Pity the monks of Tibet who dare to hope that anyone will come to their aid

momo

This is big BS

Austin Barry

China is the Pit bull in the corner of the living room, where it lurks with the Islamist Rottweiller. Don't provoke them at any cost and adopt any hypocrisy to appease them. Meanwhile, relax, the bread is on the table and the circus flickers on the screen.

ed lancey

Who is the fresh-faced youth in the etching beside Rod Liddle's name?

PJ

The Left doesn't understand China in the way that it doesn't understand Islamism. It thinks that if you put on good manners and don't look as if you'll stick up for yourself you'll be left alone by the bully boys. Let's just thank our luck stars that America is the headmaster - for now. Once the Marxists have destroyed that country we can all look forward to living like the Chinese. Think of your article as a sort of holiday brochure to the future, Rod. I'm afraid it's where we're headed with the driver of the bus a G Brown.

Laurie Macdonell-Sanchez

If "momo" means to say your article is "big BS," then true to his moniker, he's a clown, as well as a poor writer of English. Thank you Rod Liddle for peering around the myopic lens of economic exigency & telling it like it is. It's a miracle China's left any Tibetans alive, much less the poor lamas. Post 9/11 oil-rich Red China filled the void left by Russian tecchies fleeing oil-starved Cuba's listening posts when the int'l intel community sniffed out Castroite collusion in those events. Not only are the Red Chinese soaking up most of the world's oil, they're sucking up to the likes of Chavez & any other nutty villain w/an agenda inimical to the US in particular & the West in general. The possible Yuan-USDollar conversion threat is an Achilles’ heel for the formerly unassailable US. The "intl. community" knocks the US's teeth down its throat over "Global Warming" yet turns a blind eye to catastrophic Red Chinese industrial smut-mongering. One could rant on & on. So it’s not surprising that the brave lamas--like their brethren over the last half-century—must join the long ranks of martyrs to totalitarianism, while the world & the useless UN (anyone heard from Amnesty International on this?) mumbles pitying platitudes & squirms in shame, but doesn't lift a finger to help.

Laurie Macdonell-Sanchez

Post datum: PJ’s spot-on, w/the exception that the Red Chinese intend to annihilate the majority of the west’s population using various techniques both old & new, including nanotechnology aimed @ reducing us to gray goo, then pile on over en masse to take our places. Not very nice, but they did give new dimension to the concept of slavery; do forcefully abort hapless Chinese couples’ 2nd children; & have morphed control of the dissenting sectors of population into a burgeoning human organ & tissue industry. Don’t let me get started on the REALLY BAD stuff they do!

Dwight Vandryver

On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War 2, this week has seen a media frenzy of political and moral analyses, claims and counter-claims on the progress of the war, and attributions of culpability. Yet on the very same pages and newscasts, the media have taken to the moral high ground over China's activities in Tibet. Of course, two wrongs simply make two wrongs, but the words: "glass houses" and "stones" do spring to mind. There are times when the media treat their punters as imbeciles. The title should read: Pity the people of Iraq who dare to hope that anyone will come to their aid.

Herbert Thornton

I have considerable difficulty in swallowing even a fraction of Ron Liddle's accusations against China.

He sounds hysterical. What does he want us to do? Send the modern equivalent of a gunboat?

ian skidmore

comfort makes cowards of us all. We buy from China the products of the slave labour camps because they are cheap. Do Olympic officals still get lavish gifts ans hospiaslity from would-be host countries?

Dunroamin

Well said Ron! No western government has ever dared to criticise China for its brutal annexation of Tibet. They are s**t scared of China, that's why.

paul eddy

"It is estimated that the Chinese murdered one million Tibetans ... back in the 1950s." Really? Estimated by who? The International Campaign for Tibet says on its web site [http://www.savetibet.org/tibet/index.php] "Tens of thousands of Tibetans ... were killed or imprisoned. Untold numbers, but at least hundreds of thousands, of Tibetans have died as a direct of China's policies since 1949 - through starvation, torture and execution." China's policies towards the Tibetans are and always have been appalling, of course, and China deserves to be utterly condemned. But making a sweeping and exaggerated claim only serves to undermine Mr Liddle's argument.

MaryAnn

Well Herbert, if you have difficulty in swallowing accusations I'd suggest it's because you are unable to digest the truth. Would you care to itemise which facts you believe to be incorrect and state your sources. This is not about left or right, it's about brutality oppression and greed. What does Rod want us to do? I imagine anything we can - speak up, stand up, apply the pressures we have the freedom to use, swallow for god's sake - take an antacid if necessary.

c chapman

Gordon probably wishes he could implement the same sanctions against his critics as the Chinese does. he increasingly has more in common with the total state conrol of this regime than for a true democracy.

Vicky

We should have never handed Hong Kong over to the bastards. Most of my chinese relations left to come to the UK or to Canada. As they knew there lives would suffer if they stayed. I feel sorry for the people in tibet who have suffered since the 50's under there rule and I was surprised by the fact that all religons suffer under this regime. May be you next article should tell all those suicide bombers there going for the wrong set of people. This government must be a bunch of spineless bastards. I epected more of Gordon Brown

Squiz

Well there is less than no chance of standing up to the Chinese when they outnumber us 1000 to 1 and value life so cheap. We don't even stand up to muslims when they're beating up our vicars in our own churchyards and we outnumber them - for the time being.

tim

I have lived amongst the Chinese for many years. One comes to have a grudging admiration for their labours and cleverness. On a personal level they can be great friends.
But then one looks at their complete lack of trust in others. Their treatment of their own women. Then one feels immensely sorry for them.
If you wish to compete with them you have to be like them and I have always found that very annoying.
I have been to Tibet. There is not a Tibetan flag to be seen.
Yes we should have kept Hong Kong. They were amazed when Thatcher handed it back. They thought she would treat it like the Falklands.
But she was advised by mandarins who are not mandarins.
The Chinese will always do things there way. However, they respect us if we are tough. And they loathe losing face.
So I say this. Brown - see the Dalai Lama and use the Chinese phrase: 'It is an internal affair.:
Then boycott the Opening of the Olympic games. Or go and march in Tibetan clothing. That's a start.

bill40

WTF has it got to do with athletics that tibetan monks wish to take thier territory back to a theologian feudal rule? We dont condemn china because we cant. I mean what sort of basket case country goes around creating an industrial powerhouse and then proceed to throw its might around an empire? china looks after china and wont be lectured by hypocital minnows like us.

Herbert Thornton

Mary Ann asks me to "itemise which facts I believe to be incorrect and state my sources."

Well, Mary Ann - lies are by their very nature well insulated against being disproved by citing "sources". If you claim for example, that you have never worked in Sheffield it would probably be very difficult indeed to disprove your claim.

I don't deny that China has some difficulties with it's outlying provinces, and that they have particular problems with, for example, their Uyghur Muslims, but their policies with respect to that minority are a great deal more realistic and sensible than British policies in Britain's own Urbanistans.

Stephen

Yes it is very sad. But dont expect anything from athletes. These saddo creatures are emotionally retarded. Any grown up doing the hop skip and a jump that most of us stopped down at the age of eight to then care or be aware of the plight of anyone else is simply not on. They focus on winning the egg and spoon race. The ethics of athletes make politicians look like saint in comparision.

Rob Cremona

What hope can we offer the Tibetans? There is more chance of visiting aliens sharing Easter lunch with my family than religious or politically-motivated fanatics sharing this planet together in peace and harmony. The early 21st century will be remembered in history as just another period when hypocrisy became acceptable, injustice ruled the world and shame became inconspicuous.

Alidė Kohlhaas

For those who doubt Rod Liddle's statements, it is time to bone up a little on what goes on in the The Land of Smiles. Having worked there, let me assure you that neither trade, the Olympics or any other democratic activity will change the vile course of history in China. The Olympic Committee consists of a self-interested bunch who cares little about freedom or ideology. Let them read The Nazi Games, a book about the 1936 Olympics. Then, too, the mantra that the games must go on was sounded irregardless of the moral consequences. As for Tibet, we can only weep for the people, the lost culture, and our own lack of moral curage to get out of China, which wants to be the leading player on the world stage, at any cost, including those of its own people.

Valerie Hart

Can you imagine what the world would say if the USA had annexed Mexico and behaved in the same way ?

stephen Bull

Pointless vapouring. The goose was cooked when China was chosen.

Martin Morrow

Today, one of the people I regard as being a political disaster made one of the most overt stands against the Chinese in this affair. Yes Nancy Pelosi, for once in your pampered life, you did something right. I just hope that this starts the ball rolling. The Chinese government has for too long got away with being the most evil and devious organization in the world. Just for once the UN and most governments need to dust off their knees and stand up to these murdering thugs. They might find they like the unusual feeling of decency that this brings about.

thecomebackid@hotmail.com

"...It is one thing to behave cravenly toward the appalling Saudis in order to ‘protect our security interests’; it is another to suck up to the even worse Chinese simply because they are bigger than us and we want a slice of their burgeoning economy..." Don't exaggerate Rod; nobody's as bad as the Saudis.

RHK

"It is estimated that the Chinese murdered one million Tibetans ... back in the 1950s" Estimated by whom? That would have meant 3/4 of the entire population, despite many fleeing to India and Nepal. Yet according to the United Nations the population actually grew during that period. http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/database/chinadata/tibet.htm "The first period, 1952 - 1958 : was characterized by high mortality and low fertility. The total number of the population in Tibet was slightly increased in this period. The second period, 1959 - 1969 : may be defined as the relatively high growth period. The population increased to 1.4805 million in 1969, i.e. 0.2743 million more than that in 1959."

RHK

"Can you imagine what the world would say if the USA had annexed Mexico and behaved in the same way ?" They did. Or at least part of it. Why do you think a part of that part is called "New Mexico"?

David Short

RHK, not to mention California and much of Texas!

Kevin

But trading with China will help generate revenue that can be spent on finding cures for Parkinson's and Alzheimer's for the people that matter. You know the score - just ask Ben Bradshaw and Evan Harris.

Max Kaye

A plague on both their houses.... and on the Olympics. Let's hope for a boycott so that the London games can be cancelled too - saving us all a lot of cash and hassle.

A. Resnick

The Tibetans cannot get a single country in the U.N. to pay attention to the occupation they are enduring. They should announce to the world that the Chinese are the agents of Zionists, and await for the world to rush to their assistance.

Bobbsterr

We should be telling China, in no uncertain terms, what we think of their behaviour in Tibet and, if necessary, we should boycott the Bejing Olympics.

I note that French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, recently made the comment that he might consider such a course of action when he takes over the helm of the EU.

Compare that with the stance of 'gutless' Gordon, who stated we would not follow such a course of action, which has obviously less to do with trying to show the Chinese the error of their ways and more to do with ensuring the 2012 games run smoothly.

Hieronymous Cheese

What exactly is the point of this article? Aside from providing a self-indulgent mWhat exactly is the point of this article? Aside from providing a self-indulgent moment of indignant self-righteousness for a few bored middle-class people (who would never get off their fat backsides and actually DO anything of substance to change a situation), I fail to see a raison d'etre for this hypocritical rubbish.

I refer, of course, to the same Rod Liddle who wrote an article, utterly devoid of irony or conscience, entitled: "Get rich with unethical investment" (Spectator, 17th January 2007).

Quote:
"Some of the companies I wanted to invest in, I couldn’t. There was, for example, the firm run by the Suffolk farmer David Lucas, which makes gallows to be deployed by Third-World African dictators — Gaddafi and Mugabe, for example. He does a terrific trade despite resembling one of the backwoods people in the film Deliverance. He does multiple gallows, too, so you can hang five dissidents in one go."

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/27411/get-rich-with-unethical-investment.thtml

As Liddle basks in his lofty position of moral superiority, bravely(!) standing up for those poor little brown people, crushed by the marauding Commie monsters, he conveniently forgets the not-too-distant imperial and colonial history of his own noble nation.

How many times have the Chinese government sent their gunboats to protect drug-runners importing their product into Britain? When was the last time the occupying Indian army opened fire on defenceless British men, women and children on British soil? When did a coalition of willing Arabs invade Britain on the pretext that British WMD posed a threat to their way of life? (And that would be ACTUAL WMD, rather than the imaginary kind).

China is looking after itself - plain and simple. It's actions are no different to any other country, civilisation or tribe throughout history, which has sought to obtain power, territory or wealth for itself in any way it can. And as Liddle illuminates in his "Get rich" article, it's the unethical, law-of-the-jungle methods that gain more often than not. "It's not fair" is not a winning argument.

Does anyone really imagine China will be "embarrassed" into submission by all your vitriolic writings, a few strongly-worded petitions, or a petulant sulk ot two (we're not going to come to your party!)

I am no great fan of China. I detest the "diplomacy" which prevents countries from recognising Taiwan as a sovereign nation, in the face of Chinese aggression. But I detest little (or might that be "liddle"?) hypocrites that sit behind a desk and spout grand ideological drivel to satisfy their armchair-activism (part-time) even more.

Despite the criticism of Laurie Macdonell-Sanchez amongst her vacuous, nonsensical ramblings, I feel that "momo" gave a perfectly accurate summation of this article: "This is big BS".oment of indignant self-righteousness for a few bored middle-class people (who would never actually DO anything of substance to change a situation)

This is the same Rod Liddle who wrote an article entitled: "Get rich with unethical investment" (Spectator 17th January 2007).

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/27411/get-rich-with-unethical-investment.thtml

Quote:
"Some of the companies I wanted to invest in, I couldn’t. There was, for example, the firm run by the Suffolk farmer David Lucas, which makes gallows to be deployed by Third-World African dictators — Gaddafi and Mugabe, for example. He does a terrific trade despite resembling one of the backwoods people in the film Deliverance. He does multiple gallows, too, so you can hang five dissidents in one go."

Hieronymous Cheese

What exactly is the point of this article? Aside from providing a self-indulgent moment of indignant self-righteousness for a few bored middle-class people (who would never get off their fat backsides and actually DO anything of substance to change a situation), I fail to see a raison d'etre for this hypocritical rubbish.

I refer, of course, to the same Rod Liddle who wrote an article, utterly devoid of irony or conscience, entitled: "Get rich with unethical investment" (Spectator, 17th January 2007).

Quote:
"Some of the companies I wanted to invest in, I couldn’t. There was, for example, the firm run by the Suffolk farmer David Lucas, which makes gallows to be deployed by Third-World African dictators — Gaddafi and Mugabe, for example. He does a terrific trade despite resembling one of the backwoods people in the film Deliverance. He does multiple gallows, too, so you can hang five dissidents in one go."

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/27411/get-rich-with-unethical-investment.thtml

As Liddle basks in his lofty position of moral superiority, bravely(!) standing up for those poor little brown people, crushed by the marauding Commie monsters, he conveniently forgets the not-too-distant imperial and colonial history of his own noble nation.

How many times have the Chinese government sent their gunboats to protect drug-runners importing their product into Britain? When was the last time the occupying Indian army opened fire on defenceless British men, women and children on British soil? When did a coalition of willing Arabs invade Britain on the pretext that British WMD posed a threat to their way of life? (And that would be ACTUAL WMD, rather than the imaginary kind).

China is looking after itself - plain and simple. It's actions are no different to any other country, civilisation or tribe throughout history, which has sought to obtain power, territory or wealth for itself in any way it can. And as Liddle illuminates in his "Get rich" article, it's the unethical, law-of-the-jungle methods that gain more often than not. "It's not fair" is not a winning argument.

Does anyone really imagine China will be "embarrassed" into submission by all your vitriolic writings, a few strongly-worded petitions, or a petulant sulk or two (we're not going to come to your party!)

I am no great fan of China. I detest the "diplomacy" which prevents countries from recognising Taiwan as a sovereign nation, in the face of Chinese aggression. But I detest little (or might that be "liddle"?) hypocrites that sit behind a desk and spout grand ideological drivel to satisfy their armchair-activism (part-time) even more.

Despite the criticism of Laurie Macdonell-Sanchez amongst her vacuous, nonsensical ramblings, I feel that "momo" gave a perfectly accurate summation of this article: "This is big BS".

Laurie Macdonell-Sanchez

A response to Hieronymous Cheesehead's comment directed @ mine: Glad I touched a nerve. In his headlong rush to equate Red China with any other country simply out for its own self-interest, he ignores the depth & breadth of the evils that the Red Chinese military perpetrate primarily on their own people, & their dangerous aims against the West. He also ignores the first-hand evidence contributed by others herein. Worse still, he ignores the fact that not everyone in the West is deaf & blind to Red Chinese depredations & are rightfully enraged & frightened by them. For years I risked life, limb & fortune in the struggle to thwart the hydra of Communism. In the process, I've had to live with horrifying realities that most people, such as Hieronymous, choose to ignore so they can sleep @ night & not cringe as they look themselves in the mirror in the morning as they prepare to continue their safe, comfortable existences in the free world. The closest Hieronymous comes to any sort of criticism is his weak comment about Red Chinese bullying of Taiwan. I actually did something about that back in the '70s when everyone else was turning their backs on Taiwan. As unrealistic and dismissive as he seems to be of the threat of Red China, I doubt Hieronymous has ever done anything of any lasting value to right terrible wrongs such as those Red China continues to commit. I dare to judge Hieronymous: He is the blathering desk-jockey, not Rod Liddle, although I suspect in reality his comments were an assignment he was given as a more cerebral fellow traveler of our monosyllabic friend Momo. The events illuminated by the Olympic torch's progress across the world give Rod Liddle the "A" and Hieronymous Cheeshead the "F" & place H.C. squarely in the minority and clearly on the Left.

Hieronymous Cheese

A response to Laurie MacDirty-Sanchez:

>"...the evils that the Red Chinese military perpetrate..."
>"...their dangerous aims against the West."
>"...Red Chinese depredations...enraged & frightened by them."
>"...the threat of Red China..."
>"...terrible wrongs such as those Red China continues to commit."

Wow, you have really worked up your paranoia, haven't you? Has nobody told you that McCarthyism is dead? What are these threats and "dangerous aims" you mention - do you have specific, concrete facts, or is it mere speculation and/or over-active imagination?

>"...safe, comfortable existences in the free world"

I actually live in China; have done for almost a decade. And I could give you a hundred criticisms of China without pausing to think. I can do the same about the UK, the US and a few other countries too - and that is my point: put your own house in order before you interfere in others'.

For instance (and I'll try to make it simple for you), look at Guantanamo Bay: an offshore prison, so that US law is inapplicable; the unilateral decision to declare prisoners "illegal combatants", and therefore not covered by the Geneva Convention, thereby allowing torture to be perpetrated; indefinite incarceration with little or no access to lawyers, despite the fact that a fair number have been proved totally innocent. WHERE are the demonstrations for those poor souls?

Take a look at the weapons Britain exports every year to countries in Africa and Asia. A good example is the warplanes sold to Indonesia, whose ONLY use for them is against their own people.

Do we remember Saddam Hussein - he of invisible WMD fame? And which countries were actively supplying him with chemical weaponry, in the full knowledge that he was using it to slaughter his own countrymen as well as the Iranians? No prizes for guessing!

Then there's the brutal regime of Saudi Arabia. You know - the ones Britain is selling billions of dollars of arms to, despite their horrific human-rights abuses.

Need I go on??? I think perhaps not. If you don't get the point by now, then you're way too blinkered for rational argument, and I will waste no more time on you. However, to address a few more of your musings:

>"For years I risked life, limb & fortune in the struggle to thwart the hydra of Communism."
Did you get the girl and walk off into the sunset at the end? Can you possibly dramatise it a little more - I feel it could benefit from an extra topping of cheese.

>"I actually did something about that back in the '70s when everyone else was turning their backs on Taiwan."
Oooh, Gary Cooper in High Noon! I wonder - did you go to Taiwan to receive military training, and pledge to return and fight in the event of an invasion? Or did you write a letter? Wave a banner? Think some particularly emotional thoughts for five minutes? Whatever you did, I'm sorry that history seems to have passed over your noble deeds.

I visit Taiwan regularly. It may interest you to know that many, many Taiwanese are actively calling for closer ties with China. They care little about the politics, and more about getting on with life and making money. The posturing politicians do little more than create irritating inconvenience for them.

>"...squarely in the minority...":
A few hundred - (no, let's be generous) thousand - demonstrators waving flags and banners, and a very small number making a desperate lunge for the torch to make a feeble point (and achieve 5 mins of fame - undoubtedly to be recalled throughout life, as they bore people with tales of risking life, limb & fortune in the struggle to thwart the hydra of Communism - no?).

In contrast, we have several HUNDRED MILLION who couldn't really give a monkeys, and DIDN'T turn up to protest. Actions, as the saying goes, speak louder than words. And kinda puts me in the majority, dontcha think?

>"...clearly on the Left":
Haha, this really is laughable. Is that genuinely the best insult you can come up with? Nowhere in my original post was there even the tiniest hint that I may hold socialist views - which, somewhat unsurprisingly, I don't.

I'm not sure I understand your desire to "grade" people - are you a school child? If so, then rest assured: the big, bad RED monster you're so afraid of is not hiding under your bed.

The charge against Liddle still stands: HYPOCRISY in the first degree - both in light of his previous article, and in the actions of his own country. Not to mention a thorough lack of understanding of China itself.

laurie macdonell-sanchez

Hieronymous is totally cheesed-off & the lava flow of his meltdown blinds him more than ever to a reality that has escaped no one else. In his finger-wagging, schoolmarmish tirade, Hieronymous lets slip the real reason behind his illogical (so many mutually exclusive arguments--tut-tut!)& strained apologia for Red China: That's where he makes his living! Veering along with Hieronymous from the Far to the Near East, were it not for Guantanamo, the "poor souls" detained therein--terrorists hiding behind Islam--would be free to unleash more of their mischief on the rest of us, probably even on Hieronymous himself, in the form of a shoe-bomb or the outright hijacking of one Hieronymous's flights bound for the dazzling wonderland of the PRC. As for Hieronymous's categorization of Iraqi WMD as "invisible," indeed, he is correct: Just prior to the U.S. invasion, most of it (some lies still buried in Iraq) & large arms caches were spirited into Syria & Lebanon's Bekaa Valley in convoys shepherded by Russian & other elements, the time to do so bought with Russia's & France's (the providers of the traceable materials & technical assistance) collusion in balking & interference thru that sham representative of freedom & democracy, the U.N. As for Cheese's attempts @ ridicule & personal affront: He's off as to my gender, so probably not a native speaker of English; those who work quietly behind the scenes for the greater good, not self-gain, are the ones who manage to at least keep the bad guys from winning all the time; and from the cowardly anonymity of "Hieronymous Cheese" (I wonder what cheese he had in mind?) he insults my surname, a line bloodied by history for nearly a millennium. If Hieronymous happens to be of Asian descent, he'll know how inadvisable that is! I agree w/Hieronymous that he's wasted enough time on me & the worthy audience of this forum: I doubt he's swayed anyone from agreeing with Rod Liddle on the theme of unceasing Chinese thuggery against Tibetans.

Patrick Bellanto

A profound statement Momo, obviously a resounding testament to your intellect. Regarding the article, I must agree with Mr. Barry, provocation of China would be foolish for obvious reasons however this brings to the fore an ethical dilemma, despite the abuse of human rights and the brazen hipocracy of it all I do not think that opposing China on these grounds is plausable. Despite this Liddle's article is surely of use, even if it's only service is to prompt the advent of these very responses.