murderOmri at Mere Rhetoric pointed to a shocking video by ProTV. A cameraman videotaped a group of Tibetan pilgrims climbing through the mountains on their way to India to see the Dalai Lama. The video shows Chinese troops shooting and killing the Pilgrims, for no apparent reason. The Pilgrims were not armed nor were they running away. There was no reason to open fire on them.But don’t take my word for it – check out the video.

Now… where’s Charlotte Kates? Where are her Socialist Worker Buddies? Where are the Ladies in Black? Koffi Anan? Friggin anyone! Anyone?

Hello??

About the author

ck

Founder and Publisher of Jewlicious, David Abitbol lives in Jerusalem with his wife, newborn daughter and toddler son. Blogging as "ck" he's been blocked on twitter by the right and the left, so he's doing something right.

11 Comments

  • ICT is already on it, dated October 13th.

    The shootings occured on September 30th and the word got out at about October 11th (Australian newspaper) or so, and it takes a while for the news to spread through the media into the consciousness of people, so give it time for some others to follow.

    To think that each of us who buy Chinese products, whatever they might be, are funding the bullets to the Chinese rifles – now that’s a sad thought. Moved by this, I tried checking what recently bought things are “made in China” but couldn’t find any aside from garlic. Will ban on garlic save the pilgrims? I guess not, but I’ll start buying Spanish ones instead.

    Oh, and better get used to writing “Ban Ki-moon” instead of “Kofi Annan” whenever you want to throw poison darts at the UN for some reason, as Mr. Ki-moon will be the new Secretary-General in January.

  • there’s plenty of anti chinese government protest amongst the left.

    perhaps it would be better to get an idea of ban ki-moon’s stance before we throw those poison darts at him? (that’s a genuine question – like, if anyone knows any

    no political group is truly homogenous, whether it’s the UN, the “radical left” or the Zionist movement, neither are particular individuals (Charlotte Kates, Kofi Annan, Baruch Goldstein) within those movements necessarily representative of the whole. it sounds ridiculously obvious but it seems we forget this from time to time. okay, I’ll shut up now. salaam al kulam and whatnot.

  • …knows any good sites about him, do post ’em up) – that’s what i meant to say

  • They weren’t murdered by white racist Euro-colonial Zionists, ck. Therefore, there’s no anti-Western angle and no news value. Besides, how can you do t’shuva for your white racist colonial past by protesting Asians killing other Asians? Not only that, it would mean interfering in the internal politics of a Communist country. No self-respecting Leftist would dare do something like that. After all, who are we, rich white capitalists that we are, to criticize the actions of a non-white, and therefore intrinsically authentic and superior culture?

    Asians killing other Asians might merit a mention, but there will be no repercdussions over this. China is a huge, powerful country with tremendous political clout, as well as being a huge market. The Tibetans are screwed.

  • Really clever logical and original argument which proves that any criticism of Isreals governments actions is of course the same as approving murder and repression everywhere else.

  • jc said:

    “any criticism of Israel governments actions is of course the same as approving murder and repression everywhere else.”

    Well, yes, that’s a good point, but that’s really just dipping a toe in the toilet of Republican propaganda. If you’d like to wallow in delusional paranoia more completely, you can always suggest that the Left doesn’t merely approve of murder and oppression, but is somehow responsible for it as well. Toward that end, you might make up some kind of nonsensical doggerel like the following:

    how can you do t’shuva for your white racist colonial past by protesting Asians killing other Asians? Not only that, it would mean interfering in the internal politics of a Communist country. No self-respecting Leftist would dare do something like that.

    What’s that you say? That you’ve never heard anyone on the Left say anything of the kind? Well, of course not, but that’s just another illustration of liberals’ inability to think outside the box. After all, we all know that facts have a liberal bias! If you’re a “conservative,” you never let yourself get bogged down in facts, but simply make shit up as it suits your needs. Plus, of course, you assiduously avoid the fact that Republicans not only contribute in a very genuine, concrete way to the ability of the Chinese government to oppress its own citizens, but explicitly obstruct a policy providing Chinese workers with the same human rights Americans have enjoyed for a hundred years or so. Specifically, you can file a formal objection – just as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has done – to legislation granting Chinese workers the right to join a union.

    Knowing you’ve put in a good day’s work, you can then molest a couple of children, kidnap and torture a few innocent civilians, and schedule a press conference accusing liberals of moral equivalency.

    The joys of schizophrenia really are vastly underrated.

  • When the “progressives” start taking to the streets every time a Chinese murders a Tibetan the same way they do when Israel kills a palestinian terrorist, and when the UN takes up the cause of Tibet and passes resolutions condemning China’s human rights violations, you can call it “nonsensical doggerel”. Until then, you’re going to have to prove to me that people who pretend to champion the oppressed of the world, who usually call themselves “progressives”, are as concerned about this kind of blatant murder as they are about Israel’s attempts to defend itself against genocidal terrorists. So far, I don’t see it.

    And I’m not a Republican, so I have no illusions about their morality vis a vis anyone else. Right now, however, they don’t seem to want to screw the Jews as much as the Left does. It’s a shame when you have to make judgements like that, but there it is.

  • Ephraim, ck’s “rant” here – at least the chord it strikes in me – is less about the Right or Left or your stance on Gush Katif. Otherwise it just becomes another “who’s really on our side” debate. What it’s really about is hypocrisy. Not only the overt hypocrisy of ISM or the old ladies with black hats, but also the subverted hypocrisy within the U.N. (and ck, I would have added the European press and U.S. academia).

    But to address your comments about “the Left” I hope you got what Gvina said in comment #2 before you go running into the arms of the Right. I hold Progressive values. I am a self-respecting Leftist. ck and I may have differing opinions on Israeli politics, Evangelical Christian influence in Israel, but we all agree that Israel is subjected to, in international politics, a higher/double standard of conduct than any other democracy in the world. Sure, I’m frustrated with the U.N.’s double-standard towards Israel. And with how the progressive Left is being hijacked by hypocrites. And how Conservatives use this to hijack the U.S. Jewish vote. But it’s not the Right’s hypocrisy I worry about. Like David Smith said (#9) Conservatives are doublespeak and circular logic. Whatever. Arguing with them is pointless. I’ll leave the moral salvation of the Republican party to the Log Cabin Republicans. But the hypocrisy that started infecting the Left during the Vietnam war (i.e. the Weather Underground’s misogyny, the attacks on Vietnam Vets) is worth fighting. Simply because I can’t stomach the alternative – which is to run into the arms of the Right because their support of Israel is perceived to be greater. I’m not saying Ephraim is advocating this, but it’s out there. It’s more important to convince Progressives to stop prostrating before Chomsky, Nader and Cockburn and their twisted views of Israel than to sit in front of Fox News and get incensed over Bill O’Reilly’s twisted views. That’s why I appreciate ck’s posts/rants about Kates, Rachel Corrie, the black hatters, Jesus Camp, etc… and the middle’s snarky “building of a state” posts. So, maybe a better way of defining Progressive may be:

    http://www.pjalliance.org/section.aspx?CID=9

    Or something that needs more attention (IMO):

    http://www.danielpearl.org/

    for a start.

Leave a Comment