When the International Olympic Committee formally awarded Beijing the privilege of hosting the 2008 Olympic Games seven years ago, they accepted assurances from the historically repressive government of China that the country would dramatically expand its commitment to protecting human rights within its borders.

The vice president of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games Bid Committee, Liu Jingmin, was explicit on this point.

As his city was making a final appeal for the games, Lie Jingman announced that, "By allowing Beijing to host the Games you will help the development of human rights."

The president of the IOC, Jacques Rogge, was equally explicit.

"We are convinced that the Olympic Games will improve the human rights record in China," said Rogge, who announced that the IOC would rely on international human rights organizations, the most prominent of which is Amnesty International, to monitor the human rights situation on the ground in China and issue periodic reports on whether conditions were genuinely improving.

Rogge and his aides said back in 2001 that, if evidence of serious violations of human rights standards were uncovered, the IOC would be forced to take appropriate action.

China has failed.

The IOC has failed.

The Olympics will open without progress when it comes to upholding even the most basic standards for individual liberty in China.

A new Amnesty International report, issued as the countdown to the opening of the games began, argues that, "The Chinese authorities have broken their promise to improve the country's human rights situation and betrayed the core values of the Olympics."

The report, The Olympics Countdown: Broken Promises concludes that four areas related to the core Olympic values of 'universal fundamental ethical principles' and ‘human dignity' -- persecution of human rights activists, detention without trial, censorship and application of the death penalty – China has reduced rather than increased its commitment to human rights as the games have approached.

"By continuing to persecute and punish those who speak out for human rights, the Chinese authorities have lost sight of the promises they made when they were granted the Games seven years ago," says Roseann Rife, Asia-Pacific Deputy Director at Amnesty International.

"The Chinese authorities are tarnishing the legacy of the Games. They must release all imprisoned peaceful activists, allow foreign and national journalists to report freely and make further progress towards the elimination of the death penalty."

Of immediate concern is the censorship of communications, even at the Olympics press center in Beijing, although any momentary complaint is drawfed by the ongoing reality of China's occupation of Tibet and its support for the dictators who brutally oppress Burma and Darfur.

Amnesty International (AI) has learned that journalists working at the center have been denied access to amnesty.org, the AI website that links to "The China Debate," a site established by the group as a forum to discuss human rights conditions in China.

Additionally, access to Taiwanese, German and British news media websites has been blocked.

The IOC's Rogge continues to cover for China, claiming that his committee's "quiet diplomacy" had brought about human rights reforms, including a reduction of censorship in Beijing.

But no serious human rights monitoring group agrees.

The reality is that the promises made by Chinese officials and the IOC have been broken.

And world leaders, including President Bush, who will attend the opening ceremonies without sincerely or effectively challenging the collapse of China's human rights commitments, do a grave disservice not merely to the people of China -- and to the oppressed peoples of Tibet, Burma and Darfur -- but to the reputation of the Olympics.

As Amnesty International's Roseann Rife explains, this failure sends "the message that it is acceptable for a government to host the Olympic Games in an atmosphere of repression and persecution."

That is an unacceptable message.

We can cheer the athletes from every country – including China – who achieve great things at the Olympics this year.

But we should not lie to ourselves about the healing power of the Olympic spirit.

That spirit has been crushed – along with the hopes of human rights activists in China and around the world -- by the crude cynicism of the Chinese government, and by the determination of the the International Olympic Committee and too many world leaders to turn a blind eye to the broken promises that disminish and demean the Summer Olympics of 2008.

Comments (69)

1. seems like there was an olympics held in munich back in the 30's...hope this aint anything like history repeating itself...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 08/07/2008 @ 09:42am

2. So much politics for the one event designed to bring the world together.

   Here's a little manifesto from an average observer:

   China has a magnificent history, as anyone who has studied its culture knows. I'm glad the games are there.

   I don't give a red rats ass about the pollution, or Tibet, or whether pundits think the emergence of capitalism in China is a good thing or not.

   Can't wait to see shots of the Great Wall and the parade of nations,(which I'm actually looking forward to more than the events themselves)

   That the IOC was given assurances that human rights would be improved if Beijing could host the games, and the IOC actually believed the improvement would be satisfactory, then they were fooled by their own politics, which I doubt. If you were Beijing and got such an opportunity, what would you say?

   The Chinese will get there, as long as they are given time and Presidents who legitimize torture in the country with an amendment prohibiting it stops ramming his sanctimonious crap down China's throat.

   In the meantime, none of this crap matters for the next two weeks.

   Let the Games Begin!

   Chip

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 08/07/2008 @ 09:44am

3. Chip, I have to agree with you on one thing here. The Olympics were originally designed to bring enemies together to compete in sport. Even if nations were at war, the idea was to stop war for the Olympic games and come together for something in common and perhaps end wars in doing so.

   China has it's problems, but the U.S. and it's multilateral gamesmanship as of late does not have any ground to be lecturing any nation about violating human rights. Hell, this particular admninstation in the White House has no problem with violating it's own citizen's constitutional rights and spies on it's own citizens while hiding everything it does in secrecy and hiding behind the term executive privilege.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 08/07/2008 @ 09:58am

4. Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 08/07/2008 @ 09:44am | ignore this person | warn this person

   i find myself in almost total agreement. after gitmo and such our hectoring of china over human rights rings a tad hollow and...

   looking forward to some competition. haven't followed the olympics too closely for a while and i think the time has come to enjoy the competition, politics aside...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 08/07/2008 @ 09:59am

5. What is this term "executive priviledge"? Is it the lawyer-client confidential?

   Posted by Mistral at 08/07/2008 @ 10:10am

6. 'The conservatives' biggest fight with Eisenhower, however, concerned Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin, who made a career of exposing alleged Communists and Communist sympathizers in government. McCarthy demanded access to government files that he said would prove that Communists in the State Department were shaping American foreign policy to benefit the Soviets. Eisenhower refused, insisting that his administration had found and dismissed all the Communists.

   Despite provocative public statements by McCarthy, Eisenhower ignored rather than denounced him. This policy was widely criticized, but it worked. When McCarthy escalated his demands for access to files, Eisenhower used the doctrine of executive privilege to withhold them. Under that doctrine, which got its name from Eisenhower but was first used by President George Washington, advice given to the president by a government official is protected from congressional inquiry. Without the documents, McCarthy soon lost his momentum.' -- Microsoft Encarta

   Posted by HonestLiberal at 08/07/2008 @ 10:17am

7. Yes I know WOLF, and I agree. Perhaps I said it clumsily. Bush has no business bitching about human rights untill he cleans up his own act.

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 08/07/2008 @ 10:27am

8. "When the International Olympic Committee formally awarded Beijing the privilege of hosting the 2008 Olympic Games seven years ago, they accepted assurances from the historically repressive government of China that the country would dramatically expand its commitment to protecting human rights within its borders."

   Well...that was dumb, wasn't it?

   I mean, what was the IOC thinking? If China "backed out" from those assurances, by THEN (aka NOW) it would be too late and the Olympics would be underway and the IOC couldn't (if it would) do anything about it.

   Seriously, talk about your dopey naivete.

   Posted by Maskdelta at 08/07/2008 @ 10:47am

9. "If the nuclear powers wish to be safe from nuclear weapons," writes Schelll. "They must surrender their own. Then we will all work together to assure that everyone abides by the commitment." Johnathan Schell

   "...they accepted assurances from the historically repressive government of China that the country would dramatically expand its commitment to protecting human rights within its borders."

   posted by John Nichols on 08/07/2008 @ 09:22am

   A pattern of dopey naivete?

   Posted by Benchrest at 08/07/2008 @ 11:03am

10. And the only gun shots heard are from the starting pistol

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/07/2008 @ 10:17am

    Agreed.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 08/07/2008 @ 11:09am

11. Posted by Benchrest at 08/07/2008 @ 11:03am

    Dopey naivete is a too-often trait of the New Left...

    just as dopey warmongering is a too-often trait of the New Right!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/07/2008 @ 11:15am

12. just as dopey warmongering is a too-often trait of the New Right!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/07/2008 @ 11:15am

    Oh c'mon. What fun is life without a war or two?

    or three?

    or four?

    Posted by Benchrest at 08/07/2008 @ 11:27am

13. Many Dutchmen like to make jokes about our neighbours to the south, the Belgians. All of these jokes have one central theme: the Belgians' stupidity. It's very childish, really, but watching Jacques Rogge at work makes me believe we Dutch might have been onto something all along. Did Rogge really believe that the Olympics would improve human rights in the People's Republic? Or that the IOC could and would take the games away from China, should the Chinese fail to deliver on their promises regarding human rights? If so, he doesn't understand much about his own organisation, and about the way these matters work in general. From the moment the IOC awarded the 2008 Olympics to China, it was set in stone that China was the place where the games would be held in 2008 - come hell or high water.

    I've been completely fed up with the Olympics for months now, and I'm just waiting for the games to be over. I'm not even going to watch. That's not because I don't like sports, but because of all the hype and the bullshit surrounding the Beijing Olympics. Like this business with the flame-on-tour. They've been walking the Earth with that thing, for how long now? Six months? Nine? Twelve? I've lost count. And it's all because of some PR-inspired symbolism that nobody understands in the first place and costs millions of euros.

    So human rights are a problem in China. Yes, of course they are, because human rights have always been a problem in China. In fact, the Chinese don't even know what the concept of 'human rights' means. It's a bit unreasonable to expect the government in Beijing to catch on overnight. 1999, 2000, 2001 - that would have been the time for the IOC to act tough, and rule Beijing out of contention for hosting the Olympics. Too late now. Just get it over with, please.

    Posted by Amsterdam69 at 08/07/2008 @ 11:43am

14. I don't pretend to understand the Chinese mindset. But I have read enough, here and elsewhere, to believe the writers who do know the Chinese, who all say that embarrassing and criticizing them publicly does not help them to make progress on such issues as human rights.

    The pollution problem, on the other hand, strikes me as dangerous and disgusting for anyone to have to endure for two weeks (let alone a lifetime). On that issue alone, I would have given Beijing a big thumbs-down on hosting the Olympics. Sadly, no one asked for my opinion. ;)

    Posted by notbuyingit at 08/07/2008 @ 12:24pm

15. What is this term "executive priviledge"? Is it the lawyer-client confidential? Posted by Mistral at 08/07/2008 @ 10:10am

    Executive Privilege is a term meaning that the President and his advisers are allowed to withhold certain information when queried by official sources in trial. The theory is that if a President and his advisers are held accountable for everything they say then the advisers would be less likely to be open and straight forward, they would instead try to watch their asses. So when the Senate Committees talk to Bush's advisers about things and they invoke executive privilege they are essentially saying the information is classified. However executive privilege CAN be overruled in a court if the courts deems the information necessary to the case, that's what happened to Nixon.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/07/2008 @ 12:38pm

16. China was never going to change it's ways and no one in their right mind would endeavor to cancel the Olympic games because of it. They put that forth in the HOPE that China would change it's ways. China knew the threat was worthless. If the IOC wanted to make the threat real they should have selected China AND another nation at the same time and told them both to begin preparing for the Olympics. If China straightened up and flew right then the that other nation would hold the Olympics after that. If it didn't get it's house in order then they would have had a back up country and the games would not be postponed or canceled.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/07/2008 @ 12:47pm

17. I first of all reject the notion that there is a unified "Chinese mindset," whatever that would even mean. Just as oversimplified, monolithic understandings of religion or of specific religions are silly and problematic, the same goes for oversimplified, monolithic understandings of a culture or country. I would also, by the way, like to see some warrant from Nichols for the bold claim that no positive change whatsoever has been made by gradual diplomatic engagement.

    I think it's equally problematic to suggest that the Bush Administration can't criticize China for its human rights violations. China even seemed to implicitly recognize this; the government's complaint was not that the Bush administration had no room to talk, but rather that they reject "intervention" by other countries (a pitiful defense if ever there was one).

    But getting to the heart of it...WHY can't the Bush administation criticize? Is a government with ANY human rights problems barred from criticizing others? Or are Bush's human rights violations somehow equal to China's? The first seems absurd on principle (precluding not only criticism of Hitler's Olympics by a US with segregation, but ALL criticism because no country's record is spotless). The second seems absurd empirically; whatever you think about Bush's policies, they indubitably pale in comparison to the repression carried out by the Chinese government. Example: journalists exist freely here, I can type these words freely here, etc.

    Posted by Thrawn at 08/07/2008 @ 12:52pm

18. For the US to criticize China on human rights is for the US to throw stones in its very own glass house. In addition to the fact that our own government is somewhat dark on human rights, we happily endure the Chinese abuses so long as they continue to fund our debt and send us cheap t-shirts.

    Posted by Zero at 08/07/2008 @ 12:53pm

19. Hey Zero, don't knock those T shirts, I got one and a hat too out there :)

    Posted by william.harry13 at 08/07/2008 @ 1:10pm

20. Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 08/07/2008

    hi chip.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 1:53pm

21. The second seems absurd empirically; whatever you think about Bush's policies, they indubitably pale in comparison to the repression carried out by the Chinese government. Example: journalists exist freely here, I can type these words freely here, etc.

    Posted by Thrawn at 08/07/2008 @ 12:52pm

    innocent iraqis thrown in jail would most likely disagree.

    free speech means little if no one listens........

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 2:04pm

22. uh, two separate points.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 2:04pm

23. Hello Frosty, how ya been man?

    Posted by william.harry13 at 08/07/2008 @ 2:18pm

24. Lots of patriotic millionaires in China. How can anything be wrong?

    Posted by Sorelish at 08/07/2008 @ 2:42pm

25. Letting the Chinese government tart itself up with this Olympic prom dress was a dopey idea right out of the box, but not out of character for an ethically wobbly group such as the IOC.

    Watch the spectacle, or don't, but it's really too late for whinging about the human rights ramifications.

    Posted by drhammer at 08/07/2008 @ 3:02pm

26. We have sold out a large junk of the sweat equity that our parents put into the country. We have mortgaged our grand kids future and made a centuries worth of enemies. We have a credit card debt for a war based on ego. China's economy is growing at twelve percent by selling us their junk, produced by their slave labor with American labels and ours is just barely maintaining 1 percent. Why would china want to change? I've heard of sheep following other sheep off of a cliff, but this is really mentally deficient. Is there something in the American DNA that explains this kind of stupidity? I have a message that I have spent at least 1 second thinking about, "China is not going to change.".

    Posted by julien38 at 08/07/2008 @ 3:03pm

27. Happy-Over the last several decades the majority of anti America terrorist acts have been committed by right wing Americans.Actually,quite a few still left who aren't in prison running around,but they have decided to keep their views more underground.. I did not see anything that was anti America in that post,either.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 4:03pm

28. Letting the Chinese government tart itself up with this Olympic prom dress was a dopey idea right out of the box,

    Posted by drhammer at 08/07/2008 @ 3:02pm

    yep.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 4:14pm

29. Happy-Don't forget that LvLiberty is not the only one on the right who puts Israel before America and when you put another country above your own then such people have no right to question others patriotism,but you others on the right should question your fellow right wingers patriotism when it comes to the subject of putting another country above your own rather than pretend that "the left" is anti America in order to do propaganda..Police your own kind first..

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 4:16pm

30. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 3:25pm

    answer the man.

    explain why this is good:

    "We have sold out a large junk of the sweat equity that our parents put into the country. We have mortgaged our grand kids future and made a centuries worth of enemies. We have a credit card debt for a war based on ego. China's economy is growing at twelve percent by selling us their junk, produced by their slave labor with American labels and ours is just barely maintaining 1 percent."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 4:16pm

31. I'm confused.

    This is a Liberal publication. Liberals consider themselves to be "multicultural."

    China is a different culture. They have different concepts of human rights.

    Is The Nation condemning non-Western definitions of Human Rights?

    Is the Nation (and are all of the posters here) stating unequivocally that only Western definitions of Human Rights are acceptable?

    How, exactly, does that square with "Multiculturalism," and the anti-Western attitudes of the Left?

    Or is it just me?

    http://inthisdimension.com/2008/03/04/multiculturalism-really/

    Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008 @ 4:31pm

32. So why are the ranting against ?your? country, the U.S.? Do you think just maybe, the Right's firmly held belief you Lefties are anti-America is more than justified by your little confession? I really want to know, just what kind of "DNA that explains this kind of stupidity", or mindset? Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 3:25pm

    This is hilarious. You know how many people on the right I have heard talk about suspending democracy including Mary and LVL. You know how many people on the right put Israel before America? Don't talk to me about America haters. Your end of the spectrum is just as full of em.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/07/2008 @ 4:37pm

33. I don't think the IOC naively took China at their word. The IOC is a notoriously corrupt institution. The human rights agreement on China was needed to make the deal happen, with the clear understanding that it was worthless in practice. The IOC can pretend that it has virtues and China gets to continue with business as usual, and everyone else gets to watch the Olympics. Everybody wins! (Except those who have to live under Chinese rule.)

    Posted by llachglin at 08/07/2008 @ 4:45pm

34. to Mr. in this dimension: you're kidding right.? you're just looking for a chat room right? This isn't a right left argument. our fearless president just gave an address stating most of the realities posted here. Granted he was in Thailand, but nevertheless it was the first time in several years that I've agreed with him. I normally don't participate in chats, but you sound almost rational. Pleas ask the Tibetans Monks what they think of the Chinese humanity.

    Posted by julien38 at 08/07/2008 @ 4:50pm

35. inthisdimension-Human rights is not a cultural thing.It's a human thing which is why it's called human rights.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 4:53pm

36. Julien: What a sexist response - and in a Liberal publication, too. Why on earth do you assume I am "Mr. in this dimension"??

    Besides - arguing what the Tibetans think is, again, not very multicultural; China took them over; China doesn't agree with you.

    The facts are that what WE in the WEST consider to be human rights are NOT universally recognized. I am all for them; I merely point out the illogical reasoning of "multiculturalists." Go read the post at the blog.

    i'm nobody: Of course human rights is a cultural thing. We feel differently about ours than do people in other cultures, just as we do about copyright (intellecutual property is a Western concept so it is always cool to hear Hollywood talent yammer about piracy). Our definition of Human Rights - and gender rights and minority rights and children's rights - has never existed outside the West and never before in history - and not now even across the entire West.

    The point is the silliness (ignorance, stupidity, childishness, adolescent immaturity) of the "multiculturalist," not a lack of support for the Western concept of Human Rights. The West is better at everything; hence our success and the failures of non-Western systems other than through copying what we developed.

    Tell me: Other than paper and gunpowder, what has been invented outside the West? Where did the Rule of Law originate?

    Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008 @ 5:04pm

37. Happy-The country isn't polarized nor could you show that there was anything anti America in the post.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 5:12pm

38. Happy-You haven't a clue as to how happy most people on the left are nor do you seem to be a particularly happy person.The reason you could not point anything out from that post is because it doesn't exist except where you want to see it.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 5:42pm

39. Imagine if China industry was integrally unionized. The US right wing would never have allowed trade with a REAL commie nation. Beijing would still be thought of as Peking & the IOC would have gotten a good laugh out of any petition to host the Olympics in China.

    Posted by Sorelish at 08/07/2008 @ 5:55pm

40. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 5:32pm

    Great White sharks are always smiling. But hey, that's the animal kingdom. Sharks are people too.

    Posted by Sorelish at 08/07/2008 @ 6:05pm

41. Posted by i'm nobody at 08/07/2008 @ 5:42pm

    Don't worry. Happy just thinks hes better than us on the left. It's not worth arguing with him. Everything you do or say is wrong to him because you are on the left. Even if it is the same sort of action his side participates in. He is not capable of looking at things subjectively. To him everything on the left is bad, everything on the right is good. Arguing with him is like arguing with a wall. He won't admit he is wrong about his disparaging remarks of the left ever.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/07/2008 @ 6:57pm

42. Those calling for a boycott have forgotten about that fool Jimmy Carter , who forced our teams out of the olympics of 1980, thereby earning the enmity of all of america's athletes, some of whom never had a career because of what he did.

    Posted by pianist355 at 08/07/2008 @ 8:38pm

43. Bet you if we matched China's regulations & enforcements, we can grow a hell of a lot more!----Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 5:05pm

    Would we get their dying rivers and air worse than Los Angeles, too?

    Oh, boy! Can't wait.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/07/2008 @ 9:22pm

44. Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008

    imprisoning people for no good reason goes beyond human decency.

    even captain kirk would intervene.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:31pm

45. Tell me: Other than paper and gunpowder, what has been invented outside the West?

    Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008

    algebra.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:34pm

46. Tell me: Other than paper and gunpowder, what has been invented outside the West?

    Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008

    wtf?

    the mayans had a far more advanced understanding of astronomy.

    the chinese discovered the circle of fifths (what's that?) way before any european.

    wtf?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:36pm

47. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 5:05pm

    you still haven't explained why it's good.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:38pm

48. Bet you if we matched China's regulations & enforcements, we can grow a hell of a lot more!

    Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 5:05pm

    oh, boy!

    the metastizing economy.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:41pm

49. Tell me: Other than paper and gunpowder, what has been invented outside the West?

    Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008

    algebra.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 9:34pm

    That's gold Jerry! GOLD!!

    Posted by Benchrest at 08/07/2008 @ 9:42pm

50. Posted by InThisDimension at 08/07/2008

    The Chinese scrapped a great imperial fleet hundreds of years ago. Did they know something we don't? These were the most seaworthy craft of their time. Stone, dough nut shaped anchors have been found off the S. Calif. Coast & these were probably Chinese. What if they had colonized? They undoubtedly traded with the native inhabitants. The Chinese are dispersed around the world & adapt to other cultures better than most. Don't ever question their greatness.

    Posted by Sorelish at 08/07/2008 @ 10:03pm

51. happy,

    do you want your grandkids shrouded in a particulate matter haze,

    dealing with cat. 7 hurricanes,

    christmas tornadoes,

    and food riots?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:07pm

52. happy,

    a lot of that $700 billion is coming here.

    it's ripping apart the boreal forest, polluting great rivers, and filling the sky with crap.

    wanna save $700 billion?

    stop wasting so god damn much.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:10pm

53. happy,

    the oil companies already have millions of hectares in leases that they haven't touched.

    anwr and offshore is really, really expensive.

    the equipment isn't available.

    the majors want the new leases for maybe 2050 when they've already milked the rest.

    it's just a con game.

    wanna keep the money in the u.s.?

    stop exporting your own petroleum.

    plus, if the u.s. were to use solely all it's proven reserves, importing none,

    the country would be drier than dick cheney's tear ducts within five years.

    you're talking b.s. and you know it.

    i

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:16pm

54. i

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:16pm

55. you know it's a con.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:38pm

56. america, the used book store.

    by happy.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:38pm

57. happy,

    i pay (currently) $1.29/litre for regular gasolito.

    that's $4.88 per u.s. gallon.

    of that 28¢ is tax.

    now, canada does this

    Oil - production: 3.092 million bbl/day (2005)

    Oil - consumption: 2.29 million bbl/day (2005)

    Oil - exports: 2.274 million bbl/day (2004)

    Oil - imports: 1.185 million bbl/day (2004).

    we're pumpin' lots of oil, yet my price is more than yours. only 28¢ is tax.

    you know it's a con.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/07/2008 @ 10:51pm

58. Wait a minute, for once the Nichelman and his extremist idealouge buddies have something right!

    The U.S.A. should lobby the IOC and the Chinese to open wide the doors of Chinese hospitality and let all extremist of every ilk into their country! Then all that is left to do is slam the iron ones shut on them as soon as they prove themselves openly! Its a win win situation for all peace loving nations!

    Posted by RedRiver_. at 08/07/2008 @ 11:37pm

59. BTW, your production # (& likely export #) is way out of date.

    ••••• blame the cia.

    I know that you Frosties have ramped up just Oil Sands production by hundreds of thousands of bbls.

    ••••• the shame.

    Check with your ?nephew? or check the production numbers from your #1 & #2 OS producers, Encana & Suncor.

    ••••• no thanks.

    I am looking to reenter into another beautiful relationship w/Suncor (SU)....watching it everyday!

    ••••• don't drool too much.

    It has been my most profitable Maple syrup....heheheheh!

    ••••• carcinogenic waffles, anyone?

    Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/07/2008 @ 11:25pm

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/08/2008 @ 12:09am

60. Posted by RedRiver_. at 08/07/2008 @ 11:37pm

    i recommend you desist in chewing glass.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/08/2008 @ 12:11am

61. To inthisdimension:

    O. k. I'll play for this once.

    You make this so easy. "WHAT A SEXIST REMARK".

    You're absolutely correct that was a sexist remark, but not meant in a mysonginistic way. I just couldn't imagine a women being so sophomoric and stupid

    Posted by julien38 at 08/08/2008 @ 12:18am

62. The Olympics is about money.

    Posted by Jim Ryan at 08/08/2008 @ 01:05am

63. INDIMENSION, JULIEN

    Why all this use of the term "sexist" There's no such thing as "Sexist" Its a non-word, a label made up by someone else to get get you to think about things "correctly", you know like "homophobe"

    I can't stand lima beans. Guess that makes me "limabeanaphobic"

    Enough with the labels already.

    Posted by william.harry13 at 08/08/2008 @ 07:47am

64. Happy-You and your ilk complain about about things all the time.What planet do you live on that you did not know that?You dittoheads are some of the biggest complainers.Happy people don't look for anti America messages, like you do nor do happy people feel the need to constantly state that they are happy..Who are you really trying to convince with your non stop claims of happiness?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/08/2008 @ 08:49am

65. redriver-You are an extremist.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 08/08/2008 @ 08:50am

66. You know how many people on the right I have heard talk about suspending democracy including Mary and LVL. You know how many people on the right put Israel before America? Don't talk to me about America haters. Your end of the spectrum is just as full of em.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/07/2008 @ 4:37pm

    Care to cite a quote from me where I wanted to suspend democracy?

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 08/08/2008 @ 11:56am

67. Posted by lvliberty1 at 08/08/2008 @ 11:56am

    Think he's right, CCC....don't think you can nail LVLIB on a "wants to suspend democracy" thing.

    Now on the "puts Israel ahead of America", yeah.

    "1. I trust Israeli intelligence more than our own and they disagree with the NIE"----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/26/2008 @ 6:40pm

    BLOG | Posted 02/26/2008 @ 1:25pm Stopping the New Arms Race by Katrina vanden Heuvel

    "2. Ultimately Israel is more important than the US in God's plans..... But my first allegiance is to God, with country a very distant second."---Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/03/2008 @ 12:48pm

    WILL MCCAIN RECEIVE THE FARRAKHAN TREATMENT?...Posted by Ari Berman at 02/29/2008 @ 4:44pm

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/08/2008 @ 12:20pm

68. Posted by lvliberty1 at 08/08/2008 @ 11:56am

    I'll see if I can find where you said we should scrap the system. It wasn't that long ago but I can't remember the exact quote so it I might not find it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/08/2008 @ 2:39pm

69. I'll see if I can find where you said we should scrap the system. It wasn't that long ago but I can't remember the exact quote so it I might not find it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/08/2008 @ 2:39pm

    Don't worry, you won't find it. What you are probably thinking of was my comment about the worthlessness of the Congress. Criticizing their behavior is not the same as suspending democracy. Nowhere have I ever suggested (nor would I) that the ability of the people to participate in their government should be suspended or surpressed.

    And a great cornerstone of our constitutional republic is the first amendment and the right of citizens to petition government for the redress of grievances.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 08/09/2008 @ 01:29am