US to stop harping on human rights

[questionmark]

The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, is due to hold talks with the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, in Moscow today amid claims that Washington has agreed to stop criticising Russia's human rights record in return for improved relations.

According to today's Kommersant newspaper, the White House will no longer issue public criticisms of Russia's democratic failings.Clinton will propose that the US and Russia co-operate on a missile defence shield against a possible Iranian attack, the paper said.

Read more...

Wow, fantastic...so now we go after Iran alluding human rights abuses (among some weapons of mass deception) by stopping to criticize one of the biggest human rights abusers...makes us all sooooo much more believable.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

"Smart power" in action.

[The Silver Thong]

So I guess we can't talk about Iran and it's human right violations just as we can't talk about Saudi's atrocities hmmmm. Just shut up and don't mention that we both have some pretty seedy allies both Russia and America.

[Torgo]

No matter what party is in power, the government is a corrupt and criminally hypocritical organization. This would have happened no matter who was in office.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

No matter what party is in power, the government is a corrupt and criminally hypocritical organization. This would have happened no matter who was in office.

Actually, the Bush Administration repeatedly called on China's, Russia's and Saudi Arabia's (among others) human rights violations. That policy was reversed by Hillary Clinton and Obama; first China, then Iran, and now Russia.

[questionmark]

Actually, the Bush Administration repeatedly called on China's, Russia's and Saudi Arabia's (among others) human rights violations. That policy was reversed by Hillary Clinton and Obama; first China, then Iran, and now Russia.

yeh, well, would have helped if the Bush administration would not have been wading up to its knees in human rights violations themselves.

[questionmark]

To be honest, doesn't make their human rights violations any less of what they are.

Right, just the critics a little more hypocrite.

[conspiracybeliever]

Does anyone see that the only time government even thinks about human rights issues is if they have something gain by it and not that they are concerned about human rights?

[questionmark]

Does anyone see that the only time government even thinks about human rights issues is if they have something gain by it and not that they are concerned about human rights?

[acidhead]

“You know, I’m of Italian descent, and if what was [happening] on Wall Street [was being done by people] with names like Celente, Caruso, Rossini, Mondavi, Torchini, or the likes, they’d call it the mafia. Oh, and there would be a firestorm, the media would be filled with it…but you can’t call the white shoe boys crooks.” --Gerald Celente

[Mr Honeybadger]

Our elected leaders have always picked and chose when we decry human rights violations and when we turn a blind eye.

It's no surprise to me that this administration would be any different.

[questionmark]

Our elected leaders have always picked and chose when we decry human rights violations and when we turn a blind eye.

It's no surprise to me that this administration would be any different.

Well, let me put it this way: I expected a little change after all the chanting.

[questionmark]

In related News:

Russia seez NO DEAL

MOSCOW (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to win specific pledges from Moscow on tougher sanctions against Iran during a visit to Russia on Tuesday but hailed progress in other areas such as arms control.

A senior U.S. official had said before the talks that Clinton wanted to know "what specific forms of pressure Russia would be prepared for to join us" if Iran did not keep promises to the international community not to pursue nuclear weapons.

Read more ...

[Pseudo Intellectual]

yeh, well, would have helped if the Bush administration would not have been wading up to its knees in human rights violations themselves.

I'd say pouring water on 3 terrorists' faces to save thousands of American and foreign lives isn't as big a "human rights" violation as the torture techniques China, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia routinely use (and not to save lives, if I might add).

[danielost]

Well, let me put it this way: I expected a little change after all the chanting.

you got a little change. the name of the president. how much little change do you need.

you should have known as i did the moment he rehired bush's people or rehired clinton's people to replace the ones of bush's people who didn't stay.

[questionmark]

I'd say pouring water on 3 terrorists' faces to save thousands of American and foreign lives isn't as big a "human rights" violation as the torture techniques China, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia routinely use (and not to save lives, if I might add).

Right...so because they do it we can do it?

Sorry, that destroys every legal principle that exists. It is either heinous and forbidden, therefore nobody should do it or it is not.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Right...so because they do it we can do it?

Sorry, that destroys every legal principle that exists. It is either heinous and forbidden, therefore nobody should do it or it is not.

No. That's not what I said at all. I compared Bush's "human rights violations" to China's, Russia's etc to show you who's worse.

And I'm no expert in legality or morality, but I'd say pouring some water on someone's face to save thousands of innocent lives is a-okay.

[questionmark]

No. That's not what I said at all. I compared Bush's "human rights violations" to China's, Russia's etc to show you who's worse.

And I'm no expert in legality or morality, but I'd say pouring some water on someone's face to save thousands of innocent lives is a-okay.

There is no better or worse when it comes to human rights violations. There only is bad.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

So, throwing a Quran in the toilet is just as bad as cutting off someone's limbs, raping them, beating them and then executing them without a trial?

[questionmark]

So, throwing a Quran in the toilet is just as bad as cutting off someone's limbs, raping them, beating them and then executing them without a trial?

Again, there is no good or better, both are heinous.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

So your answer is: They're both the same?

[questionmark]

So your answer is: They're both the same?

No, they are both heinous. What part don't you understand?

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Yes, they're both "heinous", as you say. That wasn't my question, though. I asked, which is worse?

Which is a bigger threat to America: a nuke heading to New York or a polar bear biting off a Senator's hand?

Which is worse: pouring water over a terrorist's face, or cutting off child's limbs, raping them, beating them and then executing them?

[questionmark]

Yes, they're both "heinous", as you say. That wasn't my question, though. I asked, which is worse?

Which is a bigger threat to America: a nuke heading to New York or a polar bear biting off a Senator's hand?

Which is worse: pouring water over a terrorist's face, or cutting off child's limbs, raping them, beating them and then executing them?

Are you so stubborn or are you incapable of understanding:

1. statement: there is no better or worse, only bad (want me to spell it?)

2. statement: both are heinous.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Oh my. Your moral blindness is staggering. I can only feel sorry for you.