"China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a claim that Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There are some things that rise above specific differences that are the global responsibility of great powers," she told the Associated Press.

One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human rights violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's Xinjiang region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on China to understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to stifle China's development.

"We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed up for" under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Sherman said."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

On Monday, July 26, 2021 at 8:08:09 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> "China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a claim that Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There are some things that rise above specific differences that are the global responsibility of great powers," she told the Associated Press.
>
> One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human rights violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's Xinjiang region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on China to understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to stifle China's development.
>
> "We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed up for" under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Sherman said."

Perhaps, the U.S. should look into its own human rights on the streets within the U.S.

>
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights in US
is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to interfere in
them.

However, it is the right of US to interfere the internal problem of human
rights in China and other countries. too.

This is because US thinks it is global responsibility of great powers like
them to interfere in other country's internal affairs but not allowed other
to internal their internal affairs.

Therefore, US thinks they are the only one with great powers, but not for
China or Russia or others as big powers.

This sort of stupid argument offered by Sherman is sheer stupid and naive.
She should be ashamed of herself for lying in her heart when she lied to
Christian American God.

She probably banged herself on the wall when she got back to her room,
laughing at how US told her to argue this way and twist her way on human
rights between US and other countries.

"ltlee1" wrote in message
news:d61561b3-a040-4cbc-8ef3-621aa9190f05n@googlegroups.com...

"China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a claim that
Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There are some things
that rise above specific differences that are the global responsibility of
great powers," she told the Associated Press.

One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human rights
violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's Xinjiang
region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on China to
understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to stifle China's
development.

"We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an
internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed up for"
under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Sherman said."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

Two arguments on why the US could and should interfere:

1. A two step reasoning from the US point of view:
Step a) "America is great because America is good".
Step b) "America can interfere because America is great."

2. Every country can interfere because all under heaven can be,
should be allowed to interfere on principle all thing under heaven.
天下人管天下事。

If Ms Sherman was asserting 1) above, it is noting more than an unilateral assertion.
Should there be universal criteria?
If Ms Sherman was asserting 2), there is still cultural difference between Christian
ethic and Confucian ethic.

If she insists Christian ethnic should also be universal accepted, would she then
welcome other nations to take side and/or assist on US issues?

On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 5:42:17 AM UTC-4, gorde wrote:
> US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights in US
> is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to interfere in
> them.
>
> However, it is the right of US to interfere the internal problem of human
> rights in China and other countries. too.
>
> This is because US thinks it is global responsibility of great powers like
> them to interfere in other country's internal affairs but not allowed other
> to internal their internal affairs.
>
> Therefore, US thinks they are the only one with great powers, but not for
> China or Russia or others as big powers.
>
> This sort of stupid argument offered by Sherman is sheer stupid and naive..
> She should be ashamed of herself for lying in her heart when she lied to
> Christian American God.
>
> She probably banged herself on the wall when she got back to her room,
> laughing at how US told her to argue this way and twist her way on human
> rights between US and other countries.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "ltlee1" wrote in message
> news:d61561b3-a040-4cbc...@googlegroups.com...
> "China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a claim that
> Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There are some things
> that rise above specific differences that are the global responsibility of
> great powers," she told the Associated Press.
>
> One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human rights
> violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's Xinjiang
> region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on China to
> understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to stifle China's
> development.
>
> "We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an
> internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed up for"
> under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Sherman said."
>
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 6:30:13 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> Two arguments on why the US could and should interfere:
>
> 1. A two step reasoning from the US point of view:
> Step a) "America is great because America is good".
> Step b) "America can interfere because America is great."

America can never be "great" or "good" because of its history of slavery, the killing of millions of Bison just for their skin!!! leaving the Native Indians to starve. Even today, the killing continues on the streets of America's cities... America's propaganda is the most powerful, calling China a "police-state" when Chinese policemen never wear guns... while America's policemen killed almost daily...

>
> 2. Every country can interfere because all under heaven can be,
> should be allowed to interfere on principle all thing under heaven.

But not under your own lies about other countries...

> 天下人管天下事。
>
> If Ms Sherman was asserting 1) above, it is noting more than an unilateral assertion.
> Should there be universal criteria?
> If Ms Sherman was asserting 2), there is still cultural difference between Christian
> ethic and Confucian ethic.
>
> If she insists Christian ethnic should also be universal accepted, would she then
> welcome other nations to take side and/or assist on US issues?
> On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 5:42:17 AM UTC-4, gorde wrote:
> > US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights in US
> > is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to interfere in
> > them.
> >
> > However, it is the right of US to interfere the internal problem of human
> > rights in China and other countries. too.
> >
> > This is because US thinks it is global responsibility of great powers like
> > them to interfere in other country's internal affairs but not allowed other
> > to internal their internal affairs.
> >
> > Therefore, US thinks they are the only one with great powers, but not for
> > China or Russia or others as big powers.
> >
> > This sort of stupid argument offered by Sherman is sheer stupid and naive.
> > She should be ashamed of herself for lying in her heart when she lied to
> > Christian American God.
> >
> > She probably banged herself on the wall when she got back to her room,
> > laughing at how US told her to argue this way and twist her way on human
> > rights between US and other countries.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "ltlee1" wrote in message
> > news:d61561b3-a040-4cbc...@googlegroups.com...
> > "China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a claim that
> > Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There are some things
> > that rise above specific differences that are the global responsibility of
> > great powers," she told the Associated Press.
> >
> > One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human rights
> > violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's Xinjiang
> > region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on China to
> > understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to stifle China's
> > development.
> >
> > "We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an
> > internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed up for"
> > under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Sherman said."
> >
> > https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

"gorde" the nym-shifter wrote in message news:se0hhm$670$1@dont-email.me...

Who will you be next? "Sukiki"? "Odear"?

> US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights in US
> is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to interfere in
> them.

"Human rights" is an oxymoron in Mandarin...

On 07/30/2021 10:13 PM, Byker wrote:
> "gorde"  the nym-shifter wrote in message
> news:se0hhm$670$1@dont-email.me...
>
> Who will you be next? "Sukiki"? "Odear"?
>
>> US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights
>> in US
>> is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to
>> interfere in
>> them.
>
> "Human rights" is an oxymoron in Mandarin...

Orwell understood that language can limit
thinking - hence "NewSpeak" to make it
impossible to formulate any coherent anti-BB
arguments.

The ultra dumbed-down, zealously restricted,
"WokeSpeak" being pushed on the kiddies today
is a real-world excercise in that principle.

No wonder China pushed Mandarin on its entire
population ...

On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 12:11:50 AM UTC-4, Mainspring wrote:
> On 07/30/2021 10:13 PM, Byker wrote:
> > "gorde" the nym-shifter wrote in message
> > news:se0hhm$670$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> > Who will you be next? "Sukiki"? "Odear"?
> >
> >> US seems to define and arguing set their own terms that human rights
> >> in US
> >> is an internal problem and hence not for foreign countries to
> >> interfere in
> >> them.
> >
> > "Human rights" is an oxymoron in Mandarin...
> Orwell understood that language can limit
> thinking - hence "NewSpeak" to make it
> impossible to formulate any coherent anti-BB
> arguments.
>
> The ultra dumbed-down, zealously restricted,
> "WokeSpeak" being pushed on the kiddies today
> is a real-world excercise in that principle.
>
> No wonder China pushed Mandarin on its entire
> population ...

The assertion that "Human rights" is an oxymoron in Mandarin..."
had me scratching my heading wondering what it could had meant.
Thank you for coming along and responding to the other poster who made
that assertion.

In case you two are not making things up because of misinformation, please
explain in what way "Human rights is an oxymoron in Mandarin."

Of course, you are not obligated to answer if you have no idea what your were
talking about.

ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a
> claim that Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There
> are some things that rise above specific differences that are the
> global responsibility of great powers," she told the Associated Press.
>
> One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human
> rights violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's
> Xinjiang region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on
> China to understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to
> stifle China's development.
>
> "We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an
> internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed
> up for" under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
> Sherman said."
>
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg

Human rights are defined by the UN declaration [A].
The declaration covers more than *political* rights.
Fighting *only* on ground chosen by your "competitor" is usually unwise.

The Deputy Secretary of State *demands* that some issues US would like
to treat as internal to be treated otherwise e.g. It is quite easy to
assume that human rights of over 10% Americans without health insurance
are violated.

The principle of reciprocity is the most sacred.

[A] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

--
A. Filip : Big Tech Brother is watching you.
| "It's not just a computer -- it's your ass." (Cal Keegan)

On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 8:57:42 AM UTC-4, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 <ltl...> wrote:
> > "China has accused the U.S. of suppressing China's development, a
> > claim that Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman rejected. "There
> > are some things that rise above specific differences that are the
> > global responsibility of great powers," she told the Associated Press.
> >
> > One such issue has been human rights. China has been accused of human
> > rights violations against the Muslim minority Uyghurs in the country's
> > Xinjiang region, charges it has repeatedly denied. Sherman called on
> > China to understand that human rights concerns were not an attempt to
> > stifle China's development.
> >
> > "We do expect...them to understand that human rights are not just an
> > internal matter— they are a global commitment which they have signed
> > up for" under the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
> > Sherman said."
> >
> > https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-expects-china-to-understand-human-rights-are-not-just-an-internal-matter-official/ar-AAMzFcg
> Human rights are defined by the UN declaration [A].
> The declaration covers more than *political* rights.
> Fighting *only* on ground chosen by your "competitor" is usually unwise.
>
> The Deputy Secretary of State *demands* that some issues US would like
> to treat as internal to be treated otherwise e.g. It is quite easy to
> assume that human rights of over 10% Americans without health insurance
> are violated.
>
> The principle of reciprocity is the most sacred.
>
> [A] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
>
> --
> A. Filip : Big Tech Brother is watching you.
> | "It's not just a computer -- it's your ass." (Cal Keegan)

Don't understand your post.
If you are trying to answer the question raised by the first post on this thread,
please be specific.