[kvm_mkdb]

Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan

Introducing Islam Karimov, one of Washington's most recent allies in the War on Terror. The neo-Stalinist autocrat presides over Uzbekistan, a vast mineral and oil rich country strategically located in central Asia. A country where dissidents are boiled alive; where having an Islamically sanctioned beard can get you arrested; where torture is widespread. In short, a country where human rights abuses are occurring on "a massive scale," financed in part by the American taxpayer.
http://www.counterpunch.org/kassim01172004.html





Ilham Aliyev, Azerbaijan

ILHAM ALIYEV was inaugurated as president of the oil-rich Muslim country of Azerbaijan three months ago after an election condemned by international observers as blatantly fraudulent. When members of the opposition tried to protest, they were brutally beaten by police. There followed a massive, nationwide crackdown in which more than 1,000 people were arrested, including opposition leaders, activists from nongovernmental organizations, journalists and election officials who objected to the fraud. More than 100 remain in prison, including most of the senior opposition activists. A new report by Human Rights Watch documents numerous cases of torture, including severe beatings, electric shock, and threats of rape against the opposition leaders.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Jan24.html






Emomali Rakhmonov, Tajikistan

WIDESPREAD FRAUD IN TAJIKISTAN'S PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS
Numerous violations and irregularities threaten integrity of vote
(New York, March 29, 2000) - Recent elections to the lower chamber of a new parliament in Tajikistan were marred by flagrant fraud and manipulation of the vote, Human Rights Watch charged today.
http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/9982/

In all cases where Amnesty International has detailed information, people sentenced to death claim they were tortured. Allegations have included torture by ferocious beating; rape with a truncheon, penis or other objects; and electrocution of the ears, fingers, toes and anus.
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/deliver/document/13938




Feel free to add your favourite, West-endorsed dictator - hand shaking pics welcome, but optional.

[FeLiZeCaT]

With friends like that, why would you want enemies?


Sounds like anti-terrorist jobs will become a very lucrative profession in the next few months...

[kindbud]

So what's Iceland going to do about it?

[maxelson]

OhOHOHOHOHohhhhhhspliffy. That's it? That's the best rationalization you got? Best retort?
Well done.

Hm.
SMACKED DOWN. To put it in your vernacular.

[Developer]

"[T]he world would be better off without terrible human rights violating regimes, and [...] we ought to work to that end. This is basically the shared goal of the international human rights community. [... T]he goal of a world free of those kinds of regimes would be a good idea."

SimeyTheLimey, 01-13-2004

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Heh.

The kicking and flailing desperation of the ‘Blame Bush For Everything*’ crowd is downright painful to watch sometimes!

The guilt by association ‘handshake photo-op blame game’ is just plain ol’ gettin' ollllld.

Guess what boys and girls… they’re called POLITICANS. They actually meet and talk POLITICS with each other! WHOA! IMAGINE THAT!

And sometimes kiddies -without being an accomplice to everything the other will ever do- they will sometimes actually SHAKE HANDS with each other!! And here’s a real SHOCKER: when this happens, there may actually be people around with CAMERAS who like to take pictures of such events! *GASP!*

I know, I know! Perhaps hard for some folks who don’t get out much, or too young to know how the word works yet to believe, but, yes Virginia, it happens!


By the way kvm, pictured in your post isn’t Ilham Aliyev, it’s his father Heydar. Get your dictators and Bush-blames straight!

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
[But Clinton did it too]

Yes. Clinton was a liar and a crook just like GWB. He even called Suharto (which - unlike Saddam Hussein - can be reasonably compared to Hitler) "Our kind of guy".

That's always the last straw of the the Bushists.

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Guess what boys and girls… they’re called POLITICANS. They actually meet and talk POLITICS with each other! WHOA! IMAGINE THAT!

Wow. Aiding and abetting bloodthirsty dictators: just politics!

Sure, some good friends get a contract - oil drilling here, pipeline there - and in exchange we give them weapons to keep their populace down; simply politics, nothing to see: move along...

By the way kvm, pictured in your post isn’t Ilham Aliyev, it’s his father Heydar. Get your dictators and Bush-blames straight!

Ah - not the father ex-dictator, the son current-dictator. Big difference.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Some more faves:


Get a room you two!






Aww, now that's real cozy:





"Yankees fan, go home!" Opps. Did even dictator congenial Carter wear out his welcome?

Hey kvm, just curious, how old are you? How long can one have been living and breathing past the pre-teen years not to have noticed that politicians of all stripe meet and shake hands with one another? Seriously.

By any chance, have you noticed they tend to kiss babies too? Got a picture collection of that? By your logic, you could haul the photos out and claim the ones you don’t like are pedophiles!


I know you're desperate to bash Bush, and it must suck to have what you thought was your little ‘dynamite’ evidence of Bush ‘creating’ some eeeeeevil dictator as your ilk likes to assert, but just what exactly would you have the man do that's so vastly different from EVERY politician before him or since?

When he meets with other world 'leaders' that happen to have shady backgrounds (which would include a hell of a lot of them), is he supposed to slug them? Kick 'em in the nads and go "I hate you! I hate you! You die now!"?

Should he just give ‘em the thousand-yard stare? Glare menacingly and grit his teeth, while revealing a pearl-handled pistol tucked under his jacket?

Would any of that make you happy?
Something tells me if he did any of that, you'd bitch at him for it.

So what exactly do you want? For Bush to never meet or shoot the political $hit with anyone?

You'd bitch at him for that too, and you know it.

Basically, you just like bitching at the guy and blaming him for everything. Fess up. And you'd do so NO MATTER WHAT the guy ever did.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Basically, you just like bitching at the guy and blaming him for everything. Fess up. And you'd do so NO MATTER WHAT the guy ever did.

Nope. I'm protesting the use of my tax dollars to prop up the military machinery of those criminals - which they use against their own population.
I blame the administration for barking (and worse...) at some countries baseless accusations, and then cozying up with bloodthirsty tyrants, turning a blind eye to the suffering of millions.

Apparently you didn't bother reading the articles I linked - you saw the pics and decided it was 'yet another cheap shot at Bush' (which I never personally attacked). That's all right, it doesn't bother me. Keep spinning if that makes you happy.

[undotwa]

Without any dialogue between corrupt dictatorships and democracies, the situation will probably be a hell of a lot worse.

[Logic]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Without any dialogue between corrupt dictatorships and democracies, the situation will probably be a hell of a lot worse.

There is a difference between a dialogue and making lucrative contracts with dictators that act like most of the do.

If we would isolate them and make no contracts unless they change their way of ruling perhaps we would be able to change the world for the better.

But making deals with some, while attacking others won't help much. That I'm sure of.

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Without any dialogue between corrupt dictatorships and democracies

which democracies?

[maxelson]

CRASH, what's happening? You're only supporting the point that OUR POLITICIANS are liars, crooks, hypocrites and enemies of the world.
I thought you were a bit more supportive of our government than that.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by maxelson:
CRASH, what's happening? You're only supporting the point that OUR POLITICIANS are liars, crooks, hypocrites and enemies of the world.

They may or may not be liars, and crooks. The point (my mistake for thinking it was obvious, but I guess you have to draw pictures for some) is that this has nothing what-so-ever to do with who they shake hands with, toast, sing a duet with, or play baseball with. I honestly can’t believe the sub-Jr. High school level of ‘thought’ (or lack thereof) that can’t seem to grasp this.

You can pretty much name the scumbag, then name the US politician, and BAM. Chances are if they were major players on the world stage at the same time, they’ve met, and when they meet, they have a tendency, no matter how differing their world views, to be congenial with each other. Here let’s try it: Clinton. Milosevik.

Tada:


Neat, we even get Chirac thrown in for good measure.
Oh I know! Clinton and Chirac must have teamed up and ‘created’ Milosevik, and therefore are responsible for the man’s war crimes. That’s seems to be the left’s ‘logic’ of the way things work.

I thought you were a bit more supportive of our government than that.

I fail to see what one’s level of ‘support of the government’ has to do with recognizing the reality of the fact that politicians meet, talk, shake hands with each other.

For the record, I support government up to the point it actually works (which is to say not overly so), and consider MOST politicians to be a waste of the space they occupy. And not because of who they happen to shake hands with.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
[more handshaking drivel]

You're still dodging the issue i raised in this thread, ignoring the actual issue...

I'll repeat it - in the hope you will address the point correctly:

Military aid to bloodthirsty dictators

The hand-shaking pics were just a complement to the thread - please focus on the arguments.

[kindbud]

CRASH,

I love you.

This is like the 3rd time in a week.

*SMACKDOWN*

(you're wearing the paint off my asterisk key)

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
You can pretty much name the scumbag, then name the US politician, and BAM.

yup. seems to be a pattern...

[undotwa]

Originally posted by Logic:
There is a difference between a dialogue and making lucrative contracts with dictators that act like most of the do.

If we would isolate them and make no contracts unless they change their way of ruling perhaps we would be able to change the world for the better.

But making deals with some, while attacking others won't help much. That I'm sure of.

A lot of these lucrative contracts are made upon conditions.

Whether or not a country is run by a lunatic, it is stupid to place sanctions upon it and cripple trade, as the innocent people then start to suffer for actions of politicians.

[FeLiZeCaT]

undotwa, you may have a point but:

good business is not necessarily ethical though!

Here is link you might find interesting:

http://www.thecorporation.tv

The documentary gives some clear examples: some corporations do not care as long as the profits are in and its constituents are not made accountable.

But then again, why sell weapons to a country if its neighbour barely has any? I know, it is a very simplistic point of view, but the more you sell, the more you create demand. Why not simply decrease the sales of weapons? How about limiting production?

But that would not work; where would profit go????

Are we more secure with more weapons? We know what happens with weapons of mass destruction. The next gadget to obliterate a chunk of life off this planet maybe just a few years away for all we know! But heck, we have jobs to save and an economy to revive; stopping selling weapons is probably suicide...

As if a few cutters and some wit had not been enough already!

[maxelson]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
They may or may not be liars, and crooks. The point (my mistake for thinking it was obvious, but I guess you have to draw pictures for some) is that this has nothing what-so-ever to do with who they shake hands with, toast, sing a duet with, or play baseball with. I honestly can’t believe the sub-Jr. High school level of ‘thought’ (or lack thereof) that can’t seem to grasp this.

You can pretty much name the scumbag, then name the US politician, and BAM. Chances are if they were major players on the world stage at the same time, they’ve met, and when they meet, they have a tendency, no matter how differing their world views, to be congenial with each other. Here let’s try it: Clinton. Milosevik.

Tada:


Neat, we even get Chirac thrown in for good measure.
Oh I know! Clinton and Chirac must have teamed up and ‘created’ Milosevik, and therefore are responsible for the man’s war crimes. That’s seems to be the left’s ‘logic’ of the way things work.


I fail to see what one’s level of ‘support of the government’ has to do with recognizing the reality of the fact that politicians meet, talk, shake hands with each other.

For the record, I support government up to the point it actually works (which is to say not overly so), and consider MOST politicians to be a waste of the space they occupy. And not because of who they happen to shake hands with.

Nice. How about actively SUPPORTING those politicians, leaders and their regimes? DO you support that as well?
Fact of the matter is this: diplomatic recognition goes a long way to legitimizing what these folks do- better or worse.

You know damned well it ain't just " shaking hands". Spliffy probably doesn't, but you definitely do.

[kindbud]

It's a handshake.

Only YOU could write a conspiracy theory about a handshake.

"It was for oil"

"It was for money"

"It was for power"


Tell me...when you shake hands what is your motive?

[Logic]

Originally posted by kindbud:
It's a handshake.

Only YOU could write a conspiracy theory about a handshake.

"It was for oil"

"It was for money"

"It was for power"


Tell me...when you shake hands what is your motive?

Try to read the articles. You will see that the handshakes aren't the biggest problem.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by kindbud:
It's a handshake.

The Azeri state news agency quoted the general as saying that Washington was offering unspecified military aid which "is important from the point of view of regional security, including in the Caspian. The Pentagon attaches great importance to this."
http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/we....RwgY_DNL.html

Some of the biggest beneficiaries of US military aid have been Central Asian Republics, including Uzbekistan. Although the US State Department reported that Uzbek security forces had committed human rights abuses, an emergency bill passed by the US Congress in late 2001 granted Uzbekistan US$25 million in loans to buy US weapons and equipment, US$40.5 million for economic and law enforcement assistance, and US$18 million for "anti-terrorism", demining and non-proliferation programs. US military loans increased in 2002 and are slated to increase further in 2003.

The human rights situation in Uzbekistan is dire. Several thousand political prisoners are imprisoned and the crack-down on political and religious dissent continues. Unfair trials, torture and ill-treatment are routinely associated with these cases. Indeed, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture recently stated that it is his impression that torture in Uzbekistan is not just incidental, but "systematic".
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ttt4-article_8-eng

[maxelson]

Originally posted by kindbud:
It's a handshake.

Only YOU could write a conspiracy theory about a handshake.

"It was for oil"

"It was for money"

"It was for power"


Tell me...when you shake hands what is your motive?

I am not a statesman and yeah, when there's a handshake it DOES mean something more than "howyadoin" and you know it does.

Is that REALLY the best you could do.
State visits mean what, spliffy? What do they mean? Diplomatic contact means what? Spliffy?

And only YOU could pop on your party blinders so effectively.

We bomb other countries because we can. Right, spliff? C'mon. You can taunt better than that. I've seen you do it.

[maxelson]

Sometimes, spliff, a handshake means this:

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
The Azeri state news agency quoted the general as saying that Washington was offering unspecified military aid which "is important from the point of view of regional security, including in the Caspian. The Pentagon attaches great importance to this."
http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/we....RwgY_DNL.html

Some of the biggest beneficiaries of US military aid have been Central Asian Republics, including Uzbekistan. Although the US State Department reported that Uzbek security forces had committed human rights abuses, an emergency bill passed by the US Congress in late 2001 granted Uzbekistan US$25 million in loans to buy US weapons and equipment, US$40.5 million for economic and law enforcement assistance, and US$18 million for "anti-terrorism", demining and non-proliferation programs. US military loans increased in 2002 and are slated to increase further in 2003.

The human rights situation in Uzbekistan is dire. Several thousand political prisoners are imprisoned and the crack-down on political and religious dissent continues. Unfair trials, torture and ill-treatment are routinely associated with these cases. Indeed, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture recently stated that it is his impression that torture in Uzbekistan is not just incidental, but "systematic".
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ttt4-article_8-eng

Back to your smack.

[swrate]

All these smacks lately
****

some distraction: a game,


the link may lol have been posted before
as it dates of? one year?
last year, before the war....

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

does it have any thing to do with hand shaking?:O

edit: i didn't think a face would show up,

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Without any dialogue between corrupt dictatorships and democracies, the situation will probably be a hell of a lot worse.

you know what, you're absolutely right!