Indian democracy loses to Chinese efficiency - by 160 votes

[chauism]

That way no media can be biased or not biased but thanks to the news papers here many of the MP's have given up politics forever for over charging on their bills.

If we can do this to our politicians then we are not going to be kind to your politicians or sorry military leaders when they do a mass genocide. The best way to tame news is to give them easy access and that way they become less critical in what the publish.

Regards

One thing I notice about the west media, it might be relatively transparent on the domestic issues because it matters to their own lives, but on international issues it tend to side with what the government's interest is. For each country when they talk about other countries, it is quite hard to find a different voice.

 

[Always Neutral]

One thing I notice about the west media, it might be relatively unbiased on the domestic issues because it matters to their own lives, but on international issues it tend to side with what the government's interest is. For each country when they talk about other countries, it is quite hard to find a different voice.

Why even BBC criticises our foreign policy. See the articles on Iraq.

Regards

 

[chauism]

Why even BBC criticises our foreign policy. See the articles on Iraq.

Regards

You know I am not talking about foreign policies, right? They only talk about those when the issue start to affect their own lives. What about say something to inform the public about there is no WMD in Iraq before when it was already too late?

On a side note, since you are from Britain, have you seen Spooks?

 

[Always Neutral]

You know I am not talking about foreign policies, right? They only talk about those when the issue start to affect their own lives. What about say something to inform the public about there is no WMD in Iraq before when it was already too late?

You are out of touch with time or don't get to read our media articles. They were the first to expose MI 5 fake memos on Iraq buying uranium cakes from Niger or that no WMDS existed in Iraq.

Regards

 

[Always Neutral]

Spooks the serial on BBC ? Well its produced by a private company on behalf of BBC and hence not BBC's views if thats what you mean.

Regards

 

[chauism]

You are out of touch with time or don't get to read our media articles. They were the first to expose MI 5 fake memos on Iraq buying uranium cakes from Niger or that no WMDS existed in Iraq.

Regards

Well, that is true. Since most of my news sources are from the states. I guess they just did not do it fast enough then. I think the main reason for that is somehow I got the impression that most of the news source in UK besides BBC are full of tabloids, well I might be wrong.

 

[Always Neutral]

Well, that is true. Since most of my news sources are from the states. I guess they just did not do it fast enough then. I think the main reason for that is somehow I got the impression that most of the news source in UK besides BBC are full of tabloids, well I might be wrong.

The tabloids are for people who like to see clevage, football results and which star is having an affair. The Guardian, Telegraph and Times are all good sources.

Regards

 

[chauism]

Spooks the serial on BBC ? Well its produced by a private company on behalf of BBC and hence not BBC's views if thats what you mean.

Regards

Actually the reason I mentioned it is because there are many incidences in Spooks about the government's cover ups and showing how fragile the democracy is if just a few people really put their mind into how to manipulate the public.

The most noticeable one is "Gas and Oil" from series 5, when they almost succeed in destroy democracy in UK if there are not those MI5 agents. Anyways that is just a TV show. I guess it is not the realism in UK.

 

[Always Neutral]

Actually the reason I mentioned it is because there are many incidences in Spooks about the government's cover ups and showing how fragile the democracy is if just a few people really put their mind into how to manipulate the public.

The most noticeable one is "Gas and Oil" from series 5, when they almost succeed in destroy democracy in UK if there are not those MI5 agents. Anyways that is just a TV show. I guess it is not the realism in UK.

Well if its any comfort to you the House of Lords (the highest court in UK) has often made the MI 5 Chief be a witness in front of it and then allowed the press carry parts of his statement. The last was when the private inquest of Princess Diana's death was going on last year. The point is that the more access you give to the press the more likely is it that you will get fairer articles about china.

Regards

 

[chauism]

The tabloids are for people who like to see clevage, football results and which star is having an affair. The Guardian, Telegraph and Times are all good sources.

Regards

well, indeed I rarely read from those besides Telegraph. However again there is no unbiased news. It will be naive to think that there is any integrity left in journalism, it is all about ratings and volumes. They write whatever gets people's attentions.

 

[chauism]

Well if its any comfort to you the House of Lords (the highest court in UK) has often made the MI 5 Chief be a witness in front of it and then allowed the press carry parts of his statement. The last was when the private inquest of Princess Diana's death was going on last year. The point is that the more access you give to the press the more likely is it that you will get fairer articles about china.

Regards

I guess you really need to watch it to understand what I meant. In these episodes they saw elements in the British Government, MI6 and the UK press conspire in an attempt to over-throw the Parliament and the Prime Minister. These elements had agreed that for Britain to survive the threats posed by modern day terrorism, democracy had to be replaced with rule by committee in the 21st Century.

Actually I agree with you on this. It is kind of stupid for Chinese government keep foreign reporters out of all the loops, but it is improving I think. Last year western medias during the Tibet riots and the Olympics did something for China that the Chinese government could only do it in its wet dream. Chinese people both inside and outside of China had never been so united back then thanks to the help of the western medias.

If you have time to read following two articles you might understand why. They are quite long though.

China Shouldn’t Be Inscrutable

Angry Youth

 

[spsk]

Corruption is actually against the core interests of those people who are in power. Think this way, they kind of own the whole country, why do they want to be corrupted for? However when the other people who are under their control are corrupted, then it will cause a lot of problem for the leaders, because those corruptions will just mean that they are loosing control of that is rightfully theirs. Of course this doesn't mean nepotism is not in play in China, but this is already rooted in the East Asian cultures, and it will not be eliminated by any systems.

Let me make another analogy here. Think of a company, who do you think will care more about the well being of the company and are more resentful towards corruption within the company? The people who owns the company or some hired executives?

Corporate management cannot have any kind of similarity with a country's governance. What you say can happen only in a kingdom, I am sure in China too nobody is permanent leader , If there is no permanent leader why can't there be any corruption . There is going to be no problem if all are corrupted . Being corrupted is not going to bring any problem but the other way can bring all possible problems to corrupted leaders

 

[chauism]

Corporate management cannot have any kind of similarity with a country's governance. What you say can happen only in a kingdom, I am sure in China too nobody is permanent leader , If there is no permanent leader why can't there be any corruption . There is going to be no problem if all are corrupted . Being corrupted is not going to bring any problem but the other way can bring all possible problems to corrupted leaders

Well, they are more permanent than you think.

I did not understand what you are trying to say in the last part.

 

[Always Neutral]

Well, they are more permanent than you think.

I did not understand what you are trying to say in the last part.

Hi GPit and Chausim,

You guys said that chinese did not think about the genocide in Tiananmen. Care to tell me why 150,000 of your country men gathered with candles in Hong Kong ?

BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | Hong Kong's Tiananmen beacon

It was the strongest possible answer by the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong to the Chinese government's efforts to sweep the memory of the Tiananmen massacre under the carpet.

A huge crowd, which the organisers said numbered 150,000, gathered at Victoria Park in Hong Kong to remember the anniversary of the massacre on 4 June 1989. That would make it the biggest anniversary commemoration of all here.

Hope you will not blame this article on western media bias.

Regards

 

[spsk]

It is not that people don't remember it happened, it is that they don't really care. Things happened 20 years ago is not going to affect how they carry on with they life unless it gives them a holiday or extra money. Otherwise it will not be any significance to them. Anyways, why should they care about bunch of stupid people being used by few to do stupid things that cause many casualties. As for the number of the casualties, the government said none besides 241 soldiers being killed or wounded by those students(which I bet you never heard in the western medias) and the western media said around couple thousands. My pick is around couple hundreds of students were killed that day.

Here is some information of declassified NSA document of the number of casualty.
"Secretary of State's Morning Summary for June 4, 1989"

Thats were the difference between dictatorship and democracy comes into picture, If it happened in a democratic country definitely ruling party is answerable to that.

Those killed were students you can't even call them normal civilians because they are your future.This show how you are brainwashed that your system is best suited for your country . I am sure you have some justification why that 100s killed too . For your information if 241 soldiers killed in that incident it shows how poorly they were trained which caused this much of casualties both in security forces and civilians.

btw why should government deploy soldiers in a civilian area?