Comments on: Australian sensitivity singles out the Yellow Peril

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Why pick on the Chinese? Israel has illegally occupied the West Bank and Gaza for over 40 years, and our Parliament had just recently congratulated Israel on its 60th anniversary without a single mention of the plight of the Palestinians.

By: Tony Papafilis

Tony Papafilis — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

You should feel embarrassed about the nonsense you write, Jeff. US President has his minders just as the Chinese PM did when visting. The torch does not belong to the Chinese Commies but to the IOC. As such, Chinese commies have no right to muscle in on our security. I guess Jeff would join Chinese commie protests against free speech whcih are about as intelligent and free minded as the uni students protesting against voluntary student unionism. Just another brain dead socialists.

By: Tim.Nash

Tim.Nash — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Tibet should be free. Of course it should. But, then, the Chinese might respond: if military occupations are so odious, why are Australians still in Iraq?”

Jeff I understand your point, but using military force against the largest army on earth is a little daunting and then there is all that lovely trade and need for our resources coming from that country. Western countries need China. Western governments prefer not to do much about this kind of popular sentiment and will speak out about it but I doubt any action will ever be taken.

Also Tibet is an Asian country and the western white supporters by calling for its independence are supporting Asian people. This is hardly racist sentiment.

By: Lucy

Lucy — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“With all due respect, the Olympic torch is less a head of state and more a, well, torch.” This observation wins.

By: John James

John James — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

”..the Chinese might respond: if military dictatorships are so odious, why are Australians still in Iraq?” Heavens above, please, spare me the bullsh*t! Isn’t that typical of the Left!
Ask yourself what the difference is between the Dalai Lama and Saddam Hussein and the already obvious answer, to anyone vaguely interested in the truth, may become ‘bleeding obvious’.

By: michael

michael — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

With all due respect, the Olympic torch is less a head of state and more a, well, torch. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t a hint of racism and yellow peril in the broader response to the torch relay, only that this analogy is ridiculously out of proportion. I fail to see how the protection of the leader of a nuclear-armed state, such as Bush or, more relevantly, Hu Jintao, by that state’s security service is at all comparable or relevant to the protection of a torch. The Iraq-Tibet comparison seems similarly irrelevant, even to someone of the left.

By: nic

nic — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Do you recall any similar official warnings directed to the US security posse?” No, but then again I doubt anyone reading this article was at the official briefing for the US security.

By: Mick

Mick — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

If I remember rightly there were quite a few Australians who objected to GW Bush’s entourage - a lot more in fact than the handful of protestors who turned up to demonstrate against the Chinese torch. And Mr Bush, like him or loathe him, came as the democratically elected leader of the American people. The Torch came at the behest of Hu Jintao, Kevin Gosper and Samsung.

By: John

John — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

What a load of drivel.
Does Mr Stone really believe that incidents that occurred 100 years ago have any relevance to today’s beliefs and actions?.
If he does, it must be really interesting living in his household. If he uses this logic with his partner, I could imagine the argument following the lines: “And when we were at that fish and chip shop 15 years ago you said ……”
The Chinese are notorious for being the bully boys through Asia and are in the process of expanding their activities to the whole world.
And Mr Stone, that does not make me xenophobic or afraid of the “yellow peril”. It just makes be a realist.

By: Lucy

Lucy — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Look, I agree that Australia has a habit of setting double standards for foreigners and that it’s silly and embarrassing, but please: the French, with their Academie and their exorbitant local content laws and their ridiculous restrictions on terms like “champagne” are hardly ones to complain about other countries’ exceptionalism.

By: David Sanderson

David Sanderson — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

If you compare two things which are fundamentally not comparable then you cannot derive any sensible conclusions. You can though come up with conclusions that are silly and tendentious and in this regard Mr Sparrow never misses an opportunity to demonstrate what a dill he is.

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

This is so dumb. First the China Inc agreed to the rules of engagement with the IOC Inc of more democracy and improving human rights for getting the gig. Westerners kicking up a fuss are not being selective, they are being strategic with the real politik opportunity. If there was a better cause for human rights and opportunity say for Palestine or Iraq that was presenting then it would (and will crank) in that time too. And finally what will it achieve - BREAKING NEWS - China Inc have decided to meet representatives of of the Dalai Lhama, preferred exiled government of Tibet. You know what really pisses me off here? That so called lefty academic types or writers don’t even have a belief in democratic free speech protest having a value of it’s own, to think and speak truth to enormous power. Are you really so beaten, jaded, broken, cynical, defeatist, washed up, piss poor, sorry arses? Why not just go and join a big Inc and be done with with the pretense you even give a damn?

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

The security detail for the President of the United States is the same irrespective of who is president and which country he visits and is widely disliked in the host counties. However, it is the basis on which the visit goes ahead. It is just silly to compare and contrast his security detail with that of a flame. The other arguments have been used unsuccessfully with the exception of the “skippy” argument. The last question posed is just so ludicrous that the chinese authorities themselves haven’t had the neck to use it. The author of this article will find it difficult to be taken seriously by me (and I suspect many others) ever again!

By: Frank Birchall

Frank Birchall — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Jeff spoils his attempt to be even-handed with extreme (and inaccurate) invective like “vicious dictatorship” and “murderous gerontocracy”. It simply devalues the ability to use harsh criticism in situations where it is manifestly appropriate. BTW, both Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao are 65 years old — scarcely gerontocratic when one considers John Howard’s and John McCain’s age. If Jeff feels so strongly about China, I assume he doesn’t buy any clothing made there and routinely protests about our exports to that country. All the attempted torch hijacking will accomplish is a sense of insult and resentment from the Chinese people and damage to the Olympic Games. How will that help Tibet?