This is not true. The whole argument against the law is based on accusations of rights violations. Whether or not this case has been made is not the issue. The issue in the China remarks is that the accusation of human rights has not been swept under the rug here. Conversely it should not be so in China. Fine. I don't think it violates any rights that illegals don't have. But you cannot have this discussion without recognizing that hispanic Americans object to the law as a violation of their rights. That is the diplomatic point being made. We have been accused and are addressing the issue and being open about it. It may prove to be untrue, but it is not ignored. The lesson to China is addressing the questions do not mean that they have been pre-judged, only that they will be openly judges.
Dude, if you address my remarks without having read them, you are prone to say something wrong based on ignorance.
Very true. I've read everything in this thread. Show me where I said I didn't read something. I'm basically trying to say what Okie is saying, but you're not getting that either. I understand your point as to how we handle things in America, but disagree with bringing in the AZ law as a human rights issue similar to China's. SF quote from the article in the OP. An example of "racial discrimination". Really? Not according to what you've vehemently argued.
You know that "par" and "equate" mean equal. The statement does not compare Chinas and America human rights records at all, much less equate them. It compares how we address human rights complaints. And it is folly to imagine that America doesn't face human rights complaints from all over. We address them and remedy them if they are found true and we dismiss them if they are false. Remember that this is diplomatic speech, where nuance is everything and there are overt and covert messages being delivered. China already knows all about Arizona, we aren't telling any family secrets here. We opened by couching Arizona on our terms--free-world open discussion of rights issues, rather than let them define it on their terms--that we are no different than them. The idea is that whatever China does will be wrong. If they discuss the issues they have much to account for and may be embarrassed. If they refuse to discuss the issues they lose credibility and are revealed as obstructionists and may be embarrassed. Never underestimate how far an Asian will go to avoid losing face.
Can you quote Posner's remark in context instead out of an article? I've not seen one where he is quoted as saying "racial discrimination" or human rights" with regards to Arizona. I've found: (regarding the Arizona law) “We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session and as a troubling trend in our society, and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination. And these are issues very much being debated in our own society,” "The broader context in which this was raised was to discuss the political openness of this society and the value of an open debate," Posner said. "We never did get into the merits of the Arizona law. It was not in any way a comparison between that law and any specific law or practice in China."
I don't give a damn what hispanic-americans think about this law. There is nothing in it to object to. They hear it's discrimatory from ignorant media and Administration officials and jump on the bandwagon.
Don't be naive, they know what discrimination is. It starts with hispanic Americans and the media starts spinning in both directions and politicians in both parties then start whoring for their votes.
So they know what discrimination is? BFD. This bill does not discriminate. Some are afraid that it gives cops a license to profile. It doesn't. Stay on the right side of the law and you'll be fine. That goes for everybody. Even us white folk who never have any problems because life is rosy and always milk and honey.
