The president of the Association of National Olympic Committees recently said that the Olympic games will present few problems, that he is confident than any minor problems will diminish as the games approach, and that humanity will be served by "allowing for greater understanding between the peoples of the world. . . " Meanwhile, the torch lighting-bearing process has been in full swing throughout much of the world. At the torch lighting ceremony in Greece, IOC President Jacques Rogge echoed these wholesome sentiments.
There have been disruptions based on the Chinese occupation of Tibet and other concerns about China's human rights history and its current practices. Today, there was an article in the London Daily Mail entitled ”Lord Coe blasts 'horrible Chinese thugs' who barged their way through London as IOC considers scrapping the relay.” According to the article, " burly henchmen" interfered with spectators and with policemen during the parade. Former Blue Peter presenter and torchbearer Konnie Huq, complained that the Chinese minders "barked orders at her and pushed her arm up to hold the flame higher." The men who did these things were reportedly recruited from Chinese special forces brigades. Some came from the Flying Dragons, a counter-terror unit. Another, more recent, article appeared later today in Times Online. There, the incident seems to have been even more inappropriate.
Due to these and similar debacles, consideration has been given, and more is being given, to a boycott of the Olympics opening ceremony, if not of the Olympics itself.
In these circumstances, one must question the perception that the "marvelous Olympic Games . . . [will] serve humanity, allowing for greater understanding between the peoples of the world." Duh.
It is possible that the events leading up to the Olympics, and even the Olympics themselves, will serve humanity by allowing for a greater worldwide understanding of just how open and tolerant of dissent the Peoples Republic of China is. It is certainly tolerant of supporters of its occupation of Tibet, and open to their dissent in countries which find that occupation distasteful. It is far less tolerant of dissent within, for example, Tibet, and appears even to take umbrage at dissent in England, France, the United States, and elsewhere.
The late lamented President Nixon is given substantial credit for opening up China to the West through ping-pong diplomacy back in 1971. Then, China was overtly hostile to the United States and vice versa. Now, due largely to commerce with the United States and other countries, the hostility is more beneath the surface. I suppose that holding the Olympic Games in China was intended to drive at least the perceptions of hostility deeper below the surface. Unfortunately, it seems at least possible that the still alive but buried hostility is being resurrected.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Zedd
Dan,
Interesting. I would say that change always comes with resistance. Some see it as not enough and others think that things have gone far too far.
HOWEVER...
I think it is highly hypocritical of the U.S. and the U.K. to express any serious disapproval when they have conducted a siege on a sovereign nation for no tangible reason. Multitudes are dead, many more than those that we could accuse China of at this time in our history.
2 - Dan Miller
Zedd,
I think the U.S. and the U.K. may have pretty much recognized a lack of standing to say much about the situation in Tibet; there have been some mumblings, but nothing really substantial. Alternatively, maybe neither officially gives much of a damn. In any event, I don't want to get into an off-topic discussion here about the differences between Tibet and Iraq.
The point I was trying to make, however, is that if Bremmer has a valid thesis, and I think he does, China has stepped in the poop by sending in goons to stifle dissent from her policies in the U.K. and in France. That raises the pucker factor by an order of magnitude. I can't recall either the U.S. or the U.K. having done that sort of thing in the Republic of China recently.
What the consequences will be, I can't predict. However, if China is not to forfeit too much face, or commerce, or otherwise allow a possibly explosive situation to get too much out of hand, she will have to do something to make amends, possibly by relaxing things a tad in China during the Olympics. This may cause her to slip down the "J Curve" and, if there is sufficient momentum, to remain a bit more open and less oppressive.
Perhaps this is a remote possibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Dan
3 - Clavos
Cool pic, Dan,
I see you got it published OK. Did the instructions help?
4 - STM
I love Zedd's description of the US and UK launching an attack on a sovereign nation and saying China's human rights abuses pale in comparison. I assume she is talking about Iraq.
Really Zedd, are you fair dinkum??
From one who lived in Iraq as a boy, and who keeps in contact with Iraqi friends, I can tell you this:
About 99 per cent of the population of Iraq regarded the coalition as liberators, given that they'd been living for rhree decades at the hands of a brutal stalinist ideology made worse by the eventual rise to power in the Ba'ath party of Saddam Hussein, whose favourite party tricks were to gas children knowingly and without a second thought and feed his opponents feet first, and slowly, into industrial paper shredders. I know I've said that before, but it's all true.
You didn't have to have done anything either to have that happen. You just had to know someone who knew someone who knew someone else who'd saidn too loudly that he didn't like Saddam. All that stuff's well documented.
To compare the removal of this lunatic and the attempts to give Iraq a decent government that doesn't have as its raison d'etre the terrorising of its own people to China's human rights abuses is a nonsense.
Most of the killings done today in Iraq are being done or orchestrated by fanatical outsiders from other Arab/muslim countries or by Iran and their shia sympathisers in southern Iraq.
Ask the average Iraqi what they think, and they'll tell you it's unthinkable to leave them to their fate - again.
What they complain about is not the US invasion, but the subsequent "peace" and the bad management of that process. The US tends not to do that stuff well, given that it a) hasn't really been a colonial power despite some minor imperial pretensions over the past 200 years, and b) Americans as a rule tend to have very little cultural understanding of anything much outside their own country (and in a lot of cases, outside their own county - like the military police reservists involved in the Abu Ghraib debacle).
However, the US IMO doesn't go out of its way to subjugate a people to its will, and never has. When it has been heavy handed, there are usually plenty of benefits on offer in return. It's a fine line, sure, but there's a differnce ...
Still, given Zedd's views on what's going on in Zimbabwe, the former food bowl of Africa now struggling to feed even a fraction of its own population after the thug takeover of the farms since 2001, and the brutal treatment meted out to members of the black opposition in Zimbabwe, why would I be surprised at this skewed view?
China's ongoing litany of human rights abuses is a different ballgame and bears no comparison, whatever we think of the Bush administration's original flawed reasoning for launching the invasion of Iraq.
5 - james
Tibet " the “Inconvenient Truth”
1. Tibetan Buddhist hierarchy " a combination of religion institution and secular governing body:
Contrary to the popular belief (molded and ingrained mostly by the western mainstream medias and probably in the textbooks as well) in the West, Tibetan Buddhist society was, never a pure form of religious institution in Chinese history, instead, a fundamentalism for as well as an extension of the then secular government solely consisted of slavery landlords. Tibetan Buddhism monasteries both directly and indirectly preserved the feudal system ruling the region for centuries with extreme cruelty, such as peeling off slaves’ skins to make drums, beheading prisoners to use their skull to make bowls. Dismantlement of limbs and gouging out of eyes were common punitive punishment was a memory as recent as 1940s of last century until the communist uprooted ruling class of the then Tibetan region.
The western so-called communist “invasion” and later on its crackdown of rebellion in the ensuing year was in fact not prompted by the quest for territorial gain (anyone with rich knowledge of Chinese history would know the legitimacy behind China’s claim of the region as a integrated part of the country), but rather the result of inevitable clash between two vastly different social ideologies.
As a result most of the Tibet exiles following Dalai Lama, old or new, are those who used to be the beneficiaries of that Tibetan feudal system. They are not real Tibetan people.
2. Dalai Lama " never a spiritual leader in Chinese Buddhism followers’ mind:
To understand this, western minds must abandon the perceived comparison between Buddhism and Christianity, particularly Catholic Church. Chinese Buddhism, due to its pacifist philosophy of life, has never developed into a unified and highly organized religious system. There is NEITHER a Buddhist “Bible” NOR a Buddhist “Vatican” to speak of is self evidence.
In Buddhism the reverence towards a certain living individual is of only academic value " no more, no less. In Chinese traditional point of view, living in seclusion was and still is regarded of the highest Way of Buddhist living. Participation in politicking is scorned off by mainstream Chinese Buddhism. From this standing point, it is not difficult to see why Dalai Lama does not have the respect from Chinese people, let alone win hearts and souls.
The Nobel Prize to Dalai Lama was just a poorly orchestrated politic joke in an ordinary Chinese eye. So please, if you happen to see Mr. Lama coming your way in the street, don’t be scared. A polite “Hi, there!” will be sufficient enough to fulfill your social courtesy.
3. Any logic behind the western medias’ truth-less report and inflammable commentaries:
Firstly, if there was no western reporter inside Tibet during the course of the riot, how can the various news agencies could justifiably declare they had told the public a true story? Second, manipulations of photographs, distortion of facts are surely not deemed as professionally ethical or even legal under the law of “freedom of speech”? Thirdly, when facts desperately in short supply, on what basis did editors and commentators alike make all those comments and accusations?
If we to take a leaf out of the book of the western justice system " “innocent until proven guilty” " to depict the bias of the western medias in this Tibet issue, we have to reverse the sentence and plus, and then it shall read like this: “guilty until proven innocent " but we are the judge and the jury”.
But there is the famous English saying even more deafening:
“You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time”. I hope you take it to your mind " because it is YOUR reputation on the line; and what’s more, as a news agency, reputation is your flesh and blood. Without them you are bound to be out of business " sooner or later.
4. Reaction from some of the world leaders:
It is absolutely shocking to see how they have acted the way like, with due respect to the artists, a pop star " caring only the quality of the tenor and the velocity of the voice, but not giving a dime about what exactly what they were talking about.
Isn’t it the leader of a nation should be the most knowledgeable (with the help of his/her think tank) person among his/her peers? Maturity should be the virtue of his/her leadership, right? And most importantly the national interest should certainly be the order of his/her job?
But hell no! As the anti-China shenanigan uncoiling we see you guys became headless, putting up some ugly no-brainer shows that certainly will not benefit the countries that you are elected to serve. Trust me on this one: whenever there is an action, there will be a reaction. If you want a friend you must yourself act like one; if you want an enemy you just carry on what you are doing now. China is not your wholesale market " she has survived over 6000 years, and mind you, for most part she had no idea where on earth the West was.
By the way, USA, the self-proclaimed leader of the free world, is just over 200 years old. If culture is the soul food and history the time for a nation to grow strong and healthy, it certainly lacks in both. The establishment of a strong and beautiful nation is just like the making of a noble spirit. From this point of view I tend to agree with the Scots: the American Whiskey (or any other Whiskey for that matter) is not Whisky.
As for the topic of morality and human rights, I dare say each and every Chinese baby has been born over 6000 years old. Please save your breath, or better still " lecture to yourselves if you want to. We know what we want and no force in the world could ever change that.
5. An advice to those who threaten to boycott Beijing Olympics:
I challenge you do what you say and say what you mean, please.
To your knowledge, the most cultivated value in Chinese tradition is to be humble and modest. We learned it since childhood.
What does this to do with “boycotting Beijing Olympics”? It surely does.
Because your boycott threats have just betrayed your feel of arrogance hidden in your innermost heart though it is entirely unjustifiable, which is just the adversary to the above-said value so cherished by Chinese people. Tell you the truth: you do know how to flatter yourselves indeed.
I advise you don’t ever backtrack your “boycott” threat, seriously. Because if you do, you will find you are NOT welcomed in China no matter where you go. And you’d better keep your words. Thus, at least we will respect you to be a person of your own conviction " be it wise or stupid.
6. Shame on China?
I don’t think so. To quell a riot and to protect innocent people and to ensure law and order are nothing to be ashamed of. Those violent mob led by Tibetan monks are the shameful lot. And so are those who use physical violence in protest against the Olympic Torch Rally. They have just shown the world how ugly and brutal and lawless they are. It is none too blind for those who don’t wish to see. As to those who insist to twist the facts they are simply from verbal diarrhea.
7. If you care to know who I am:
I am proud to tell you this: I am no government employee if this is what you want to know. But I am well educated and probably know the world a little better than those who are making big noises on their over-sized stages.
I am just an ordinary Chinese!
“Don’t be too CNN!”
The recent anti-China choir has reached a crescendo as the Beijing Olympic Rally has got underway. The time seems just right " the Olympics as close as merely a little over three months away. What topic? It is “human rights” issue, damn it!
Western mainstream Medias have not let themselves down by putting up a really good show to demonstrate to the world their professionalism to the full. Manipulations of original photos, distortion of facts, fraudulent reports, deliberate selective reports and editing " all methods that have been refined under the “Freedom of Speech” protection have been utilized to “send a message to China”.
You know what? We have surely received it.
Seeing is believing. If you go to Anti-CNN.com or MITBBS.com you will see it. Or better still " if you can understand Chinese as I English you shall see the plentiful posters " literally millions if not tens of millions " that have been jam-packed all Chinese websites the world over.
You should be very thankful to the Chinese government for blocking your websites. I happen to be one of the few “lucky” overseas Chinese who have the “good fortune” to read your newspapers and watched your TV clippings. And trust me, at this point of time " just as I am writing this comment, I really think Chinese government has done itself a great disfavour by denying the right of its people to know the kind of dirty work you have done to their country.
To the five innocent shop-keeping girls, who were burnt to death in the inferno of Tibetan rioters, you are just as evil as the murders who have physically committed the crime. To the 1.3 billion Chinese people your names are forever nailed on the totem post in the hall of shame.
In case people don’t know whom I am talking about, following is the list of those who have earned themselves the crown of shame: CNN, BBC, Washington Post, Fox News, Germany's N-TV, BILD, N24, RTL, German TV stations RTL and N-TV, and the radio station Voice of Germany.
As one of the 1989 Tiananmen Square prodemocracy demonstration supporters and activists, later jailed and deprived of his employment by the communist government, I have been totally disillusioned by your gentlemen’s abuse of the true spirit of the sacred “freedom of speech”. You don’t deserve it.
And that thought leads me to the following joke, not so funny though:
“How about ‘Freedom of Speech’?” a “free Tibet” demonstrator asked for the support of a beggar who was hoping for the placard to make a shelter.
“No, thanks.” Answered the poor man, thinking a piece of bread would be a better idea.
“Propaganda, then?” the demonstrator gave him a coin.
“Yes, please. But, just don’t be too CNN!”
6 - Alan
Buncha squint-eyed wankers! :)
From another planet anyway!
7 - Frank
Dan,
Hmm, very reasonalbe analysis. I am a Han Chineses, and I despise the news distortion on the Tibet events in some western media. Moreover, I strongly support the "One-China Policy" and don't want to see any part of China split. I still hope, however, the Chinese government would promote greater openness in the near future. I think to open can make the situation better rather than worse.
8 - Dan Miller
Clavos --
Yes. I would have had a very hard time figuring it out without your help. Many thanks.
Frank --
I think that the Olympics provides an opportunity for more openness, and than China will avail herself of it -- perhaps encouraged by the recent unpleasantness involving the torch lighting ceremonies referenced in my article. What will happen as the 2008 Olympics fades into the past is a different question. I hope the openness doesn't fade along with the Olympics, and think that just maybe it will remain. Let's hope so.
I too find media accounts quite often unreliable, but think that in some countries that is a function of the news media themselves, rather than of governmental pressure. That is a part of what "openness" is about. Here in Panama, the news media pretty much say what they wish, right or wrong. The same is true in the U.S., and a bunch of other countries. It is not true in many others. North Korea, Cuba, now Venezuela, and others come to mind.
If you haven't read J Curve, I would encourage you to do so.
STM --
Right on. I didn't get into that, because I wanted to focus on one point rather than ride, like the General, off in all directions. Thank you for taking the time to deal with Zedd's unfortunate perspective.
Dan
9 - China Law Blog
Excellent post. I too have been wondering where on the J curve China is going to end up after the Olympics. The most interesting thing for me so far is that China just recently ceased blocking a huge number of internet sites, pursuant to its agreement with the IOC to do so. Will these sites remain unblocked after the Olympics? Will they help China realize that one of the best methods of dealing with dissent is to allow it to air and then run its course? We will see....
10 - Dan Miller
I seem to have screwed up on the link to Times Online; so, I will try again.
Dan
11 - Lisa McKay
I fixed up your links, Dan, all should be working now.
12 - Dan Miller
Thanks, Lisa. I just tried them all, and they all worked.
Dan
13 - Zheng
To Dan,
I really need to say that I admire your ability of choice of words, along with that of the guy who wrote the article that you referred to. I, whose English does not come as the first language will never have the chance to catch up.
But I do know what "thug" means and, to be totally honest, I don't really like it.
First of all, could you please explain how on earth they "silenced" the protesters? As far as I'm aware of, protesters are all over the world and as long as they don't come up and try to snatch the torch, there will be no direct contact between the "men in blue" and the protesters. The protesters could shout anything they want and they can get all the media coverage and the pity from all around the world and there's just no way some 30 guys could stop that. Sorry, maybe my English is too poor, I just don't understand how the word "silence" came up.
And obviously, the "thugs" have not taken over the security, at least not yet. Here's the video of what happened in London.
If you look at it really carefully, maybe you'll agree that the writer of your article might be a little bit careless, since it was the British police who "wrestled the protester(s) to the ground"(5th paragragh of the article).
OK, maybe I'm too stupid to get anything straight, but I'm gonna tell you my judgement of right or wrong anyway.
There is the right of protesting and they did not stop anybody from protesting peacefully.
And it's just not right to attempt to extinguish the torch for any reason (don't believe it? ask the police who's protecting the torch), so they tried to protect it.
Last but not the least, so far there is no jurisdiction issue since they have not participated in any act on behalf of law. No handcuffing, no arresting and all.
Again, I'm really not in favor of Chinese Government in any way. But I do have a dream, that everybody could just tell the fact as it is, without manipulating the rhetoric, without using words that could be very much misleading.
Ever since the unrest in Tibet, there has already been a lot of mutual resentment going on between the Chinese and the western people without twisting the stories. I, as a Chinese living in the US, really don't want to see it escalated.
If we really do anything wrong, just say it. We really appreciate that. But, please, no trick.
14 - Zheng
Sorry Dan, just wanted to forward my previous post in here, since I'm still not totally comfortable with the articles that you talked about and used as if it's a solid proof.
I understand your hope for a more open China and I really appreciate it. Actually this is what I have dreamed for for more than 20 years. But sadly what the kind western people are doing might just backfire.
Why? Here's the logic:
1. It is the truth that the western media are not totally unbiased during the whole event. There have been lots of "careless" mis-spelling, mislabeling and word changing.
2. Even me as a Chinese Government hater still find that truly irresponsible and unpleasant. Let alone those ordinary people living in China who really hope one day their country can be fully recognized by the world. They are infuriated. Go to YouTube and see what a battle field it has become. It's just too many people cursing each other.
3. This is going to give the Chinese Government a valuable opportunity to denounce the western world as determined to tarnish the honor of the country and deny the accomplishment they have made. Given the propaganda power of the state owned media, people are very easily convinced and provoked. When the point of limit is reached, people are no longer reasonable. They can be fooled to believe all western influence are just bad, including concepts of freedom, democracy and human rights.
I'm telling you I've been in China long enough to be confident that this is a highly likely possiblilty.
And this, is exactly what I'm afraid of.
So please, if a friendly way to pressure China is too much to ask, at least do it in a righteous way. Otherwise things are just gonna be worse. And I know "liar" is a pretty bad word in English.
BTW, after copy and paste, the video link of my last post got disappeared. Here it is again.
15 - Zedd
STM,
The problem with Westerners is that because of the power that they posses at this time in history, they are unable to see the extent of their affect on others. They (you) have the luxury of being right without allowing anyone to object effectively because your power affords you the ability to tune everyone out.
Your statements reflect a very naive and unconsidered point of view Stan. Because you don't and possibly can't extend yourself to ponder the idea that your Western mindset could be completely shallow and utterly limited; that your scope is so pitifully tiny and perhaps expendable because of your acculturation, you will not value what I have to say. You will forever "KNOW" that whatever it is that you and all those in your culture "know", is what is relevant. You will remain embarrassingly condescending and off course will never how much you don't know so you will never feel the shame that is fitting...
Stan talking to a couple of people does not reflect the sentiments of a nation of people. Asking a few Australians about their opinion about an issue will not give one the right to make ANY reasonable commentary on that nation. I suspect your deeply ingrained need to simplify "others" as not as nuanced as you are may be the reason why you would feel comfortable stating what you did in such a public way... Reckless to say the least Stan.
No people like being occupied by aliens. Saddam would have died eventually as all humans tend to do and Iraq would have evolved at their own pace, learning from their choices to become whomever they would become.
The deaths in Iraq are caused by those who were warned repeatedly about the chaos that would ensue in that county but ignored those warnings and occupied and indepedent nation. Every thinking person understands that destroying a government without a plan in place will cause mayhem, death and destruction. Human beings need structure. We destroyed that nation and opened the door for all manner of madness to occur. Stan we were/are wrong. We attacked that nation for the wrong reasons. China's choice to engage in Tibet thr way that they have is not any more badly considered. It's a bad choice; a bad plan. Demonizing them about it or trying to add an extra layer of emotion to it does not make it more bad.
On Mugabe... You seem to want me to say he is at fault for EVERYTHING that took place in that country. AGAIN with the simplicity Stan, good guys vs bad guys; a simplistic response to a complex and telling tale of the balance of power on this globe.
I will state it once more so that you are clear and will not accidentally slip into a discussion about sentiments and ideas that have never been conveyed. I despise Mugabe. It's unfortunate that I can't reveal too much about myself, but if you knew me and my history, you would have no question in your mind about my disdain for what this man has done. This however doesn't mean that I will ignore other REAL factors that have contributed to the quick demise of this nation. It is those factors that make a broader and far reaching "statement" about our global structure and why those that have, HAVE. I am not impressed with emotional evaluations of social phenomenon. It is that sort of world view that has resulted in the base and over simplified which has rendered us so incompetent as stewards of this age.
Dan:
Not sure what you are cheering Stan on about. He made no point.
16 - Clavos
Saddam would have died eventually as all humans tend to do and Iraq would have evolved at their own pace, learning from their choices to become whomever they would become.
A la Zimbabwe?
Every thinking person understands that destroying a government without a plan in place will cause mayhem, death and destruction.
Apparently, Mugabe isn't a "thinking person."
17 - Zedd
Clavos
YES!! Sorta.
You seem to be suggesting ONCE MORE that I am supporting Mugabe. Stop yourself. You are in an emotional tizzy. The expressed sentiment was that of abhorrence. File it away, and lock it up so that you can refer to it every time the urge comes to overstate, dramatize or manipulate.
The Zimbabweans are striving to evolve right now as we speak. It's an encouraging thing to watch. Should the US have come in and destroyed the country further just to get rid of Mugabe? You would answer NO. (We all know that they wouldn't have anyway and we know why....). Mugabe is in his 80's. It is good that his death will come at a time when the majority of the nation is convinced of his evil doings because transition will be easier.
On the point of destroying a nation (in reference to Zimbabwe), you would have to add Britain as a major player. THAT is and has always been my point.
Focusing on one renegade dictator and uprooting societies, causing the deaths of multitudes when entire empires exist who have weapons of colossal destruction, who arm dangerous men, manipulate, destroy, and impoverish while their people live in the lap of luxury, is silly.
That is the point.
18 - Clavos
So, Zedd, would you agree with me then that the US should not intervene in any way in the Sudan, either?
19 - Dan Miller
Here is an interesting link.
In Beijing, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that the "Men in Blue," "special agents picked from the People's Armed Police, China's internal security force," would be allowed to participate in the torch procession in Australia only to the extent of riding on a bus accompanying the procession and getting off the bus only "when the torch is passed from one runner to another."
Although possibly seen by some as an unwarranted intrusion into China's "external affairs" (snicker) -- or even into her internal affairs (snicker snicker), since his statement was made in China, this might just help China on her passage along the J Curve.
Regardless of that, I think it's a Damn Good Idea.
Dan
20 - peace
"Why Do you Hate Us?"
- A Poem Dedicated to the last 150 years of this planet.
By a Slient, Silent Chinese
===
When We were called Sick man of Asia, We were called The Peril.
When We are billed to be the next Superpower, We are called The threat.
When We were closed our doors, You smuggled Drugs to Open Markets.
When We Embrace Freed Trade, You blame us for Taking away your jobs.
When We were falling apart, You marched in your troops and wanted your "fair share".
When We were putting the broken peices together again, "Free Tibet" you screamed, "it was an invasion
( When Woodrow Wilson Couldn't give back Birth Place of Confucius back to Us,
But He did bought a ticket for the Famine Relief Ball for us.)
So, We Tried Communism, You hated us for being Communists
When We embrace Capitalism, You hate us for being Capitalist
When We have a Billion People, you said we were destroying the planet.
When We are tried limited our numbers, you said It was human rights abuse.
When We were Poor, You think we are dogs.
When We Loan you cash, You blame us for your debts.
When We build our industries, You called us Polluters.
When we sell you goods, You blame us for global warming.
When We buy oil, You called that exploitation and Genocide.
When You fight for oil, You called that Liberation
When We were lost in Chaos and rampage, You wanted Rules of Law for us.
When We uphold law and order against Violence, You called that Violating Human Rights.
When We were silent, You said you want us to have Free Speech.
When We were silent no more, You say we were Brainwashed-Xenophoics.
Why do you hate us so much? We asked.
"No," You Answered, "We don't hate You."
We don't Hate You either,
But Do you understand us?
"Of course We do," You said,
"We have AFP, CNN and BBCs..."
What do you really want from us?
Think Hard first, then Answer...
Because you only get so many chances,
Enough is Enough, Enough Hypocrisy for this one world.
We want One World, One Dream, And Peace On Earth.
- This Big Blue Earth is Big Enough for all of Us
FootNote:
One, never mind the racist thick fake accent, I am sure this video Just want human Rights.
Two, If you don't know the above references, Go to libraries and Do your own research. don't get your facts from the tube, You wouldn't have a Clue.
Three, Any one is free to use this poem, Copy Right Notice, Just Give The Credit, to the Silent, Silent Chinese.
Thank You and Peace.
21 - Baronius
Peace -
There is no single voice in the West.
When you trade, some will blame you for trading.
When you close your markets, some will blame you for closing them.
When you stagnate, some will mock your failure.
When you grow, some will fear your success.
When you speak in one voice, the West will not understand you, because we speak in many.
When you silence other voices, in work camps and execution chambers, outlawing religions and forbidding political dissent, murdering neighbors and tearing children from their mothers' wombs, you risk uniting us in one voice against you.
22 - peace
"When you silence other voices"
Like the CNN? FOX? only news of protester, no news of supporter? Only bad news about the countries they do not like?
"in work camps and execution chambers":
You mean those factories which hire illegal immigrants and pay them little? The death penalty chamber in prisons in west?
"outlawing religions and forbidding political dissent" :
Like what happened in Texas before and recently? Like arrest anti-war mom in DC?
"murdering neighbors":
like trying to assasinate Cuba's leader?
"and tearing children from their mothers' wombs":
This one sounds pretty much what is happening in Iraq.
"you risk uniting us in one voice against you.":
Agree with you, when you always behave like you are a God in the world, and think your standards should be all other people's in the whole world, you are uniting others in one voice against you.
23 - peace
Nobody is perfect.
No exception.
24 - Zedd
Clavos,
First, admit that you missed me. Come on....
Now, regarding #18, I would challenge you, being the thinking man that you are, to make a distinction between the Zimbabwean or the former Iraqi government and what is and has taken place in Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Bosnia, or Rwanda. I think that engaging in that exercise will render my need to respond needless.
I'm certain you can manage. However, if you feel limited and can not stretch your processes to that extent, I will be glad to chime in. Let me know how it goes.
25 - Zedd
Baronius,
The West does not always speak in one voice but doe so most of the time. France was ostracised for speaking out against the war. We got REALLY silly, protesting to the extent of threatening to only eat "freedom fries" (flush, flush). And they call Americans dumb.
If you would cheer on the idea that truth is a philosophy that Western civilization is built or some self congratulatory garbage that Westerners like to claim as theirs, you would have to take ownership of the idea that Westerners see themselves to be propelled by a uniting philosophy. It's never greed off course or neediness or self consciousness off course. It's always some basic HUMAN trait that they claim to have conceived (chuckle), which they don't display so well. Perhaps what is meant is Truthiness instead of Truth.