Re: (slightly) Xenophobia

[dpw39]

Idi Amin is now Idi Am-out .

The ex Rhodesian (now Zimbabwe) dictator passed away today in Saudi Arabia.

Further information can be found at www.homesforterroristsanddictators.net (JOKE!).

Saudi is treading on thin ice with this practice, or do you think it's wide-spread? Is Isama playing croquet with Lord Lucan (moonlighting as Lord T) and Saddam in some sultry hideaway drinking their Pimms (courtesy of ex-pats )? and having Elvis wait on them hand and foot!!!

How about their standards of justice that prevails in their counrty as opposed to ours?

Opinions and humour greatfully recieved,

Ciao,

Dave the Rave

[Anonymous]

I do not want to be pedantic. However have you ever tried walking from ex -Rhodesia to Uganda? But what I really want to say is what about Martin McGuiness (who has just asked nicely that his criminal record be expurged) General Pinochet who would still be here if the Spanish hadn't threatened him with Tourquemade
No time sorry
Paddy

[George Brims]

Paddy you aren't just pedantic, you are excessively subtle. Was your second sentence meant to point out that Idi Amin was from Uganda, not Zimbabwe? Just to be even more pedantic, Zimbabwe was Southern Rhodesia (I think Northern became Zambia).

Anyway, xenophobia has nothing to do with it. Amin was a disgusting butcher and that's all there was to it.

[jjc]

Anyway, xenophobia has nothing to do with it. Amin was a disgusting butcher and that's all there was to it.

I thought that the xenophobic reference had more to do with the original questioning of Saudi's role in his exile than with the man himself.

But then for some reason we don't seem to be able to question Saudi about much… certainly our governments don't seem to be up to the task – or maybe they are just a little more lenient towards oil-superpowers than they are to the rest of the world?!?!

[dpw39]

[quote="dpw39"] Idi Amin is now Idi Am-out .

The ex Rhodesian (now Zimbabwe) dictator passed away today in Saudi Arabia.

Yes sorry about that. I was experiencing a SENILE moment. The only thread I can work out is that they both had very strong links at one time or another with great Britain, but otherwise my brain must have slipped a gear.

Human Rights is all well and good, but to go into other countries and instill our beliefs in democracy on them, I think is wrong morally speaking.

If they live in a country with a restrictive or dictatorial regime (our perception), such as Iran or Iraq, then they have two options if they are disatisfied. 1. Escape from the country, 2. Overthrow the regime.

For foriegn powers to encroach on anothers nations culture and beliefs I think is totally wrong. We go to their countries and have to abide by their rules whether we like them or not, unfortunately when foreigners come to this country, they are allowed to bring their own cultures with them. I can appreciate David Blunket's plan, even though I disagree with some of his policies, but thats another story...

Certain cultural practices that are commonly accepted abroad, are frowned upon over here, such as female mutilation. In their own culture, this practice is totally acceptable and desired. However westernised views are totally against practices such as these.

Total social integration is far from being alive and well...as we speak, Israel and Palistine are back into conflict. The UN building blown up in Iraq, what next, a Red Cross post etc.

Who said, "left to their own devices, they will survive" and should we let all these "HOT-SPOTS" in the world, contain their problems within their own borders. the initial law of the jungle what says you?

Ciao,

Dave the Rave
Dysfunctional Senile Delinquent
(and loving evry minute of it).

[scotsboy]

Yes, I thought the xenophobia reference was aimed at the Saudis for giving the King of Scots exile i.e a dislike/distrust of foreigners.