>Mr. Ellian, who fled Iran in 1983, is a professor of legal philosophy at Leiden University. He has a piece in the WSJ on the recent release of Fitna that is a powerful criticism of fecklessness in the face of Islamic threats.
‘Fitna” has arrived.
Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders put the 15-minute movie about the Quran on the Internet Thursday night. But for weeks before anyone saw it, the Dutch flag was burned around the Islamic world. Iran’s undemocratically-elected parliament endorsed a boycott of the Netherlands, and Web sites linked to al Qaeda called for terrorist attacks.
Americans may be accustomed to images of angry bearded men setting their flag alight. The Dutch aren’t. In response, the government raised the national terrorist threat level to “substantial” while Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende distanced himself from the movie. Until the last moment, he urged Mr. Wilders not to show the film.
The message of “Fitna” is that the Quran is the living inspiration for jihadists. Without the Quran’s violent passages, the film suggests, Islamic terrorism would not exist. Mr. Wilders shows verses from the Quran alongside hate speeches by imams and graphic images of Islamic terrorism — from 9/11 to the Madrid train bombings in 2004 and the London attack a year later. He uses footage from the video-taped beheading of a hostage by Islamic terrorists. He also shows the most famous of the Danish cartoons (the one with a bomb on Muhammad’s head) that triggered demonstrations across the Muslim world two years ago.
The Western world long ago learned to criticize, even mock, religion. Think of such movies as “The Life of Brian” and “The Da Vinci Code” or more serious texts on Christianity by Nietzsche, whose famous phrase “God is Dead” is part of popular culture. Competition of ideas is fundamental to the Western way of life. The Islamic world isn’t accustomed to such discussions.
As in other countries, the terrible attacks of 9/11 raised existential questions in the Netherlands that remain the subject of heated debate to this day. They paved the way for the political rise of Pim Fortuyn, a flamboyant, openly gay former university professor and writer. Fortuyn fulminated against the dark sides of political Islam — terrorism, the subjugation of women and homosexuals, and anti-Semitism. His murder in 2002 by an extreme leftist was seen as an assault on Holland’s democratic order.
That shock was compounded in 2004 when in Amsterdam, the capital of freedom and tolerance, a Dutch Muslim of Moroccan descent shot and nearly decapitated filmmaker Theo van Gogh. The murderer declared that Islam demanded of him to kill Van Gogh, who had made a short movie that criticized the mistreatment of women in Islam. After the murder, the filmmaker’s collaborator, Somali-born parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was put under 24-hour police protection.
When Ms. Hirsi Ali went to live in the U.S. in 2006, Geert Wilders picked up the baton. He takes a hard stance on Islamic terrorism and calls for a stop to immigration, at least until Dutch Muslims are better integrated. Some of his arguments are pure polemic. For instance, he says the Quran is a “fascist” book. Since it is illegal in the Netherlands to publish Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” he argues, so it should be illegal to publish the Quran. One can have a debate about the Quran, but to ban the book altogether is ridiculous, and he knows it.
Yet his outrageous remarks have stirred a constructive discussion about the Quran and Islam in the Netherlands that is more vigorous than in any Western or, for that matter, Muslim country. And uncomfortable as they may be for Dutch Muslims, they help them view their religion in a more critical light. Notwithstanding the growing appeal of radical Islam, the political participation of moderate Muslims is on the rise, a positive sign of integration. For the first time in Dutch history, two Muslims are in the cabinet.
Dutch Muslims have so far reacted calmly to “Fitna.” There have not been any demonstrations, peaceful or violent, in the Netherlands. Perhaps this is further evidence that the hard debate has helped Dutch Muslims to understand Western values.
The issue isn’t really Mr. Wilders’s movie, or whether it incites hatred, which I doubt. It’s whether we are capable of defending our values against the intolerance of radical Muslims. Some people wanted “Fitna” banned before seeing it. That’s disconcerting. Dutch law prohibits a priori censorship.
A strand in Western society — a combination of European nihilism, self-loathing and timidity — favors appeasement. It is not the strength of our enemies but our weakness that might be our ruin.
Should “Fitna” lead to violence and protests against the Dutch, Europe will hopefully show more solidarity than it did with the Danes during the cartoon crisis. Any weakness in the resolve to defend our democratic legal order should be seen for what it is: Betrayal and cowardice.
That’s it. If you take the side of these Muslim loons on the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend basis then you’re not only a Moral Idiot but a coward and cultural traitor, as well.
Unfortunately, there are far too many on the Left who are prepared to betray their culture.
>Coldplay are a British rock band. Formed in 1998 in London, the group comprises vocalist/pianist Chris Martin, guitarist Jonny Buckland, bassist Guy Berryman and drummer Will Champion. Coldplay achieved worldwide fame with their 2000 single “Yellow”, followed by the success of their debut album, Parachutes, which was nominated for the Mercury Prize. Coldplay went on to be nominated for this prestigious award on two further occasions, once in 2003 and again in 2005. Coldplay have been one of the most commercially successful acts of the new millennium, selling over 30 million albums. The band are also known for hit singles, including “In My Place” and the Grammy Award-winning “Clocks”.
Coldplay’s early material was compared to acts such as Jeff Buckley and Radiohead, while also drawing comparisons to U2 and Travis. Since the release of Parachutes, Coldplay have also drawn influence from other sources, including Echo and the Bunnymen and George Harrison on A Rush of Blood to the Head (2002) and Johnny Cash and Kraftwerk for X&Y (2005). Both of these albums were released to great critical acclaim and commercial success. In 2002, A Rush of Blood to the Head was named as NME’s Album of the Year.
I saw Coldplay at Melbourne Park (I say so many concerts at Rod Laver Arena/ Vodaphone arena that I can never remember which one I was at without looking at the ticket) when they toured about three years ago. They were absolutely fantastic; certainly much better than I expected.
I took a few videos myself, the best of which is Clocks (missed the start). Given it was taken on a Nokia N70 it’s come out quite well.
Jack’s video of Clocks from Melbourne 2005
In My Place
>That tonight’s Earth Hour will make its holier than thou, onanistic environmental participants feel good about themselves is beyond doubt.
Also beyond doubt is that it is already an embarrassment. Huge amounts of energy have already gone into promoting the event, surely offsetting what little will be ‘saved’ during the event’s one hour duration. Andrew Bolt has been reporting on some of the insanity that includes light bulb shaped hot air balloons floating over Sydney to promote the event. A fleet of Hummers running for a day and a half put out less CO2 than that little exercise. Tim Blair recommends an Hour Of Power in order to offset the damage being done by the Earth Hourians.
It is claimed that last year Sydney’s electricity supply dropped 10% during Earth Hour. In fact it was around 2% – statistically indistinguishable from normal. What you aren’t being told is that in the two hours before Earth Hour got under way, electricity use rose considerably because everyone was getting things done in order to prepare for having no power. The net effect? More electricity was used on that day than normal.
Way to go, guys.
It has been quite cold here in globally warmed Canberra over the last few days. I have asked my Big Green supporting mates whether they’re going to turn everything off during Earth Hour including the heater. It will be very cold at 8PM here. None have given me a straight answer. Are those people hosting Earth Hour parties requiring everyone to bring a blanket, hat and gloves so that they can avoid getting some illness?
Earth Hour? More like Mirth Hour. It’s all so silly.
Still. It’s the symbolism that counts. Symbolism is a primary value to the Left.
Unfortunately, the whole thing is an Australian idea. Long ago are the days of famous Aussie inventions like the black box flight data recorder, Hills hoist, combine harvester, box kite, latex gloves, the pacemaker, the infamous winged keel, penicillin, Vegemite and, of course, the boomerang. If we weren’t so good in the field of medicine – spray on skin, Relenza etc – we’d have nothing to show for the last 20 years. These days we’re reduced to exporting pathetic, meaningless gestures.
Wikipedia’s Earth Hour entry includes:
Earth Hour, under the working title ‘the big flick’, was conceived by members of WWF-Australia’s communication team in December 2005 as a possible campaign to engage all parts of the Australian community on the need to address climate change.
A partnership was formed in August 2006 between WWF-Australia’s Andy Ridley, Leo Burnett’s Nigel Marsh and Fairfax Media’s Phil McLean with a planned campaign date of early 2007. Earth Hour was launched publicly as a Sydney-only event on December 16, 2006 by Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore and took place at 7:30pm on March 31 2007.
Following significant interest from both inside Australia and around the world, Earth Hour was formed into a non-profit entity owned by WWF-Australia, Leo Burnett and Fairfax Media. The decision was taken to make Earth Hour an open source model, allowing any genuinely interested individual, company, media or government anywhere in the world to adopt the campaign for 2008.
The 2007 Earth Hour was part of a wider awareness campaign that aimed to reduce Sydney’s carbon emissions by 5%. 68,506 individuals and 2,270 businesses registered their intention to participate on the Earth Hour website. EnergyAustralia, a utility, attributed a 10.2% decrease in consumption during the hour to the campaign. A poll of about 1000 people conducted afterwards suggested that 57% of Sydneysiders participated – some 2.2 million people.
2.2 million people out of a population of 3.8 million participated and could only reduce power use by 2%. Even using the WWF’s 10.2% it’s still a miserable effort. It really should give people cause to contemplate the extent of reductions necessary in order to hit proposed CO2 reduction targets if that’s all of the impact that can be achieved. Mind you, the 2.2 million figure was obviously achieved by using The Lancet’s methodology for counting things, which means it’s probably out by a factor of 10.
Strong backing from the City of Sydney and its Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, helped to make Earth Hour 2008 an international event. As of 27 March, over 11,900 businesses and over 200,000 individuals had indicated their intention to participate at earthhour.org.
People may also recall that some media outlets Photoshopped images of Sydney in order to make them look dimmer than what they actually were. The fact was that the city of Sydney was just as bright for Earth Hour as both before and after. No doubt there’ll be more of the same this year in the post-event propaganda.
Earth Hour. Putting the mental back in environmental.
>There’s little doubt that Geert Wilders’ new movie showing the violent side of Islam is a provocative piece.
It’s interesting to note that the usual Muslim suspects were seething before the film had even been shown. Along with the seething came the usual death threats against Wilders and promises to undertake attacks in Holland.
By taking this action Muslims act in exactly the way that the film portrays them. Irony does not seem to be understood in the Ummah.
What’s also interesting is that there are a lot of parallels between Communism and Islamism. It’s very clear when you see what Ahmadinejad and others have to say about Islam taking over the world.
The clock is running now on when a professionally produced film comes out that does the same thing to the West or to the USA in an attempt to create a moral equivalence between the two cultures and to provide fodder for the Kos Kids, HuffPo crowd and rest of the tin foil hat community.
>In the short but sweet category comes a report that has even made it into Fox News.
SYDNEY — A New Zealand man has been sentenced to community service after telling police he was raped by a wombat and the experience had made him speak “Australian”.
Arthur Ross Cradock, 48, from the South Island town of Motueka, called police on February 11 and told them he was being raped at his home by the wombat and he needed help, The Nelson Mail newspaper reported.
Readers may or may not be aware that Sydney is home to the vast majority of those activists-in-animal-costumes that annoy the crap out of everybody who’s more than 10 years old and who scare the crap out of the kiddies. I suspect that one of them, still dressed in his work clothes, stumbled into the wrong house after getting tanked at the local enviro-pub and proceeded to set about what he thought was his partner. It is Sydney, after all.
The orchard worker later called back and said: “Apart from speaking Australian now, I’m pretty all right, you know.”
Who would have thought that there was such as simple way to get people to talk Australian? No longer do we have to have government instructions printed in every language ever spoken since Babylonian times. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship just needs to hire a few wombats to do the job on arriving immigrants and voila, sie spracht Strine.
Cradock pleaded guilty in the local court to using a phone for a fictitious purpose. He was sentenced to 75 hours’ community work.
If using a phone for fictitious purposes is a real crime then all of us are in a lot of trouble. “Honey, I’m working back late…” is enough for weekend detention when it really involves the close company of your receptionist (or wombat or favourite other marsupial) and inappropriate use of the board room table.
Police prosecutor Sergeant Chris Stringer told the court alcohol played a large role in Cradock’s life.
You don’t say?
>Truth, as we all know, is not something that Middle Eastern nations have a particular affinity for. In this morally repugnant opinion piece published in Asharq Alawsat, Syrian Minister for Expatriates gets stuck into Australia – the world’s most fair-minded nation – for committing genocide while at the same time supporting that most evil of nations, Israel.
Her bio reads: Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban is Minister of Expatriates in Syria, and writer and professor at Damascus University since 1985. Before assuming her current ministerial position, Dr. Shaaban was Director of the Press Office at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Syria. She received her Ph.D. in English Literature from Warwick University in England in 1982, and joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as an advisor in 1988. Since then, she has represented Syria as a spokeswomen on an international level. In 2005 Dr. Shaaban was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and in the same year, was presented with “the Most Distinguished Woman in a Governmental Position” award by the Arab League. Dr. Shaaban has published four books, and contributed to numerous others.
No doubt the Left will applaud her for her ‘courage’ and ‘speaking the truth’. Why anyone thinks that a government hack from a socialist dictatorship speaks with anything other than a well-trained, well-used forked tongue is beyond my ken.
Only few weeks after the apology of Kevin Rudd, the newly elected Prime Minister of Australia, to the Aborigines, the indigenous inhabitants of Australia, he was party to a motion in Parliament describing Israel as a “robust democracy” and a “custodian of freedom” in a region abounding in autocracies and theocracies!
Opposition Liberal party leader Brendan Nelson said that in a region “characterized more by theocracies and autocracies, Israel is the custodian of the most powerful of human emotions – that is hopeful belief in the freedom of man, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly “.
And both Rudd and Nelson are absolutely correct. Israel is the Middle East’s only democracy. Arab Israeli citizens have the highest standard of living in the entire Arab world and unlike in the rest of the Arab world – they can vote – with the result that a number of Arabs sit in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset. Israel’s deputy-President is an Arab Israeli.
Here’s a pop quiz for you:
In which Middle Eastern country can a Muslim parliamentarian loudly denounce his country, call for its military defeat and then leave parliament without needing bodyguards, go home and not fear being arrested?
B) Saudi Arabia;
C) Libya; or
Tick, tock, tick, tock…thinking time is really not required, is it?
All this was expressed in the aftermath of Israeli Killing of over 130 Palestinians in Gaza, 39 of them were children, and 12 women and the rest were young men in their twenties aspiring to live in peace and dignity on their own land. The question that came to mind upon reading the disappointing news of the motion in the Australian Parliament was whether Kevin Rudd and his colleagues want to wait for 200 years to apologize from the Palestinians as they apologized from the aborigines, but only when it becomes too late and almost of no value to a people and culture who have been almost completely destroyed. If the world expressed its absolute shame of the way the “stolen generations” were treated in Australia, it should be more ashamed of the “slaughtered generation” in Palestine that is being collectively punished and ethnically cleansed in the most abhorrent racist policies adopted by any state in the world, including the past apartheid regime in South African.
Leaving aside the fact that there is no such thing as the Stolen Generations, and never has been, what culture is being destroyed in Palestine? It’s a non-place; there’s never been any such country. It’s never had a language, or money, or art, or philosophy, or trade, or government…or culture. Apologising to the so-called ‘slaughtered generation’ carries as much validity and honesty as the Stolen Generation apology did.
To Kevin Rudd and Brendan Nelson, I would like to say that Gaza is not on the moon; it is only a few miles from Jerusalem and you may easily visit or send a camera and a journalist to take you pictures of what is happening to the Palestinians at the hands of the Israelis, and to see for yourselves, what kind of “custodian of freedom” you are supporting! A million and a half Palestinians are imprisoned in a big jail called Gaza, after they have been transferred from Southern Palestine. The small West bank has over 400 check points and a tall apartheid wall that prevents children from going to schools and farmers from reaching their lands, and in the case of Qalqilia, prevents the sun from reaching windows of houses. Palestinians in Gaza are killed by Israeli missiles, tanks and fire, whether they are men tending their cattle or women making their bread at home, or children playing football, or simply attending schools.
In fact, you cannot send journalists with cameras in to see for yourself what is happening. As has been well documented, if Hamas or Fatah don’t like what you’re reporting then you get a warning to leave and never return with the threat to life and limb being obvious. It’s certainly accurate to say that the population of Gaza has been imprisoned but who actually imprisoned them? Israel? No. The rest of the Arab world imprisons them and uses them for Palestine-As-Cause propaganda. Why does Egypt have a security wall along the border between the Sinai Desert and the Gaza Strip? To keep Egyptians from getting in? Hardly. It’s to keep Palestinians from getting out. Why do so many Arab nations forbid migrants from Palestine and not accept Palestinian refugees – including Dr Shaaban’s own country of Syria? And to claim that cattle herders and school children and women making bread are the targets of Israel – while at the same time saying nothing about Hamas’ own Katuysha rocket attacks that are deliberately aimed at civilian targets – rivals anything Goebbels could come up with.
It is these immoral, illegal, and inhuman crimes perpetrated by Israeli forces against the Palestinians on a daily basis that prompted Iian Pappe, the Israeli historian from Haifa university (who was later virtually expelled, and he is now a professor at Exeter University, England) to say “I don’t think there is one moral person in the world that supports what Israel stands for” (Yedioth Ahranot, March 16, 2008).
Ilan Pappé is an Israeli Communist. He was expelled for supporting Hamas and promoting boycotts against Israeli universities. As the old saying goes, you can judge a man by who his enemies are. It works with his friends, as well. From his Wikipedia article:
Pappé’s works have been praised by many other historians, academics and writers, such as Walid Khalidi, Richard Falk, Ella Shohat and John Pilger. According to John Pilger: “Ilan Pappe is Israel’s bravest, most principled, most incisive historian.”
When John Pilger is on your side you know you’re waaaaaaay left.
Critiquing Pappé’s 2004 book, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples, historian Benny Morris wrote in the New Republic: ‘Unfortunately much of what Pappe tries to sell his readers is complete fabrication. […] This book is awash with errors of a quantity and a quality that are not found in serious historiography. […] The multiplicity of mistakes on each page is a product of both Pappe’s historical methodology and his political proclivities[.] […] For those enamored with subjectivity and in thrall to historical relativism, a fact is not a fact and accuracy is unattainable’.
Benny Morris is an Israeli historian who supports the Palestinian cause and he’s basically calling Pappe a liar.
Back to the article:
She has her numbers wrong. Of the 132 elected officials, fully 26 of them are ‘detained in Israel’ on charges of being associated with Hama’ or Fatah’s terrorist wings. Most are from Hamas – a proscribed terrorist organisation in most Western nations.
I am sure whether the Australian Parliament that lauded Israel and congratulated it on its 60th anniversary is aware that the president of the Palestinian Parliament Aziz al Douek and 15 of his colleagues who were democratically elected in elections that was described by ex-president Carter as the most democratic and transparent, that they are imprisoned and tortured in Israeli jails for the last two years, and no Parliament in the world has put forward a motion for their release or threatened to boycott their jailors (the Israelis) if they do not release them.
So, she prefers to provide moral support to the terrorists and murders who have perpetuated the conflict long past a time when it was clear Israel would do what it had to in order to achieve peace, which goes all the way back to the early 80s. Furthermore, to describe Israel as an apartheid regime when, as I mentioned, people with Arab backgrounds do so well there is absurd.
This moral support that is given to the racist, criminal policies of Israel against the Arabs is, partly, morally responsible for the crimes perpetrated. The balance of military power is by far in Israel’s favor, and the only hope for the Palestinians is to have the moral and political support of peoples of the world who gave us all hope when they kept mounting pressure on the ex-apartheid regime of South Africa till they brought it to an end.
Australians will certainly be ashamed of the Apology to the Stolen Generations when it causes the destruction of that culture in years to come. We will never be ashamed of standing up for free and democratic nations, especially when they come under such sustained attack as Israel has from dictatorships that back terrorist organisations, assassinate Lebanon’s political leaders willy-nilly and have appalling human rights records of their own such as Syria.
The very same effort is badly needed today to free the Palestinian people from the last occupation in the twenty first century. Let’s again listen to the best expert on Palestinian-Israeli affairs, Professor Iian Pappe: “I believe that things would change only if Israel receives a strong message that as long as occupation continues it would not be a legitimate member of the international community, and that until then its academics, doctors and authors would not be welcome. A similar boycott was imposed on South Africa. It took 21 years, but it eventually led to the end of Apartheid.” (Yedioth Ahranot, March 16, 2008). Much sooner than 21 years, the Australian people will be ashamed of the motion passed by the Australian parliament.
>The great Dennis Prager makes a reasonable point. Why is it that Palestine attracts so much support from the UN, international media and leftist organisations when there’s a much more valid case for supporting Tibet against China?
The long-suffering Tibetans have been in the news. This happens perhaps once or twice a decade. In a more moral world, however, public opinion would be far more preoccupied with Tibetans than with Palestinians, would be as harsh on China as it is on Israel, and would be as fawning on Israel as it now is on China.
But, alas, the world is, as it has always been, a largely mean-spirited and morally insensitive place, where might is far more highly regarded than right.
Consider the facts: Tibet, at least 1,400 years old, is one of the world’s oldest nations, has its own language, its own religion and even its own ethnicity. Over 1 million of its people have been killed by the Chinese, its culture has been systematically obliterated, 6,000 of its 6,200 monasteries have been looted and destroyed, and most of its monks have been tortured, murdered or exiled.
Palestinians have none of these characteristics. There has never been a Palestinian country, never been a Palestinian language, never been a Palestinian ethnicity, never been a Palestinian religion in any way distinct from Islam elsewhere. Indeed, “Palestinian” had always meant any individual living in the geographic area called Palestine. For most of the first half of the 20th century, “Palestinian” and “Palestine” almost always referred to the Jews of Palestine. The United Jewish Appeal, the worldwide Jewish charity that provided the nascent Jewish state with much of its money, was actually known as the United Palestine Appeal. Compared to Tibetans, few Palestinians have been killed, its culture has not been destroyed nor its mosques looted or plundered, and Palestinians have received billions of dollars from the international community. Unlike the dying Tibetan nation, there are far more Palestinians today than when Israel was created.
None of this means that a distinct Palestinian national identity does not now exist. Since Israel’s creation such an identity has arisen and does indeed exist. Nor does any of this deny that many Palestinians suffered as a result of the creation of the third Jewish state in the area, known — since the Romans renamed Judea — as “Palestine.”
But it does mean that of all the causes the world could have adopted, the Palestinians’ deserved to be near the bottom and the Tibetans’ near the top. This is especially so since the Palestinians could have had a state of their own from 1947 on, and they have caused great suffering in the world, while the far more persecuted Tibetans have been characterized by a morally rigorous doctrine of nonviolence.
So, the question is, why? Why have the Palestinians received such undeserved attention and support, and the far more aggrieved and persecuted and moral Tibetans given virtually no support or attention?
The first reason is terror. Some time ago, the Palestinian leadership decided, with the overwhelming support of the Palestinian people, that murdering as many innocent people — first Jews, and then anyone else — was the fastest way to garner world attention. They were right. On the other hand, as The Economist notes in its March 28, 2008 issue, “Tibetan nationalists have hardly ever resorted to terrorist tactics…” It is interesting to speculate how the world would have reacted had Tibetans hijacked international flights, slaughtered Chinese citizens in Chinese restaurants and temples, on Chinese buses and trains, and massacred Chinese schoolchildren.
The second reason is oil and support from powerful fellow Arabs. The Palestinians have rich friends who control the world’s most needed commodity, oil. The Palestinians have the unqualified support of all Middle Eastern oil-producing nations and the support of the Muslim world beyond the Middle East. The Tibetans are poor and have the support of no nations, let alone oil-producing ones.
The third reason is Israel. To deny that pro-Palestinian activism in the world is sometimes related to hostility toward Jews is to deny the obvious. It is not possible that the unearned preoccupation with the Palestinians is unrelated to the fact that their enemy is the one Jewish state in the world. Israel’s Jewishness is a major part of the Muslim world’s hatred of Israel. It is also part of Europe’s hostility toward Israel: Portraying Israel as oppressors assuages some of Europe’s guilt about the Holocaust — “see, the Jews act no better than we did.” Hence the ubiquitous comparisons of Israel to Nazis.
A fourth reason is China. If Tibet had been crushed by a white European nation, the Tibetans would have elicited far more sympathy. But, alas, their near-genocidal oppressor is not white. And the world does not take mass murder committed by non-whites nearly as seriously as it takes anything done by Westerners against non-Westerners. Furthermore, China is far more powerful and frightening than Israel. Israel has a great army and nuclear weapons, but it is pro-West, it is a free and democratic society, and it has seven million people in a piece of land as small as Belize. China has nuclear weapons, has a trillion U.S. dollars, an increasingly mighty army and navy, is neither free nor democratic, is anti-Western, and has 1.2 billion people in a country that dominates the Asian continent.
A fifth reason is the world’s Left. As a general rule, the Left demonizes Israel and has loved China since it became Communist in 1948. And given the power of the Left in the world’s media, in the political life of so many nations, and in the universities and the arts, it is no wonder vicious China has been idolized and humane Israel demonized.
The sixth reason is the United Nations, where Israel has been condemned in more General Assembly and Security Council resolutions than any other country in the world. At the same time, the UN has voted China onto its Security Council and has never condemned it. China’s sponsoring of Sudan and its genocidal acts against its non-Arab black population, as in Darfur, goes largely unremarked on at the UN, let alone condemned, just as is the case with its cultural genocide, ethnic cleansing and military occupation of Tibet.
The seventh reason is television news, the primary source of news for much of mankind. Aside from its leftist tilt, television news reports only what it can video. And almost no country is televised as much as Israel, while video reports in Tibet are forbidden, as they are almost anywhere in China except where strictly monitored by the Chinese authorities. No video, no TV news. And no TV, no concern. So while grieving Palestinians and the accidental killings of Palestinians during morally necessary Israeli retaliations against terrorists are routinely televised, the slaughter of over a million Tibetans and the extinguishing of Tibetan Buddhism and culture are non-events as far as television news is concerned.
The world is unfair, unjust and morally twisted. And rarely more so than in its support for the Palestinians — no matter how many innocents they target for murder and no matter how much Nazi-like anti-Semitism permeates their media — and its neglect of the cruelly treated, humane Tibetans.
To those who think that the issues in Palestine are created by the Israelis you should seek the answer to a question. Why is it that if you live in Gaza or the West Bank then you cannot migrate to any other Arab country (with only a couple of exceptions)?