No. I don't think they did it for the right reasons.

i lol'd when i saw her get hit.

Damn straight they should protest, they should have every right to get in the way of China's plans and show them what they are doing in Tibet (and the rest of China) is wrong.

i think the people who attacked the torch should count thewmselves lucky they didnt get shot!

but i think they should be protesting, what chinese government is doing is wrong. BUT so i what the protesters did.

I love China,but a free China!

damn right. FREE CHINA. the government has more important shit than some silly games on its agenda.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

They have as much right to protest against China's plans as pan-Arabs have rights to bomb British citizens for the Iraq and Afghan war. Hooliganism is hooliganism, not matter what. Just because it is done by the British or French, it doesn't become a justifable hooliganism.

Bombing people is different from protesting though. And killing loads of people is different from causing a bit of trouble.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

The average Anglo-American is a [Nazi] extreme nationalist whose ego is charged by the way their countries bully weak third world nations. An American simply can't come to terms with the reality that China is way too mighty and powerful to bullied by United States. Hence protesting against the Olympics is the best self-righteous way of letting their nationalistic rage that they to come to. If any of these 'free Tibet' protesters were really concerned about human rights, they'd have looked among their own war crimes in Iraq.

I don't know about America, but as far as I know, the majority of people in the UK do not support the war in Iraq. I don't understand where you got the idea that it's mostly overly-nationalic, pro-US British people who don't like China... except from perhaps reading one quote from some former Conservative...

I don't support everything the UK does blindly; I fully agree with anyone (British or not) who protests against human rights abuses in Iraq (or anywhere else). If people demonstrate about that before the 2012 Olympics I think it's very justified.

^ How did the post above me violate Teen Hut rules...?

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Equal for equal. A Londoner trying to disrupt the Olympic torch run for self-righteous beliefs is on an equal footing as an Arab who blows himself up in a public place in UK because his breathren are dying thanks to UK-US policies in the Gulf. Both are equal in extremes.

I really can’t understand why you think that protesting is on the same level of extremism as suicide bombing…

Sasha Vassily wrote:

I am not talking about the Britons who dislike China. I am talking about the ones who try to disrupt Olympics proceedings for their self-righteous ideals; especially Sebastian Coe (I wouldn't call such an racist idiot 'Lord').

You don’t know what motivated the people who protested in London to do what they did. Somehow I doubt that most who were there would agree with Sebastian Coe. You just called the average Briton a Nazi because of what one man said:

Sasha Vassily wrote:

The average Anglo-American is a [Nazi] extreme nationalist whose ego is charged by the way their countries bully weak third world nations.”

It is easier to delete than respond, you are still wrong.

Unfortunately i think disrupting the relay is the only way to stage a noticable protest against China.
I mean the millions of people who protested against Iraq in 2003 didn't make a difference so perhaps a different approach will.

Then again, before all the hecticness about China... how did we treat the native americans?

i love china forever!
why some of you believe thar chinese goverment "crackdown" Tibet?

your shit news make all of you misunderstand the true thing.

why you only believe the things reported by your whole country ,why not listen the true,your country control the media,even it true or not,you will believe?

you seem stupid to believe all the things only from your own country.

forgive me for the impolite words ,i am really arque with your false news!

I think that making a stand and protesting is one of the rights we have "Feedom of Assembly" so why not! The state of China and thier actions regarding Tibet, is atrocious. So i agree totaly with all the non-vilent protests. i esspecialy loved the San francisco sit in! i only wish i could join in with the protests in Austaralia but the toach is't coming my way.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Okay, what would motivate a Briton to wake up one fine morning and risk arrest and stampede by disrupting an Olympic torch run? If there is something China did to them personally or to their families, there might have been an explanation. If they belonged to a cult that considered protesting against Olympic torch is a way to reach salvation, it might have given an explanation too.

I don't think you have to be affected by something personally to be concerned by it. Fair enough, Chinese control of Tibet doesn't disrupt the average Londoner's life, but they're allowed to support the cause and if they want to so I think they should be able to demonstrate. I don't think it's caused by raging British pride, at the worst uniformed philanthropy, but outside of causing a bit of trouble to the torch procession, I don't think it causes any harm...

I personally don't know what to think about Tibet and China's treatment of it. I'm still formulating an opinion. But regarding the protests, I think people are quite within their rights to protest. You can't compare a suicide bomber to the protests that were held, if anything simply because of the possible consequences. A suicide bomber is going out of his/her way to end people's lives. The London protests? No more than put out a big candle.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

The torch snatchers go way out their way to disrupt an Olympics proceeding. On a scale of equality and using plain logic, their drive is similar to that of a suicide bomber. Except for the little fact that while a suicide bomber has a personal vendetta, the torch snatcher is driven by racism or double standard idealism under the garb of 'protests'.

I wouldn't call protesting over the control or treatment of Tibet, whether it is a misplaced cause or not, racism. If the protests were double standard idealism, then so be it, a lot of protests unfortunately are. If people have a disagreement and want to make that disagreement public (without, in reference to your suicide bomber comparison, harming people) then that's fine by me, they have that right to publicly disagree.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

The consequences are same whether its a suicide bomber or a torch snatcher.

They are the same, in that they both attract media attention, but they are plainly different in their effect on people's lives. People did not die in the Olympic torch relay protests.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Both attempt to make a statement to their causes through dramatic ways, often for causes that don't have an easy solution the way they think. How many torch snatchers honestly believe that disruption China's Olympics proceedings is going to have any effect on their pseudo 'causes' for Tibet?

I agree here. If they thought they could make a difference, they were deluded. If they didn't, why were they?

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Suicide bombings? No more than terminating a few human life cycles about 40 years in advance.

So you hold the Olympic torch in equal esteem to people's lives? Lives which are not only important to those that live them, but to their loved ones?

the tibetan monk "riot" was actually staged by the chinese government. there was a video showing policemen dressing up in tibetan robes, purposefully "igniting" the violence. if you don't belive me, you can go look it up. and after that, the chinese government almost concealed its media successfully, as always.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

I agree. But there is also a saying, "People living in glass houses should not throw stones at others". Applies perfectly with Britons attempting to throw slime at China. I'll ignore the blatant Chinaphobic racism by some public figures of Britian at this point.

Who else said stuff, apart from Sebastian Coe?

Sasha Vassily wrote:

What about the hue and cry at the Chinese guards who wouldn't get the protesters put off the torch. The responses in British parliament that followed makes it quite obvious it is more than philanthropy that motivated them. In any case, attempting to snatch the Olympic torch and light it off is more than causing a 'bit of trouble'.

As far as I know, there were hundreds, possibly thousands of people in London protesting that day. The police only made 37 arrests and only one person tried to grab the Olympic torch. Out of all those people, only a few caused any damage to the Olympic spirit which you value so highly.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Suicide bombings? No more than terminating a few human life cycles about 40 years in advance.

That’s a pretty callous thing to say.

Sasha Vassily wrote:

I'll ignore the blatant Chinaphobic racism by [B]some public figures of Britian at this point.[/B]

In answer to the above, you wrote this:

Sasha Vassily wrote:

Not only the British MP Sebatian Coe, but also the entire band of hooligans who attempted to snatch the Olympics torch.

The people who tried to grab the torch were "public figures of Britian"?

Sasha Vassily wrote:

[I]Apparenty you missed the entire hype created by politicians in the British Parliament on how Great Britian's sovereignty is 'under attack' and 'national security is compromised' because of the presence of 'Chinese thugs who couldn't speak English'.[/I]



Although I understand that Anglo-Saxons hold a lot of weight to arbitary symbolism, it is not that symbolic 'Olympic spirit' that I am concerned about. It is the newly revealed institutional anti-Chinaism that seems to be growing in the English and American masses. Especially when it runs so high that the president of London Olympics Committee is overheard making a bigoted statement to his colleague

Stop going on about him for a second… who else?