You do not defeat terrorism by rewarding terrorists, regardless of how many bleeding heart liberals argue otherwise. Want to know where that flawed approach leads to? Read UNIONISM DECAYED 1997-2007 - It's my first book and it explains what happens when you seeek to appease terrorists and call it peace. It's available right now for ATW readers so make sure you get your copy by emailing the editor! This is the book that dissents from the herd mentality that doing wrong can lead to being right. It doesn't and this book spells out WHY.
"I do remember... the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. I'll always remember that", Jane Garvey, BBC Five Live, May 10th, 2007, recalling May 2nd, 1997.
Monday, April 7, 2008 at 02:55PM Just spotted that the Olympic Torch has been extinguished twice in Paris! This may be merely symbolic but it is most welcome for all that. China should never have been awarded these games in the first place and by showing their own tyranny in Tibet THEY have exacerbated the situation. I'm delighted at this news and hope more will happen.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (7)
I believe the Olympic torch carried in the relay is ignited from an "original flame" kept in a safety lantern. So dousing the torch isn't enough to cause symbolic distress to China. Somebody has to get hold of the lantern and extinguish that.
Alex
What you say about the original lantern is true, but....I guarantee that the Chinese authorities are horrified and unspeakably angry about what they see.
But yes, extra credit must be given to anyone who puts out the other flame.
I'd like to see a relay climber let it slip out of his hands as he nears the top of Mount Everest. That would be a fine symbol.
Next stop San Francisco. Maybe they can get some of that legendary California hospitality!!
From SF Team Tibet
Phantom,
Thanks for the SF info. Can't make it out to the coast myself. Maybe our Patty could drive up from LA with a carload of illegal aliens -- kinda kill two birds with one stone.
I too support the protesters. Even though, yes, these gestures are largely symbolic and do nothing immediate to help oppressed Tibetans, I think it's important to try and make some sort of stand against oppressive regimes, such as China, or Russia/Zimbabwe etc.
Mind you, it's slowly dawning on me that political and economical globalisation is happening, and in terms of resources and economic clout, many of the key players are "bad guys". Russia has all the gas, The M.E. has all the oil (and is profiting hugely from current crude oil prices), and China has all the cheap plastic consumerist cack that we're buying just as fast as our plastic credit cards will allow us!
In the long-term it seems to me that, well how can we effectively "boycott" China? (Or Russia, or Saudi for that matter?) I dunno, but I wouldn't like to see the state of world politics 100 years from now....
>>So dousing the torch isn't enough to cause symbolic distress to China. Somebody has to get hold of the lantern and extinguish that.<<
Why not? The whole flame idea, whether carried by torch or latern, is in any case merely (and somewhat jadedly) symbolic. Dousing the torch is therefore a sufficient gesture as far as such symbols go.
In any case, isn't it good to see a cause that unites apparently all on ATW?
And after Paris and London, I wonder what happened to "the-Left-would-never-demonstrate-against-a-Communist-country" claim that was being made by the usual stalwarts here just a few days ago?
Don's share your pessimism, Tom. The West's cultural and material success is its most persuasive argument for the youth of places like China. There can be no Chinese "middle-way" for democracy. Its people want, and will increasingly want, the degree of freedom and debate we enjoy.
I am against the Chinese Olympics and support a boycott, and even civil disobedience agains tthe torch procession (getting in its way), but dousing the flame is too likely to involve physical assualts and injury so I don't think that is a good idea.