from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
20,564 views
31 replies
OK, that' s hilarious. Though I was kind of confused by not realizing they were using actors to represent the 2000 basketball handover.
I think he should run that in every contested election! It is great!
a piece of slanderous trash. no wonder nothing can get done in this country when the people in charge blatantly lie over and over again.
| no wonder nothing can get done in this country when the people in charge blatantly lie over and over again. |
Democrats aren't in charge?
It certainly is funny as a parody, but if I watched that as an actual campaign ad, I'd be inclined to distrust the person using it.
I particularly liked Kim Jong Il dunking.
I particularly liked Kim Jong Il dunking.
| piece of slanderous trash. no wonder nothing can get done in this country when the people in charge blatantly lie over and over again. |
I guess we've heard from the left now.
That was hilarious. A bit over the top for a political ad, but none-the-less, very funny.
guess we've heard from the left now.
no, you've heard from an independent who holds views from many sides of the political fence. lies are lies. it's not about any bias.
the really sad thing is here is that it looks like this conflict is going to spiral right down to another "clinton vs. bush" thing for all the pundits. that is what this false advertisement is touting.
the reality is that what the clinton policy did, was the right course at the time. no it didn't go all as planned, but how much of that had to do with the japanese refusing to deliver the promised "light reactor" in 2001? these reactors were to replace the older ones and are much more easily tracked and verified in regards to weaponizing plutonium.
before that event, the bush administration was prepared to sign the agreement set up by the clinton admin. that would have furthered relations.
and remember, before even the clinton administration came around, the us did threaten to bomb north korea with nuclear weapons. from n. korea's perspective, they are defending themselves against such threats. (keep in mind, when it comes to nuclear weapons, only 1 country has ever used them. much of the rest of the world feels a need to defend themselves from that)
remember, you don't negotiate with your friends, you negotiate with your enemies. and negotiation does not equal appeasement.
on the positive bush side, the proposed policy of a "naval blockade" is a good one IF they can get the chinese and s. koreans to block on land.
people need to stop the partisan rhetoric on this one...the history around this is complex and confusing sometimes. the policy decisions go back to 1948 and neither side has a monopoly on good or bad choices. north korea is not al quaeda. their motivations and "what they want" is a far cry from the terrorists. kim jong is a son of a bitch, as was his father. but so was kruchev, stalin, and many others. generically lumping them in with al quaeda is a naive mistake.
no, you've heard from an independent who holds views from many sides of the political fence. lies are lies. it's not about any bias.
the really sad thing is here is that it looks like this conflict is going to spiral right down to another "clinton vs. bush" thing for all the pundits. that is what this false advertisement is touting.
the reality is that what the clinton policy did, was the right course at the time. no it didn't go all as planned, but how much of that had to do with the japanese refusing to deliver the promised "light reactor" in 2001? these reactors were to replace the older ones and are much more easily tracked and verified in regards to weaponizing plutonium.
before that event, the bush administration was prepared to sign the agreement set up by the clinton admin. that would have furthered relations.
and remember, before even the clinton administration came around, the us did threaten to bomb north korea with nuclear weapons. from n. korea's perspective, they are defending themselves against such threats. (keep in mind, when it comes to nuclear weapons, only 1 country has ever used them. much of the rest of the world feels a need to defend themselves from that)
remember, you don't negotiate with your friends, you negotiate with your enemies. and negotiation does not equal appeasement.
on the positive bush side, the proposed policy of a "naval blockade" is a good one IF they can get the chinese and s. koreans to block on land.
people need to stop the partisan rhetoric on this one...the history around this is complex and confusing sometimes. the policy decisions go back to 1948 and neither side has a monopoly on good or bad choices. north korea is not al quaeda. their motivations and "what they want" is a far cry from the terrorists. kim jong is a son of a bitch, as was his father. but so was kruchev, stalin, and many others. generically lumping them in with al quaeda is a naive mistake.
the only piece of truth in this whole ad (and they make a huge deal out of it cause it is the only truth) is that madeline albright gave kim a basketball...big whoop! who cares? as you read here,,,this is common, esp. amongst enemies...
Gifts of State
The exchange of gifts among kings and chiefs and presidents and premiers is a centuries-old tradition. From the ancient civilizations of Rome and Egypt to the native tribes of North America, ceremonial gifts have paved the way for peaceful coexistence between peoples of different cultures. They are universal symbols in the language of diplomacy.
In 1787 a young America defied this old custom and banned the acceptance of foreign gifts by government officials. For citizens of a new democracy, gifts bore both the distasteful odor of aristocracy and the distinct scent of danger: A bribe in betrayers' hands could topple a government. In spite of the prohibition, the strong tradition of diplomatic exchange compelled foreign leaders to continue to send gifts. Refusing them proved impossible; it was at best impolite and at worst a stinging offense. Despite early ideals, Presidents often had no choice but to accept foreign gifts; indeed, every President since George Washington has received gifts of state.
Today gift-giving between heads of state is an important part of modern-day international relations. U.S. Presidents routinely meet face to face with leaders from every corner of the earth. These state visits shimmer with pomp and ceremony, including formal welcomes, elaborate dinners, and the exchange of gifts. As tokens of this ritual of diplomacy, gifts are enduring emblems of international cooperation and friendship.
Though gifts from foreign leaders bear a symbolic meaning, they also resonate with the variety and vibrancy of all the nations of the world. They range from native arts or antiques-prized pieces of a country's culture and heritage–to sparkling gold and gemstones. Other gifts are surprisingly sentimental, symbols of national or personal friendship. All enrich the relations between two countries and their leaders. And each recalls a moment in history, when two nations–often separated by oceans or ideology–briefly clasped hands.
Tea set, by David Andersen, Oslo, Norway, ca. 1930s
Gift to President Roosevelt from Olav and Märtha, the Crown Prince and Princess of Norway
Gold, enamel, tea pot: 5 3/8 x 6 3/4 x 3 inches; sugar bowl: 1 7/8 x 4 13/16 x 2 1/4 inches;
creamer: 1 5/8 x 3 7/8 x 1 15/16;
tray: 3 1/4 x 13 1/16 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In April 1939 the Crown Prince and Princess of Norway visited President and Mrs. Roosevelt at the Roosevelt family home at Hyde Park, New York. Treated to tea, a recital by local Norwegian Americans, and a picnic in the rolling countryside of the Hudson River Valley, the royal couple was enchanted by their visit. They sent the Roosevelts this Art Deco-style tea set as a remembrance.
Adoration of the Three Wise Kings, ca. 1500
Gift to President Eisenhower from Konrad Adenauer, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany
Oil on wood panel, 23 x 20 x 2 1/2 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
When he visited the United States in 1956, Chancellor Adenauer gave this painting by a Southeast German master to the President. The two leaders discussed the progress of rebuilding postwar West Germany.
Cloisonné liqueur set
Gift to President Nixon from Leonid Brezhnev, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
Vermeil, enamel, pitcher: 11 1/2 x 5 x 3 inches; cups: 3 1/2 x 1 1/2 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In May 1972 the two leaders of the world's most powerful countries met to sign the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) agreement. By restricting missile production in the United States and the Soviet Union, Nixon and Brezhnev hoped to reduce the threat of war between the two nations.
Cloisonné, a difficult technique of soldering and enamel painting–and a specialty of Russian craftsman–is a favorite gift of Russian leaders.
Water or wine vessel, Roman, first or second century
Gift to President Ford from Shimon Peres, Israeli Defense Minister
Glass, 6 5/8 x 5 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
Roman forces occupied present-day Israel from about 60 B.C. to 600 A.D. Many hundreds of years later, this remarkably preserved remnant of Israeli history became a gift to an American President.
Great Order of the Nile
Gift to President Carter from Anwar Sadat, President of Egypt
Gold, enamel, synthetic stones, 16 x 12 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
President Jimmy Carter helped to negotiate peace between Egypt and Israel after 31 years of war. When Carter visited Egypt in 1979, President Sadat, by then a good friend, presented Carter with this gift, Egypt's highest honor.
Saddle
Gift to President Reagan from Chadli Bendjedid, President of Algeria
Leather, velveteen, woven cord, gold thread, 19 x 27 x 23 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
Because of his love for riding, President Reagan received dozens of saddles from both the general public and foreign leaders. President Bendjedid presented this richly embroidered saddle during an official state visit in April 1985.
The Roman Coliseum
Gift to President Clinton from Pope John Paul II
Glass, 22 x 31 1/2 x 3
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In June 1994 President Clinton traveled to the Vatican for a private audience with the Pope. During their meeting, the leaders discussed the cause of religious freedom, world population growth, and the role of family in society. His Holiness also gave the President this intricate and unusual glass mosaic.
Gifts of State
The exchange of gifts among kings and chiefs and presidents and premiers is a centuries-old tradition. From the ancient civilizations of Rome and Egypt to the native tribes of North America, ceremonial gifts have paved the way for peaceful coexistence between peoples of different cultures. They are universal symbols in the language of diplomacy.
In 1787 a young America defied this old custom and banned the acceptance of foreign gifts by government officials. For citizens of a new democracy, gifts bore both the distasteful odor of aristocracy and the distinct scent of danger: A bribe in betrayers' hands could topple a government. In spite of the prohibition, the strong tradition of diplomatic exchange compelled foreign leaders to continue to send gifts. Refusing them proved impossible; it was at best impolite and at worst a stinging offense. Despite early ideals, Presidents often had no choice but to accept foreign gifts; indeed, every President since George Washington has received gifts of state.
Today gift-giving between heads of state is an important part of modern-day international relations. U.S. Presidents routinely meet face to face with leaders from every corner of the earth. These state visits shimmer with pomp and ceremony, including formal welcomes, elaborate dinners, and the exchange of gifts. As tokens of this ritual of diplomacy, gifts are enduring emblems of international cooperation and friendship.
Though gifts from foreign leaders bear a symbolic meaning, they also resonate with the variety and vibrancy of all the nations of the world. They range from native arts or antiques-prized pieces of a country's culture and heritage–to sparkling gold and gemstones. Other gifts are surprisingly sentimental, symbols of national or personal friendship. All enrich the relations between two countries and their leaders. And each recalls a moment in history, when two nations–often separated by oceans or ideology–briefly clasped hands.
Tea set, by David Andersen, Oslo, Norway, ca. 1930s
Gift to President Roosevelt from Olav and Märtha, the Crown Prince and Princess of Norway
Gold, enamel, tea pot: 5 3/8 x 6 3/4 x 3 inches; sugar bowl: 1 7/8 x 4 13/16 x 2 1/4 inches;
creamer: 1 5/8 x 3 7/8 x 1 15/16;
tray: 3 1/4 x 13 1/16 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In April 1939 the Crown Prince and Princess of Norway visited President and Mrs. Roosevelt at the Roosevelt family home at Hyde Park, New York. Treated to tea, a recital by local Norwegian Americans, and a picnic in the rolling countryside of the Hudson River Valley, the royal couple was enchanted by their visit. They sent the Roosevelts this Art Deco-style tea set as a remembrance.
Adoration of the Three Wise Kings, ca. 1500
Gift to President Eisenhower from Konrad Adenauer, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany
Oil on wood panel, 23 x 20 x 2 1/2 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
When he visited the United States in 1956, Chancellor Adenauer gave this painting by a Southeast German master to the President. The two leaders discussed the progress of rebuilding postwar West Germany.
Cloisonné liqueur set
Gift to President Nixon from Leonid Brezhnev, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
Vermeil, enamel, pitcher: 11 1/2 x 5 x 3 inches; cups: 3 1/2 x 1 1/2 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In May 1972 the two leaders of the world's most powerful countries met to sign the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) agreement. By restricting missile production in the United States and the Soviet Union, Nixon and Brezhnev hoped to reduce the threat of war between the two nations.
Cloisonné, a difficult technique of soldering and enamel painting–and a specialty of Russian craftsman–is a favorite gift of Russian leaders.
Water or wine vessel, Roman, first or second century
Gift to President Ford from Shimon Peres, Israeli Defense Minister
Glass, 6 5/8 x 5 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
Roman forces occupied present-day Israel from about 60 B.C. to 600 A.D. Many hundreds of years later, this remarkably preserved remnant of Israeli history became a gift to an American President.
Great Order of the Nile
Gift to President Carter from Anwar Sadat, President of Egypt
Gold, enamel, synthetic stones, 16 x 12 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
President Jimmy Carter helped to negotiate peace between Egypt and Israel after 31 years of war. When Carter visited Egypt in 1979, President Sadat, by then a good friend, presented Carter with this gift, Egypt's highest honor.
Saddle
Gift to President Reagan from Chadli Bendjedid, President of Algeria
Leather, velveteen, woven cord, gold thread, 19 x 27 x 23 inches
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
Because of his love for riding, President Reagan received dozens of saddles from both the general public and foreign leaders. President Bendjedid presented this richly embroidered saddle during an official state visit in April 1985.
The Roman Coliseum
Gift to President Clinton from Pope John Paul II
Glass, 22 x 31 1/2 x 3
Click to see high-resolution version (JPEG)
In June 1994 President Clinton traveled to the Vatican for a private audience with the Pope. During their meeting, the leaders discussed the cause of religious freedom, world population growth, and the role of family in society. His Holiness also gave the President this intricate and unusual glass mosaic.
So...you're saying it's true now but that it's fine because gifts are normal?
A new action-oriented website has been launched at CongratulationsDemocratsNowDoYourJob.com. The focus of the website is - assuming that Democrats win the House and/or Senate in November - to hold their feet to the fire to authorize a new and REAL 9/11 investigation and take other actions for the good of the country:
\"AUTHORIZE A TRULY INDEPENDENT MASSIVE INVESTIGATION OF THE ATTACKS OF 9/11, AND ACTIONS LEADING UP TO AND FOLLOWING IT
An investigative body must include the growing number of physicists, scientists, and engineers who have researched these events, including Dr. Steven Jones (BYU Physic Department), and Kevin Ryan (formerly of Underwriter Laboratories), Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Lt. Colonel rtd.), and the 9/11 widows (known as the Jersey Girls) who fought for the 9/11 Commission and have since condemned it as frightfully incomplete and flawed. The body must also include David Ray Griffin, and use his book on the 9/11 Commission Report as a guide to re-examining the events of 9/11/2001.
\"AUTHORIZE A TRULY INDEPENDENT MASSIVE INVESTIGATION OF THE ATTACKS OF 9/11, AND ACTIONS LEADING UP TO AND FOLLOWING IT
An investigative body must include the growing number of physicists, scientists, and engineers who have researched these events, including Dr. Steven Jones (BYU Physic Department), and Kevin Ryan (formerly of Underwriter Laboratories), Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Lt. Colonel rtd.), and the 9/11 widows (known as the Jersey Girls) who fought for the 9/11 Commission and have since condemned it as frightfully incomplete and flawed. The body must also include David Ray Griffin, and use his book on the 9/11 Commission Report as a guide to re-examining the events of 9/11/2001.
An investigative body must include the growing number of physicists, scientists, and engineers who have researched these events, including Dr. Steven Jones (BYU Physic Department), and Kevin Ryan (formerly of Underwriter Laboratories), Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Lt. Colonel rtd.), and the 9/11 widows (known as the Jersey Girls) who fought for the 9/11 Commission and have since condemned it as frightfully incomplete and flawed. The body must also include David Ray Griffin, and use his book on the 9/11 Commission Report as a guide to re-examining the events of 9/11/2001.
interesting idea for a sight. but i take exception when anyone proclaims these people "must" be on the panel. sounds like someone is trying to shape answers around a hypothesis, which is how we got where we are in Iraq, et al...
IF the dems get control of either house of congress, their 1st duty will be to do whatever they do in a truly fair manner and not go straight to more partisan crap. there might be a lot to learn from some more investigations of the events that are shaping our world today, but the only way to do it is in a fair, non partisan manner.
interesting idea for a sight. but i take exception when anyone proclaims these people "must" be on the panel. sounds like someone is trying to shape answers around a hypothesis, which is how we got where we are in Iraq, et al...
IF the dems get control of either house of congress, their 1st duty will be to do whatever they do in a truly fair manner and not go straight to more partisan crap. there might be a lot to learn from some more investigations of the events that are shaping our world today, but the only way to do it is in a fair, non partisan manner.
So...you're saying it's true now but that it's fine because gifts are normal?
i'm not sure what "true NOW" means, as i already did state that this was the only true part of this ad. but like i said,,,so what?
fact is that gifts are a common practice when meeting for diplomats and heads of state. it actually would have been unusual if there was no exchange. making a big deal out of it and painting it as something "unamerican" was sad and weak.
i'm not sure what "true NOW" means, as i already did state that this was the only true part of this ad. but like i said,,,so what?
fact is that gifts are a common practice when meeting for diplomats and heads of state. it actually would have been unusual if there was no exchange. making a big deal out of it and painting it as something "unamerican" was sad and weak.
The real point of the video is true. Making nice and appeasing terrorists and dictators does not work.
The real point of the video is true. Making nice and appeasing terrorists and dictators does not work.
funny,,,then in another post, you'll cite lybia as a great success. LMFAO!!!
China relations are where they are because of the bridges built, starting with Nixon (watergate really clouds some of the good stuff nixon did do)
you are just wrong puppy...and the video is a lie.
funny,,,then in another post, you'll cite lybia as a great success. LMFAO!!!
China relations are where they are because of the bridges built, starting with Nixon (watergate really clouds some of the good stuff nixon did do)
you are just wrong puppy...and the video is a lie.
| The real point of the video is true. Making nice and appeasing terrorists and dictators does not work. funny,,,then in another post, you'll cite lybia as a great success. LMFAO!!! China relations are where they are because of the bridges built, starting with Nixon (watergate really clouds some of the good stuff nixon did do) you are just wrong puppy...and the video is a lie. |
Lets start with that the ad has "NOTHING" to do with China! It "does" have everything to do with N. Korea! And sorry to inform you, the video is not a lie, but exactly what Island Dog said it was. It boots nothing to appease tin-horn dictators.
| Lets start with that the ad has "NOTHING" to do with China! It "does" have everything to do with N. Korea! And sorry to inform you, the video is not a lie, but exactly what Island Dog said it was. It boots nothing to appease tin-horn dictators. |
you are getting dumber by the minute , aren't ya quack?
i don't believe i said the ad had anything to do with china, dolt!
he contended that "making nice and appeasing terrorists and dictators does not work."
i provided 2 off the top of my head examples of where diplomacy did work. if it hadn't been for nixon extending his hand and opening dialog, we wouldn't have the relations we have with a china that has gradually improved itself over the years to the point of becoming a world power as they embrace more capatalistic policies.
lybia disarmed after years of negotiations and helping them out....not the "after 9/11 , they caved in" attitude that the portable punditry contends to the uneducated masses like yourself.
| And sorry to inform you, the video is not a lie, but exactly what Island Dog said it was. It boots nothing to appease tin-horn dictators. |
yes the video is a lie, and as i've shown, negotiating and simply "talking" to your enemy vs. threatening everyone and invading everyone has shown results.
try again quack...
| Lets start with that the ad has "NOTHING" to do with China! It "does" have everything to do with N. Korea! And sorry to inform you, the video is not a lie, but exactly what Island Dog said it was. It boots nothing to appease tin-horn dictators. you are getting dumber by the minute , aren't ya quack? i don't believe i said the ad had anything to do with china, dolt! he contended that "making nice and appeasing terrorists and dictators does not work." i provided 2 off the top of my head examples of where diplomacy did work. if it hadn't been for nixon extending his hand and opening dialog, we wouldn't have the relations we have with a china that has gradually improved itself over the years to the point of becoming a world power as they embrace more capitalistic policies. lybia disarmed after years of negotiations and helping them out....not the "after 9/11 , they caved in" attitude that the portable punditry contends to the uneducated masses like yourself. And sorry to inform you, the video is not a lie, but exactly what Island Dog said it was. It boots nothing to appease tin-horn dictators. yes the video is a lie, and as i've shown, negotiating and simply "talking" to your enemy vs. threatening everyone and invading everyone has shown results. try again quack... |
Listen up butthead and we'll try again! According to "you", you never said China had anything to do with the ad. Okay, then what's all this about?
| China relations are where they are because of the bridges built, starting with Nixon (watergate really clouds some of the good stuff nixon did do) |
Also according to you, you provided 2 instances of where diplomacy worked when dealing with a dictatorship. Care to point out "both" instances? Because I don't see any. If your thinking of using China....don't bother. That is a "communist" country, NOT a dictatorship! And as everyone knows a communist country is not ruled by a single person. So now "you" try again, dolt!!!
Listen up butthead and we'll try again! According to "you", you never said China had anything to do with the ad. Okay, then what's all this about?
lol....let me repeat myself...one more time...china didn't have anything to do with the ad. ISLAND DOG said that appeasing terrorists and dictators doesn't ever work.
i pointed out china and lybia as examples of where diplomacy has worked. china was run by Mao Tse-Tung, who was their DICTATOR. kim jong ill is a DICTATOR of a communist govt as well. your claim that china is communist, so they can't have a dictator, might be the single dumbest thing ever said here....you said...
That is a "communist" country, NOT a dictatorship! And as everyone knows a communist country is not ruled by a single person. So now "you" try again, dolt!!!
so kim is a dictator of a communist country, but that is impossible, right? cause communist countries can't have dictators according to you...so what is kim?
i wasn't gonna respond to this cause i laughed so hard every time i looked at it...but eventually the laughter died...
but don't believe me,,,just keep slamming your foot into your own mouth.
lol....let me repeat myself...one more time...china didn't have anything to do with the ad. ISLAND DOG said that appeasing terrorists and dictators doesn't ever work.
i pointed out china and lybia as examples of where diplomacy has worked. china was run by Mao Tse-Tung, who was their DICTATOR. kim jong ill is a DICTATOR of a communist govt as well. your claim that china is communist, so they can't have a dictator, might be the single dumbest thing ever said here....you said...
That is a "communist" country, NOT a dictatorship! And as everyone knows a communist country is not ruled by a single person. So now "you" try again, dolt!!!
so kim is a dictator of a communist country, but that is impossible, right? cause communist countries can't have dictators according to you...so what is kim?
i wasn't gonna respond to this cause i laughed so hard every time i looked at it...but eventually the laughter died...
but don't believe me,,,just keep slamming your foot into your own mouth.
| i pointed out china and lybia as examples of where diplomacy has worked. china was run by Mao Tse-Tung, who was their DICTATOR. kim jong ill is a DICTATOR of a communist govt as well. your claim that china is communist, so they can't have a dictator, might be the single dumbest thing ever said here....you said... |
And just for the record....this mention of lybia was the "first" time you mentioned it.
And as far as "Chairman" Mao goes you better read a little more. Try this:
1. THE COMMUNIST PARTY The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party. The theoretical basis guiding our thinking is Marxism-Leninism. Opening address at the First Session of the First National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China (September 15, 1954). |
Link
Or this from the same site:
10. LEADERSHIP OF PARTY COMMITTEES The Party committee system is an important Party institution for ensuring collective leadership and preventing any individual from monopolizing the conduct of affairs. It has recently been found that in some (of course not all) leading bodies it is the habitual practice for one individual to monopolize the conduct of affairs and decide important problems. Solutions to important problems are decided not by Party committee meetings but by one individual, and membership in the Party committee has become nominal. Differences of opinion among committee members cannot be resolved and are left unresolved for a long time. Members of the Party committee maintain only formal, not real, unity among themselves. This situation must be changed. From now on, a sound system of Party committee meetings must be instituted in all leading bodies, from the regional bureaus of the Central Committee to the prefectural Party committees; from the Party committees of the fronts to the Party committees of brigades and military areas (sub-commissions of the Revolutionary Military Commission or leading groups); and the leading Party members' groups in government bodies, people's organizations the news agency and the newspaper offices. All important problems (of course, not the unimportant, trivial problems, or problems whose solutions have already been decided after discussion at meetings and need only be carried out) must be submitted to the committee for discussion, and the committee members present should express their views fully and reach definite decisions which should then be carried out by the members concerned.... Party committee meetings must be divided into two categories, standing committee meetings and plenary sessrons, and the two should not be confused. Furthermore, we must take care that neither collective leadership nor personal responsibility is overemphasized to the neglect of the other. In the ar!-ny, the person in command has the right to make emergency decisions during battle and when circumstances require. "On Strengthening the Party Committee System" (September 20, 1948), Selected Works, Vol. IV, pp. 267-68.* |
I don't think you really understand how communism works.
Or this from Wikipedia on N Korea!
The parliament, the Supreme People's Assembly (Choego Inmin Hoeui), is the highest organ of state power. Its 687 members are elected every five years by popular vote. In every district voters are offered only one candidate. The People's Assembly usually holds two annual meetings, each lasting a few days, during which it elects a standing committee. The Assembly is viewed by the west as typically ratifying decisions made by the ruling KWP (see rubber stamp). A standing committee elected by the Assembly performs legislative functions when the Assembly is not in session. See also: Foreign relations of North Korea, Military of North Korea, North Korea and weapons of mass destruction |
Link
Or this link on communism itself:
Link
So then I would say ol Kim isn't a dictator either. So now who's slamming their foot into their mouth, huh?
| And just for the record....this mention of lybia was the "first" time you mentioned it. |
for the record...WRONG AGAIN! go look at reply #19 . it was the 1st example mentioned.
and if you want to live in a fantasy world whre mao wasn't a dictator, go ahead. mao was not only a dictator, he was the equivalent of a God to many chinese. you obviously know nothing here. a "communist" system hardly prevents a dictator from ruling.
are you seriously contending that kim jong ill is not a dictator? what about castro? is he a dictator? cuba is communist.
and yes, it is you slamming your foot into your own mouth.
for the record...WRONG AGAIN! go look at reply #19 . it was the 1st example mentioned. |
I like the way you take credit for an idea that someone "else" caused you to say and that claim that you deliberately said it to use as an example.
| funny,,,then in another post, you'll cite lybia as a great success. LMFAO!!! |
As for the rest of it, you bore me to tears. You're not much better than col klink! You say one thing, I show you in BLACK & WHITE that you are misinformed and yet you continue on in the same vien. You do not need to respond to this because I'm through with it.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!