Wanderer

I can only assume that you're being intentionally obtuse here.

If you honestly believe that your research proves that Chinese actions in Tibet are fine and that the breaches of human rights there are absolutely ok, you are exposing yourself as a naive apologist for a misunderstood sense of cultural relativism.

You are also delving into the philosophical mire that is the universalisation or otherwise of morality and the question of tangible moral truth, encompassing imperialism, religion and nationalism.

Dogmatism is dogmatism, no matter how you dress it up.

Tibet is part of China therefore the laws of China and their processing are Tibets

What the does all this have to do with China executing a mentally ill man?

Exactly what I have been thinking

Are you stupid or something or maybe you haven't studied the case.....HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS IN THE SUITCASE!

He knew perfectly well what was in the suitcase, how many times has this excuse been used before?

I think (hope?) you've got a bit confused here. What people are saying is:

1 - You think that sovereign countries should be able to do whatever they want, regardless of human rights abuses.

2 - You therefore think that countries have no right to invade other sovereign countries, an extension of point 1.

3 - You think that China's action in Tibet doesn't contradict either 1 or 2, when in fact it contradicts both..

1. Inside their own country

2. Yes

3. Having researched it, Tibet is part of China so they can do what they like there!

1. All members of the United Nations agree to abide by the Declaration to which I referred.

A declaration is not legally binding and not all member states fully support it!

You say that "China", by which you mean the CCP, can do whatever the hell it wants in Tibet and/or Xinjiang because it is part of "their" country. You also said and reconfirmed that it is wrong for one sovereign state to invade another. Those two statements contradict each other.

They are occupied territories, like Palestine, Cyprus and Western Sahara so there is no contradiction there whatsoever!

Otherwise you're saying that it's fine for totalitarian aggressor states to invade and oppress anyone they can.

I'm not sure how you're coming to this conclusion and it really does baffle me!

It is a globally accepted standard. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to be exact.

You show me a list of current signatories and i'll disagree with the use of the use of the word 'globally'

You said it was wrong for states to invade other states. Why then was it OK for the PRC to invade and occupy Tibet and indeed Xinjiang?

Yes I do believe that it is wrong as I stated a few posts ago! I don't know Scott, why don't you tell us why it was ok for PRC to invade and occupy Tibet and Xinjiang!

1. Human Rights are universal. They are the same in China as they are in the UK.

2. When you say "China" does this or that, you are in fact talking about an unelected clique which is in power via brute strength. You think it's OK for unelected, incredibly authoritarian governments to do whatever the hell they please simply because they can? Fuck off.

Different cultures have different ideas of human rights! They are not a globally accepted standard, the main shared rights seem to be food, water and shelter. Read this: Top French court rips heart out of Sarkozy internet law - Times Online

There are multiple styles of government and all have their good and bad points. China has one which is considered 'bad' by western ideologies, however, it is they not us who are the ones weathering the current financial climate more comfortably. As for the last part of your post, this has been answered in my previous posts! Please keep it civil!

I would like a prince Albert

So it's ok to have an unfair trial? Sorry but regardless of what country and differing cultures, opinions, traditions etc I fail to understand how you can brush away any compassion.

I'm not expecting the UK to turn into the US and get involved in every other countries politics but this has been an exception.

Wonder how you would feel if you developed a mental illness, received an unfair trial and was sentenced to death? Yep, it's fine... it's their country.o_O

It is not okay to have an unfair trial in this country because it woulnd't be allowed, hopefully. I am not from China nor am I living in their society and so as an observer I have no problem with them processing criminals in any way they see fit. If this had happened in the UK, yes, of course I would have a problem with it.

The government did all they could for which I commend them however, it is not our country and we could not expect anything, just hope.

I don't understand how anyone, even with bi-polar could completely neglect the fact, which has been implanted in their head, probably from birth that Heroin is probably considered the worst drug available in 90 or so % of the worlds countries! There is a possibility that he didn't know that China had the death penalty, or the death penalty for such crimes and was willing to risk life imprisonment.

We could go with a completely wild idea, so far out there that it would be like finding out that Derek Acorah really can do what he says he can... This: Man Raped Woman to Learn English in Prison

You can't say because our government breached human rights it is ok for China to do like wise,and invade a sovereign state and breach THEIR laws and persecute peaceful buddhist monks.And persecute peaceful falun gong followers in their own country........wake up and smell the coffee!

It is okay for China to impose laws in whichever way it pleases on its own soil! The USA and its Allies invading a sovereign country such as Iraq and in the case of Germany, Russia and breaching their laws on their soil is despicable!

This man committed a crime partially within China and deserved punishment, whether or not he deserved the death penalty, peoples views differ.

Its in Rosemount, Its accross the road from the central library which is next to HM theatre, its a tiny pub below another pub called The Noose and Monkey.

Thanks mate, i'm being taken there on Wednesday supposedly , new city new cool spots

So you support a countries judicial system that has a track record of human rights atrocities? A 30 minute court case for a "possibly" mentally ill man is justified because "that's the way they do it in China".

What next, Tibet is fine?

Yes, Yes and Yes! Why? Because they are their own countries run by their own people and standards are different there, what may be a human right abuse here would never constitute one there! Imagine if China forced its prisoners to slop out or god forbid took away their 'Sega Xui 360'

Our government, the UK one have never ever, ever commited human rights abuses, never in any prison, never in Ireland, you do know its Sunday? Bloody Sunday already? I could have sworn it was Tuesday.

I don't mind what they do in Tibet, it's not my country and If I did go there I'd make sure I followed the laws!

Maybe next winter they will release a song called

Fuck yeh, you did what we told ya!

Does nobody go anymore and get trashed and watch random films like human traffic and, its all gone pete tong at 7 in the morning?

Pictures: Orphan

Different countries have different laws and we must respect that. In an ideal world the law would be international but it is not and some decisions will drive other countries round the bend, abdul basset elf megraxi anyone?

He broke the law and was dealt with and processed by the Chinese legal system which has operated this way for years. One less major drug dealer means a slightly better world.

I support Chinas decision on this matter. However, I am not in support of the death penalty in the UK.

Just moved to the deen, where is cellear 35 this night sounds like it could be good