NBC Universal with 82% of the Shares and Microsoft 18% of the shares:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

3. I also did a quick Google: Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

and guess who's on top? Thaivisa !

BTW: Mark45y; you are a Master in not answering and replying to my previous posts and questions but sidetracking onto different paths and roads all the time

LaoPo

My question was on topic. So what makes the news on Thai Visa so much different than BBC or Al Jazeera? Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Be honest and answer my question without trying to divert attention to more war crimes. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

You answer my question and I'll answer yours.

Did you ? I'm sorry and maybe I missed it ?

"The ONLY thing I'm asking Mark is that you -and other American members- stop labeling me and other members of being Anti-American!

(didn't you read my post, before: Pro- or Anti-American? )"

From a previous post.

To answer to YOUR question: WHERE was I in my last post diverting to more war crimes ?

I have NO idea why the topic about Hillary Clinton was posted in the first place but I fully agree with you that it is a remarkable coincidence that both the Human Rigths Day and The Nobel Prize day are on the same day but I have also NO idea that is is/was the Human Rights Day today since I didn't have any chance yet -today- to read any newspapers or see television, apart from news on Thaivisa.

Concluding: I have no bloody idea whether the Human Rights Day was/is big news in other countries, other than on this topic.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day.

It is a really back page news story. If you look at an American newspaper you would have a hard time finding it.

The only newsworthy thing about the story is the obvious hypocrisy of Hillary talking about human rights.

If one wanted a story about human rights today the Nobel prize story was headlines all over the world in both print and TV.

So, it led me to wonder why on earth anyone would read and post a story that had as its only news interest the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and the US.

So I looked at the copyright of the story and it is BNO News.

BNO News is a news agency based in Tilburg, the Netherlands.

Who reads BNO news based in the Netherlands to find news stories designed to point out American hypocrisy?

1. This topic was published in WORLD NEWS by the editor in charge on board of Thaivisa; whoever that is and whyever they decided to publish the OP.

2. I did a quick check and BNO (never heard of) was bought by MSNBC who, in turn, are owned by: NBC Universal with 82% of the Shares and Microsoft 18% of the shares:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

3. I also did a quick Google: Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

and guess who's on top? Thaivisa !

BTW: Mark45y; you are a Master in not answering and replying to my previous posts and questions but sidetracking onto different paths and roads all the time

LaoPo

My question was on topic. So what makes the news on Thai Visa so much different than BBC or Al Jazeera? Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Be honest and answer my question without trying to divert attention to more war crimes. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

You answer my question and I'll answer yours.

Did you ? I'm sorry and maybe I missed it ?

"The ONLY thing I'm asking Mark is that you -and other American members- stop labeling me and other members of being Anti-American!

(didn't you read my post, before: Pro- or Anti-American? )"

From a previous post.

To answer to YOUR question: WHERE was I in my last post diverting to more war crimes ?

I have NO idea why the topic about Hillary Clinton was posted in the first place but I fully agree with you that it is a remarkable coincidence that both the Human Rigths Day and The Nobel Prize day are on the same day but I have also NO idea that is is/was the Human Rights Day today since I didn't have any chance yet -today- to read any newspapers or see television, apart from news on Thaivisa.

Concluding: I have no bloody idea whether the Human Rights Day was/is big news in other countries, other than on this topic.

LaoPo

You can trust me on this one. Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story. BBC and Al Jazeera carried the whole award ceremony of the Noble Prize.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

Why do you think a news story about Hillary Clinton whose only news worthiness was American hypocrisy would draw almost 400% more views on Thai Visa than the lead story of the Nobel Peace prize all over the world. You answer my question and I'll answer yours. What do you think?

[luckizuchinni]

It is a VERY WEAK argument to label someone anti-country if you disagree with a certain poster/member !

LaoPo

Despite your protests that you love the USA, you don't get a free pass, nor does SergeiY, from being criticized as being anti-American. Most of the two of your posts are certainly against the country. But there is Freedom of Speech in the US (well, maybe not for classified material) so you guys are free to be anti-American (especially as I don't think you are American, so of course you are free to be.) Just as other members are free to point out your bias when discounting or arguing against one of your points.

I happen to like dim sum and pandas. Does that make me "pro-China?" I dislike pickpockets in Rome. Does that make me "anti-Italy?" Listing what you like about the USA does not make you pro-America. All we, as members here, can go by is the body of posts you make. And most of them are adamantly critical of the USA. For most readers, that would make you seem anti-American, and while some would think poorly of you for that, others, like SergeiY, would probably applaud you for that.

Why do you care anyway what other posters think? It doesn't really matter. Just respond to rational arguments when you read them and ignore anything else.

[LaoPo]

You can trust me on this one. Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story. BBC and Al Jazeera carried the whole award ceremony of the Noble Prize.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

Why do you think a news story about Hillary Clinton whose only news worthiness was American hypocrisy would draw almost 400% more views on Thai Visa than the lead story of the Nobel Peace prize all over the world. You answer my question and I'll answer yours. What do you think?

1. I do.

2. I answered your questions but I have not seen any answer from you.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

You can trust me on this one. Almost every news network that was not censored carried the Nobel prize ceremony and an anti Chinese and anti Russian human rights commentary. No TV networks carried the Hillary human rights story. Millions of views for the Nobel prize story none for the Hillary story. BBC and Al Jazeera carried the whole award ceremony of the Noble Prize.

Look at the difference in number of comments and views of the two stories (50 to 230) on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

Why do you think a news story about Hillary Clinton whose only news worthiness was American hypocrisy would draw almost 400% more views on Thai Visa than the lead story of the Nobel Peace prize all over the world. You answer my question and I'll answer yours. What do you think?

1. I do.

2. I answered your questions but I have not seen any answer from you.

LaoPo

I have no bloody idea is not answering a question. That is evading answering a question. Some other posters of less Intelligence perhaps. If you don't answer a simple question like the one I posed it is because you don't want to, not because you don't know the answer.

Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

Why do you think a news story about Hillary Clinton whose only news worthiness was American hypocrisy would draw almost 400% more views on Thai Visa than the lead story of the Nobel Peace prize all over the world.

Edited December 10, 2010 by mark45y

[LaoPo]

It is a VERY WEAK argument to label someone anti-country if you disagree with a certain poster/member !

LaoPo

Despite your protests that you love the USA, you don't get a free pass, nor does SergeiY, from being criticized as being anti-American. Most of the two of your posts are certainly against the country. But there is Freedom of Speech in the US (well, maybe not for classified material) so you guys are free to be anti-American (especially as I don't think you are American, so of course you are free to be.) Just as other members are free to point out your bias when discounting or arguing against one of your points.

I happen to like dim sum and pandas. Does that make me "pro-China?" I dislike pickpockets in Rome. Does that make me "anti-Italy?" Listing what you like about the USA does not make you pro-America. All we, as members here, can go by is the body of posts you make. And most of them are adamantly critical of the USA. For most readers, that would make you seem anti-American, and while some would think poorly of you for that, others, like SergeiY, would probably applaud you for that.

Why do you care anyway what other posters think? It doesn't really matter. Just respond to rational arguments when you read them and ignore anything else.

Correct; it might SEEM I am anti-A but I'm not; they're labeling me as such because they fail to read and respond properly.

I do care what others say because it's not nice to be called a thief over and over again or anti-A over and over again, and you're not.

The (in)famous Pavlovian reflexes start taking position; i.e (just in case some haven't heard of it):

PAVLOV reflexes: If you ring a bell and give food at the same time to a dog the next time the bell rings the dog will start to drool, even if the food isn't there (yet);

meaning, if you write over and over that someone is anti-A or anti-B people start believing it.

The same with calling names to others; instead discussing the topic and content at hand, some members qualify a certain opposing view as being anti-A.

That...that is very simple minded and a weak argument, not able to discuss anymore but taking another label out of the envelope and stick in onto someone's forehead.

If I would label you as simple minded..over and over again, the trend starts setting in and after a while everybody will believe you're simple minded...

That's why I care and don't like it to be labeled anti-A.

I hope I have been clear.

LaoPo

Edited December 10, 2010 by LaoPo

[luckizuchinni]

It is a VERY WEAK argument to label someone anti-country if you disagree with a certain poster/member !

LaoPo

Despite your protests that you love the USA, you don't get a free pass, nor does SergeiY, from being criticized as being anti-American. Most of the two of your posts are certainly against the country. But there is Freedom of Speech in the US (well, maybe not for classified material) so you guys are free to be anti-American (especially as I don't think you are American, so of course you are free to be.) Just as other members are free to point out your bias when discounting or arguing against one of your points.

I happen to like dim sum and pandas. Does that make me "pro-China?" I dislike pickpockets in Rome. Does that make me "anti-Italy?" Listing what you like about the USA does not make you pro-America. All we, as members here, can go by is the body of posts you make. And most of them are adamantly critical of the USA. For most readers, that would make you seem anti-American, and while some would think poorly of you for that, others, like SergeiY, would probably applaud you for that.

Why do you care anyway what other posters think? It doesn't really matter. Just respond to rational arguments when you read them and ignore anything else.

Correct; it might SEEM I am anti-A but I'm not; they're labeling me as such because they fail to read and respond properly.

I do care what others say because it's not nice to be called a thief over and over again or anti-A over and over again, and you're not.

The (in)famous Pavlovian reflexes start taking postitin; i.e (just in case some haven't heard of it):

PAVLOV reflexes: If you ring a bell and give food at the same time to a dog the next time the bell rings the dog will start to drool, even if the food isn't there (yet); meaning, if you write over and over that someone is anti-A or anti-B people start believing it.

The same with calling names to others; instead discussing the topic and content at hand, some members qualify a certain opposing view as being anti-A.

That...that is very simple minded and a weak argument, not able to discuss anymore but taking another label out of the envelope and stick in onto someone's forehead.

If I would label you as simple minded..over and over again, the trend starts setting in and after a while everybody will believe you're simple minded...

That's why I care and don;t like it to be labeled anti-A.

I hope I have been clear.

LaoPo

I rather think most everybody posting here know what a Pavlovian Reflex is. No need to be condescending.

My point is that I think you are taking it too seriously. Maybe some of the people who think you are anti-American think great things of you because of that.

You may be a great guy, fun to be with, a valuable friend. You also present yourself as being anti-American. So what? People who dislike America's role in the world can still be great people. And "anti-American" is just a label, after all. It doesn't change who you are.

While it might be important for co-workers and people with whom you have contact to think well of you, we're all just electrons in space. We have no impact on each other. If I meet you down at MBK, and we start up a conversation, I will never know you are LaoPo. You are just the guy I chatted with.

[LaoPo]

I have no bloody idea is not answering a question. That is evading answering a question. Some other posters of less Intelligence perhaps. If you don't answer a simple question like the one I posed it is because you don't want to, not because you don't know the answer.

Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa but not in the rest of the world and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world but not on Thai Visa?

Why do you think a news story about Hillary Clinton whose only news worthiness was American hypocrisy would draw almost 400% more views on Thai Visa than the lead story of the Nobel Peace prize all over the world.

I give up; you did NOT answer to any of my quesions as posted in POST # 19 - 20 - 25 - 28 - 30 and 35; that's NOT answering in 6 posts; a record.

I ask it for the last time: PLEASE STOP LABELING ME ANTI-AMERICAN, WILL YOU PLEASE!?

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

I rather think most everybody posting here know what a Pavlovian Reflex is. No need to be condescending.

My point is that I think you are taking it too seriously. Maybe some of the people who think you are anti-American think great things of you because of that.

You may be a great guy, fun to be with, a valuable friend. You also present yourself as being anti-American. So what? People who dislike America's role in the world can still be great people. And "anti-American" is just a label, after all. It doesn't change who you are.

While it might be important for co-workers and people with whom you have contact to think well of you, we're all just electrons in space. We have no impact on each other. If I meet you down at MBK, and we start up a conversation, I will never know you are LaoPo. You are just the guy I chatted with.

I was not; never have the intention to be nor act condescending to anyone; if you see a sincere remark as condescending I think you see ghosts that aren't there !

LaoPo

[luckizuchinni]

I rather think most everybody posting here know what a Pavlovian Reflex is. No need to be condescending.

My point is that I think you are taking it too seriously. Maybe some of the people who think you are anti-American think great things of you because of that.

You may be a great guy, fun to be with, a valuable friend. You also present yourself as being anti-American. So what? People who dislike America's role in the world can still be great people. And "anti-American" is just a label, after all. It doesn't change who you are.

While it might be important for co-workers and people with whom you have contact to think well of you, we're all just electrons in space. We have no impact on each other. If I meet you down at MBK, and we start up a conversation, I will never know you are LaoPo. You are just the guy I chatted with.

I was not; never have the intention to be nor act condescending to anyone; if you see a sincere remark as condescending I think you see ghosts that aren't there !

LaoPo

It is condescending if you feel you have to explain a Pysch 101 mainstay to all of us dummies here.

[bonobo]

Let's leave off who is anti-American and who bleeds red, white, and blue. Points have been made, and that is OK so far, but no reason to belabor it anymore.

[geriatrickid]

I don't get it. Mrs. Clinton speaks out on behalf of a Nobel Peace prize winner that has been arrested by the Chinese and she is then is condemned in here. Few countries have said anything. If no one speaks up, who will act to protect this person? Mrs. Clinton didn't say or do anything wrong and yet the rude comments fly. Is it so bad that she expressed support for human rights?

Not a word is offered about the 17 countries invited that stayed away from the nobel peace prize ceremony; Algeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia,Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Iran. Afghanistan, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Iraq, Vietnam and Morocco. Not one of these countries has a human rights record to be proud of and yet they like many of the posters are often critical of women like Mrs. Clinton. These countries use human rights day to spout their bankrupt political views, but the truth is demonstrated when they refuse a basic gesture such as attending the nobel proze ceremony. It seems to me there are some people/countries that allow their obsessive anti americanism get in the way. Mrs. Clinton, her views and the country she represents are certainly welcome when its nationals put their lives at risk to deliver aid in countries like Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Edited December 11, 2010 by geriatrickid

[LaoPo]

I don't get it. Mrs. Clinton speaks out on behalf of a Nobel Peace prize winner that has been arrested by the Chinese and she is then is condemned in here. Few countries have said anything. If no one speaks up, who will act to protect this person? Mrs. Clinton didn't say or do anything wrong and yet the rude comments fly. Is it so bad that she expressed support for human rights?

Not a word is offered about the 17 countries invited that stayed away from the nobel peace prize ceremony; Algeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia,Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Iran. Afghanistan, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Iraq, Vietnam and Morocco. Not one of these countries has a human rights record to be proud of and yet they like many of the posters are often critical of women like Mrs. Clinton. These countries use human rights day to spout their bankrupt political views, but the truth is demonstrated when they refuse a basic gesture such as attending the nobel proze ceremony. It seems to me there are some people/countries that allow their obsessive anti americanism get in the way. Mrs. Clinton, her views and the country she represents are certainly welcome when its nationals put their lives at risk to deliver aid in countries like Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Maybe you missed it, but AFAIK the only one who was expressing his disappointment that Mrs. Clinton got more attention in this topic (which topic at hand IS about Mrs.Clinton and Human Rights Day) rather than the Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was your fellow American member Mark45y.

You speak of rude comments. WHO posted rude comments about her ?

If there is a complaint to be filed about the attention Mrs.Clinton received (too much or too little) maybe someone should address such concerns to the OP or Moderators?

For the record: I have no objections whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton deserved/deserves the attention she received in this topic or anywhere else in the world.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

I don't get it. Mrs. Clinton speaks out on behalf of a Nobel Peace prize winner that has been arrested by the Chinese and she is then is condemned in here. Few countries have said anything. If no one speaks up, who will act to protect this person? Mrs. Clinton didn't say or do anything wrong and yet the rude comments fly. Is it so bad that she expressed support for human rights?

Not a word is offered about the 17 countries invited that stayed away from the nobel peace prize ceremony; Algeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia,Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Iran. Afghanistan, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Iraq, Vietnam and Morocco. Not one of these countries has a human rights record to be proud of and yet they like many of the posters are often critical of women like Mrs. Clinton. These countries use human rights day to spout their bankrupt political views, but the truth is demonstrated when they refuse a basic gesture such as attending the nobel proze ceremony. It seems to me there are some people/countries that allow their obsessive anti americanism get in the way. Mrs. Clinton, her views and the country she represents are certainly welcome when its nationals put their lives at risk to deliver aid in countries like Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Maybe you missed it, but AFAIK the only one who was expressing his disappointment that Mrs. Clinton got more attention in this topic (which topic at hand IS about Mrs.Clinton and Human Rights Day) rather than the Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was your fellow American member Mark45y.

You speak of rude comments. WHO posted rude comments about her ?

If there is a complaint to be filed about the attention Mrs.Clinton received (too much or too little) maybe someone should address such concerns to the OP or Moderators?

For the record: I have no objections whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton deserved/deserves the attention she received in this topic or anywhere else in the world.

LaoPo

These comments were posted and I think they were rude. I forgot who posted them I copied them as I was reading last night, but you can go back and look.

"At least, I tried but the severity of the topic and the total deceitfulness of that snake in woman’s clothes made me choke on my laugh and I puked instead."

Hilary Clintons and Obamas version of Human rights.. will they be 'celebrating' the torture, abuse, and persecution of this female political prisoner, well educated mother of three.

[LaoPo]

I don't get it. Mrs. Clinton speaks out on behalf of a Nobel Peace prize winner that has been arrested by the Chinese and she is then is condemned in here. Few countries have said anything. If no one speaks up, who will act to protect this person? Mrs. Clinton didn't say or do anything wrong and yet the rude comments fly. Is it so bad that she expressed support for human rights?

Not a word is offered about the 17 countries invited that stayed away from the nobel peace prize ceremony; Algeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia,Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Iran. Afghanistan, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Iraq, Vietnam and Morocco. Not one of these countries has a human rights record to be proud of and yet they like many of the posters are often critical of women like Mrs. Clinton. These countries use human rights day to spout their bankrupt political views, but the truth is demonstrated when they refuse a basic gesture such as attending the nobel proze ceremony. It seems to me there are some people/countries that allow their obsessive anti americanism get in the way. Mrs. Clinton, her views and the country she represents are certainly welcome when its nationals put their lives at risk to deliver aid in countries like Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Maybe you missed it, but AFAIK the only one who was expressing his disappointment that Mrs. Clinton got more attention in this topic (which topic at hand IS about Mrs.Clinton and Human Rights Day) rather than the Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was your fellow American member Mark45y.

You speak of rude comments. WHO posted rude comments about her ?

If there is a complaint to be filed about the attention Mrs.Clinton received (too much or too little) maybe someone should address such concerns to the OP or Moderators?

For the record: I have no objections whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton deserved/deserves the attention she received in this topic or anywhere else in the world.

LaoPo

These comments were posted and I think they were rude. I forgot who posted them I copied them as I was reading last night, but you can go back and look.

"At least, I tried but the severity of the topic and the total deceitfulness of that snake in woman's clothes made me choke on my laugh and I puked instead."

Hilary Clintons and Obamas version of Human rights.. will they be 'celebrating' the torture, abuse, and persecution of this female political prisoner, well educated mother of three.

Although I wasn't addressing my post to you: thank you anyway for your answer. A better answer than the ones you didn't give...and I wonder why...

But, those examples were not mine.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

I don't get it. Mrs. Clinton speaks out on behalf of a Nobel Peace prize winner that has been arrested by the Chinese and she is then is condemned in here. Few countries have said anything. If no one speaks up, who will act to protect this person? Mrs. Clinton didn't say or do anything wrong and yet the rude comments fly. Is it so bad that she expressed support for human rights?

Not a word is offered about the 17 countries invited that stayed away from the nobel peace prize ceremony; Algeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia,Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Iran. Afghanistan, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Iraq, Vietnam and Morocco. Not one of these countries has a human rights record to be proud of and yet they like many of the posters are often critical of women like Mrs. Clinton. These countries use human rights day to spout their bankrupt political views, but the truth is demonstrated when they refuse a basic gesture such as attending the nobel proze ceremony. It seems to me there are some people/countries that allow their obsessive anti americanism get in the way. Mrs. Clinton, her views and the country she represents are certainly welcome when its nationals put their lives at risk to deliver aid in countries like Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Maybe you missed it, but AFAIK the only one who was expressing his disappointment that Mrs. Clinton got more attention in this topic (which topic at hand IS about Mrs.Clinton and Human Rights Day) rather than the Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was your fellow American member Mark45y.

You speak of rude comments. WHO posted rude comments about her ?

If there is a complaint to be filed about the attention Mrs.Clinton received (too much or too little) maybe someone should address such concerns to the OP or Moderators?

For the record: I have no objections whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton deserved/deserves the attention she received in this topic or anywhere else in the world.

LaoPo

These comments were posted and I think they were rude. I forgot who posted them I copied them as I was reading last night, but you can go back and look.

"At least, I tried but the severity of the topic and the total deceitfulness of that snake in woman's clothes made me choke on my laugh and I puked instead."

Hilary Clintons and Obamas version of Human rights.. will they be 'celebrating' the torture, abuse, and persecution of this female political prisoner, well educated mother of three.

Although I wasn't addressing my post to you: thank you anyway for your answer. A better answer than the ones you didn't give...and I wonder why...

But, those examples were not mine.

LaoPo

More than happy to but I didn't know what the question was. I think there is a difference between a statement and a question but all I saw was a statement. If you could re state it I will try to answer.

[LaoPo]

More than happy to but I didn't know what the question was. I think there is a difference between a statement and a question but all I saw was a statement. If you could re state it I will try to answer.

That would be nice.

In post # 39 I wrote this:

"I give up; you did NOT answer to any of my quesions as posted in POST # 19 - 20 - 25 - 28 - 30 and 35; that's NOT answering in 6 posts; a record."

And, instead of repeating my basic question in all those posts I kindly invite you to look it up for yourself.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

More than happy to but I didn't know what the question was. I think there is a difference between a statement and a question but all I saw was a statement. If you could re state it I will try to answer.

That would be nice.

In post # 39 I wrote this:

"I give up; you did NOT answer to any of my quesions as posted in POST # 19 - 20 - 25 - 28 - 30 and 35; that's NOT answering in 6 posts; a record."

And, instead of repeating my basic question in all those posts I kindly invite you to look it up for yourself.

LaoPo

I asked you the following.

“Look at the difference in comments about the two stories on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world. “

What did you answer? “I have NO idea why the topic about Hillary Clinton was posted in the first place but I fully agree with you that it is a remarkable coincidence that both the Human Rigths Day and The Nobel Prize day are on the same day but I have also NO idea that is is/was the Human Rights Day today since I didn't have any chance yet -today- to read any newspapers or see television, apart from news on Thaivisa. Concluding: I have no bloody idea whether the Human Rights Day was/is big news in other countries, other than on this topic."

I did not ask why the topic was posted on Thai Visa. I asked why the Hillary Human Right story was so big on Thai Visa and why the Nobel peace prize story was so big everywhere else?

So I repeat my question, “Look at the difference in comments about the two stories on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world. “

I went through the posts 30 and 35 that you said had a question, I can't find any questions for me.

Post #30 “1. This topic was published in WORLD NEWS by the editor in charge on board of Thaivisa; whoever that is and whyever they decided to publish the OP.

2. I did a quick check and BNO (never heard of) was bought by MSNBC who, in turn, are owned by: NBC Universal with 82% of the Shares and Microsoft 18% of the shares:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

3. I also did a quick Google: Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

and guess who's on top? Thaivisa !

BTW: Mark45y; you are a Master in not answering and replying to my previous posts and questions but sidetracking onto different paths and roads all the time."

Post #35, “

1. I do.

2. I answered your questions but I have not seen any answer from you.

LaoPo”

You said you asked me a question in Posts number 30 and 35. I listed the posts above and I can't find any questions. Perhaps you can point them out to me.

[LaoPo]

More than happy to but I didn't know what the question was. I think there is a difference between a statement and a question but all I saw was a statement. If you could re state it I will try to answer.

That would be nice.

In post # 39 I wrote this:

"I give up; you did NOT answer to any of my quesions as posted in POST # 19 - 20 - 25 - 28 - 30 and 35; that's NOT answering in 6 posts; a record."

And, instead of repeating my basic question in all those posts I kindly invite you to look it up for yourself.

LaoPo

I asked you the following.

"Look at the difference in comments about the two stories on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world. "

What did you answer? "I have NO idea why the topic about Hillary Clinton was posted in the first place but I fully agree with you that it is a remarkable coincidence that both the Human Rigths Day and The Nobel Prize day are on the same day but I have also NO idea that is is/was the Human Rights Day today since I didn't have any chance yet -today- to read any newspapers or see television, apart from news on Thaivisa. Concluding: I have no bloody idea whether the Human Rights Day was/is big news in other countries, other than on this topic."

I did not ask why the topic was posted on Thai Visa. I asked why the Hillary Human Right story was so big on Thai Visa and why the Nobel peace prize story was so big everywhere else?

So I repeat my question, "Look at the difference in comments about the two stories on Thai Visa. What conclusion should I draw? You tell me. Why is the Hillary human rights story so big on Thai Visa and the Nobel prize story so big everywhere else in the world. "

I went through the posts 30 and 35 that you said had a question, I can't find any questions for me.

Post #30 "1. This topic was published in WORLD NEWS by the editor in charge on board of Thaivisa; whoever that is and whyever they decided to publish the OP.

2. I did a quick check and BNO (never heard of) was bought by MSNBC who, in turn, are owned by: NBC Universal with 82% of the Shares and Microsoft 18% of the shares:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

3. I also did a quick Google: Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day

and guess who's on top? Thaivisa !

BTW: Mark45y; you are a Master in not answering and replying to my previous posts and questions but sidetracking onto different paths and roads all the time."

Post #35, "

1. I do.

2. I answered your questions but I have not seen any answer from you.

LaoPo"

You said you asked me a question in Posts number 30 and 35. I listed the posts above and I can't find any questions. Perhaps you can point them out to me.

I give up; you either don't want to answer to my question or you fail to see my question. There's no middle way.

I'm out.

LaoPo

[mark45y]

A request for help from anyone!!!!

LaoPo said he asked me a question in posts #30 and #35.

I can't find any questions to me in either of those posts. Maybe my eyesight is failing. Can some one help!!!

Maybe someone with superior mental or sight abilities to me can assist. I would like to answer LaoPo's questions but I am at my wits end. I can't find them. Help please.

[Ulysses G.]

Don't worry, some posters use that tactic to ignore the substance of your posts and it is done rather frequently. Another trick is to accuse another member of attacks when there are actually not any.

By the way MSNBC is well known for a far-left bias.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[XXpate48USA]

Don't worry, some posters use that tactic to ignore the substance of your posts and it is done rather frequently. Another trick is to accuse another member of attacks when there are actually not any.

By the way MSNBC is well known for a far-left bias.

gee, why would anyone think msnbc has a left leaning slant? Now, mr kieth Oberman is just one fair man.....yikkkkkes....

I never have seen anything so biased and so hate filled. That is no where near a news program. It is a Inteligence slamming comedy show. Anyone who can stand to listen to that "crap" is just not in tune with anything that is considered normal

How on earth can something like those two, especially Oberman consider himself balanced?...I have never seen a bigger Idiot

on television before. How do they even stay on the air? Rating's?...hmm....I think donations(soro's) maybe might keep them on the air but surely not any rating profits. Unless the usa has gone completely off the deep end....Why do so many like them hate what is right and good? ...The usa better get it's act together soon!! If this kind of thinking is taught in our schools and colleges...actually, this has what has happened over the last 25 years while parents have not been listening to what thier kids are being brainwashed with.....now, look what we have to deal with!!............it's scary for sure!

[hammered]

Bit of hypocricy in a member of the US government celebrating a human rights day when that government has done its best to reduce human rights over the past decade or so for both its own people the people of other countries that it clearly believes have no access to human rights at all if its own murderous military decide to kill or maim them

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe a more fair, tolerant nation like Iran, China or Russia should sponsor Human Rights Day. I doubt that most of the usual US bashers would have anything to complain about then.

[TAWP]

The requirement to declare yourself a 'good nation of human rights' is comparing yourself with the worst?

You sure ain't aiming high...

[Ulysses G.]

Every country in the world does things that are "wrong".

Mankind is far from perfect and pretending that the US can somehow deal with the rest of the planet without lots of compromises, accommodations and concessions is extremely naive.

The best that a superpower can do when dealing a medley of cultures and devious human beings is to do the best that they can and the US is doing a heck of a lot better than any superpower that came before it.

A future with China as possibly the world leader certainly does not look any better. There ain't no heaven on Earth and there probably never will be.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day is the last big joke in 2010.

If that's the way you see it then you are one misinformed, brainwashed and confused individual.

sorry, i do not watch FOX NEWS.

Al-Alam is not exactly known for objective reporting.

[koheesti]

Secretary of State Clinton celebrates Human Rights Day is the last big joke in 2010.

If that's the way you see it then you are one misinformed, brainwashed and confused individual.

sorry, i do not watch FOX NEWS.

Al-Alam is not exactly known for objective reporting.

Is that the channel he picks up with his tin foil hat?