Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« New Straits Times caves | Main | Terrifying »

Sunday, February 26, 2006

On the cartoons and terrorist hypocrisy (the short version)

Since the controversy over the Jyllands-Posten cartoons may never go away, I thought I'd bring up (again) a point that has been largely lost in the discussion.

At present, we are being led to believe that the "Muslim world" (keep in mind, the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not allowed to speak at all unless it serves the purposes of the ten-cent general, overly powerful political hack, or fatwa-addicted cleric that has the nation in which he or she lives locked in a despotism) is speaking out against the cartoons because of the offense to Islam. This is giving certain apologists the opportunity to mention Iraq, Palestine, and other supposed crimes of the planet's non-Muslims against the faith.

Yet the Chinese Communist Party - a regime that specifically places itself in Muhammed's place as Allah's last prophet, has occupied a Muslim nation for over 56 years (East Turkestan), and has killed over 210,000 Muslims within that occupied nation through open-air nuclear tests (yes, you read that right) - gets a pass. Osama Bin Laden and his fellow terrorists have demanded the Israelis evacuate Palestine, the Americans leave Iraq, and the Spanish abandon Spain, but they have said absolutely nothing about Communsit China's atrocities - which also include shooting political prisoners, razing mosques to the ground, and banning all East Turkestani children from attending any mosques still standing.

So why would a bunch of violent killers claiming they murder in Islam's name try to remind everyone of the medieval Crusades while staying silent on an occupation during which more Muslims have died than during all eight Crusades combined?

If your answer had something to do with the Communists' aid to terrorists, you're right.

The CCP doesn't want the democratic world to know this, but it is the largest supporter of terrorism on the planet. Among the Communists' beneficiaries are the Iranian mullahcracy, the Syrian Ba'athists, Saddam Hussein, and al Qaeda itself). No wonder the terrorists keep their mouths shut on East Turkestan, and scream only about actions taken by or in European and North American nations.

So what does this tell us about the supposedly devout Muslim terrorists? It tells me their "faith" is nothing but a cover for their hunger for power and complete lack of respect for human life. There as Muslim as Hitler was Buddhist (that was the faith that saw its swa-stika twisted by the Nazis).

I've said it before, and I'm saying it again: for Osama bin Laden, Ayatollah Khameini, al-Zawahiri, al-Zarqawi, and all the rest, there is no God but the Chinese Communist Party.

Cross-posted to the China e-Lobby

Posted by D.J. McGuire on February 26, 2006 in International Affairs, International Politics, Western Standard | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On the cartoons and terrorist hypocrisy (the short version):


How true, and for the Communist Chinese their god is the almighty buck and the lust of power.

One thing the West, well at least us political correct types here in Canada and in Europe don’t realize is the only thing these Islam fascists and Chinese understand and respect is power.

They already know about the US military strength, but Canada's?

The ironic thing (if I can mildly put it that way) is we are supporting these regimes. (I know I'm just as guilty as the next guy shopping at Walmart.)

Maybe instead of having big protests and celeb stand-ins for baby seals off Newfoundland, we could get them protesting everytime you put on your "made in China" jeans and shirts you are supporting the death of East Turkestans?

Naw, doesn't make headlines.

Posted by: tomax | 2006-02-26 3:06:39 AM

I don't think the Peoples Republic of China will give a shit about how the "West" views their treatment of minorities,Islam, citizens of Taiwan
or Hong Kong or any group they focus on from time to time. They have never appeared to me to
be too impressed by shocked and appalled Letters
to the Editor, Blogs, Semi Blogs or whatever. The
"West" does not have the resources, except for Nuclear weapons to threaten the PRC, which obviously has occurred to them. Gung Ho -

Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-02-26 4:58:26 AM

Alex Jones's website, Infowars.com has this headline: "Google Imposes Worldwide Ban On China Critical Website."

Spacewar.com accuses Google of selling out to the "boys from Beijing", seemingly due to the website's reports on China's geopolitical affairs and military technology.

This UPDATE has been added: "After a complaints campaign, Google has agreed to re-index the SpaceWar site. Your efforts DO have an impact."

Well yahoooo! Score one for our side!

Posted by: Javahead | 2006-02-26 5:01:31 AM

I disagree with your theory; I think it is reductionist and diversionary to the extreme. That is, I don't think that the Islamic fundamentalists are brain-dead puppets of China; they are self-organized and have their own agenda of Islamic rule in the ME.

With regard to China's rule over East Turkestan, that is extremely repressive. China, as a vast collation of regional differences, is now worried about regional separatism. In this era of globalization, and the dissolution of the nation-states, we see the rise of regions, rather than nations (which dominate local regions within them). We see this in the break up of the Soviet Union into regions; and, the attempts of regions within Russia (Chechnya) to break away. We see concern over regional separatism in Canada (Quebec, Alberta, Nfld). We see it even in the USA.

China is repressing regionalism..I don't know how long they can maintain a central government completely dominant over regions; my own view is that it cannot be done, as each region moves more and more into an industrial economy. It's like the overstretching of the Roman centralization, as each area in its empire became more technologically skilled, more settled, more educated..and therefore, more self-reliant...As a result, each area rejected central domination. I think the same thing will happen in China.

Whether or not the ETIM (East Turkestan Islamic Group) is terrorist or not - we bloggers really don't have the data to form a clear conclusion. Both China and the USA define the ETIM as terrorist. But, quite possibly, China is defining it as such, only to enable it to repress local separatist ideas.

As for the nuclear open air tests, I attach:


Open air testing has caused cancers in all areas. By, I think 1993, the USA had carried out 1,030 such tests in the Shoshone Nevada desert. By the same date, the UK had conducted 45; and China, also 45. The Soviet Union - 415; France - 210.

I don't think that the Chinese CP specifically posits itself as the successor to Mohammed and Islam, but it most certainly does reject religions of any type.

And again, I think that the fundamentalist Islamics are not puppets of China; they have their own roots, their own agenda.

Posted by: ET | 2006-02-26 6:26:06 AM

ET, as you know I have an intense dislike of Communists that isn’t always rational and wouldn’t even help much on a battlefield that I hope we avoid.

This is where the “it’s-all-about-oil” crowd get their say and we have to carefully differentiate who does what. As I mentioned on a parallel post, even France was playing the oil card by propping up of Saddam. We know France sold him Mirage fighter jets etc. Plus Israel, thankfully, took-out a French nuclear reactor in 1983 that otherwise would have had Iraq on the same nuclear playing field as Iran is now. Does the US play the oil card? You bet. But the US is primarily concerned with global security of supply, which is the best way to allocate oil on global markets at free-market prices with the proceeds going to the owners of the oil fields. The US is not imperialist in the classic sense.

Back to China. It seems to be more concerned with ownership than simply security of supply. You think the probabilities are very favourable that China will evolve from an agricultural economy to industrial to open democracy. I hope you are right, but it’s unknowable as to how exactly it will unfold.

Back to Canada. We should have an open discussion in Parliament, as we agreed on another thread, about what our Foreign Policy should say about disclosure of any non-democratic shareholder that purchases our resources. Specifically, China would have to agree to massive disclosure, that they aren’t used to, if we were to allow them to buy Noranda or Acme Oil Sands or whatever.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-26 6:58:14 AM

Right, nomdenet, I'm aware of your hostility to communism.

I don't think that it's communism as an ideology which is the problem - for it is, in my view, a naive, romantic, utopian, idyllic and basically irrational and unworkable ideology. It is reductionist, ignoring that complex organisms, such as large populations, cannot be organized within the simple framework of 'everything is alike'. That only works for the simplest of biological organisms..and won't work for anything larger than that.

The real problem with communism, was that it was, in itself useless...but, as a centralist and authoritarian mode, it was taken up by centralist totalitarian powers. I'll also add, however, that in my view, using a centralist totalitarian top-down enforcement..was the only way to move a vast, massive population WITHIN ONE GENERATION, from a non-industrial, peasant, sustenance only local economy..to an industrial, surplus, market oriented economy..in both Russia and China. The same movement took over 500 years in the West. The problem then becomes..after you've moved the population into the modern industrial era..you have to drop communism and its centralism and its insistence on homogeneity, and allow diversity and regionalism. That's the problem, for dropping an ideology is always difficult.

Most certainly, France (and Germany) were involved with oil. There are some nice analyses on the policy of Eurabia (google it)..which discuss how Europe (France and Germany) wanted to set up a kind of massive European-Arab political and economic construct..to counter the USA..and boost themselves up as a world power. That was a basic policy.. it seems to be withering at the moment, since France/Germany are now realizing that rather than THEY taking over 'the Arabs' and running the show..it began to be the other way around.

Yes, in my view, China is well on the way to moving into a democratic industrialism. It moved out of a peasant agriculturalism with Mao..yes, there's still a fair bit..but, the Chinese are moving ahead with that. And, I feel that democracy is the only viable option for a large population. That is, I'm saying that this has nothing to do with ideology, as such; it is almost an organizational rule - that a large popoulation cannot sustain itself without diversity. And diversity is only possible within democracy.

The ME has been able to repress diversity because it has bought its sustenance with oil revenues. China can't do that; it has to be both self-sustaining, and, expand into the global economic market. That requires..diversity, independent thought..and that means, like it or not..democracy.

I absolutely agree with you - that Canada should have an open discussion on foreign ownership, and full disclosure..and regulation by international laws. Absolutely.

Posted by: ET | 2006-02-26 7:15:45 AM

ET, let’s hope Harper reads your comments about communism because they apply to the Liberals and NDP when you say:

“ you have to drop communism (socialism) and its centralism and its insistence on homogeneity (double monopoly: national daycare centres staffed by CUPE) and allow diversity and regionalism (let the Provinces run their regions). ”

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-26 7:52:51 AM

Good job. The Communists have been making war against their people since 1949. They had lost the right to govern any minority long ago.

Posted by: David M. McClory | 2006-02-26 12:06:57 PM


Now apprerently they are planning next to make a movie and show a movie about the danish cartoons and that should make the Danes more money for the money they lost due to the islamic demonstrations

The whole issue has been about increasing the confrontation rather than defusing it, and the ulterior motive for both sides.

Posted by: Victor | 2006-02-27 5:46:09 AM

Victor , what was the ulterior motive for the Danes?

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-27 5:59:31 AM


Posted by: MOTIVE? | 2006-02-27 6:11:11 AM

Because Western Muslims are "born and bred" to hate all things Western, and who says there is "no question" that there are conscious, open efforts in Western mosques and madrassas to fund and cultivate al-Qaeda terror cells to strike Western targets.

Posted by: Reality | 2006-02-27 6:12:31 AM

Any lawyer will tell you that one of the key elements to winning in court is to discredit the opposition. In the case that is why the Muslims work so hard at protesting and do try to silence the infidels from speaking out agsinst the bad Muslims

Posted by: Hello | 2006-02-27 6:15:17 AM

>>Any lawyer will tell you that one of the key elements to winning in court is to discredit the opposition. In the case that is why the Muslims work so hard at protesting and do try to silence the infidels from speaking out agsinst the bad Muslims

And what about the false beliefs perennially current on the Arabian streets, such as the "fact" that Israel hands out poison candies to Muslim children, that Israel kills Palestinians and Muslims with radiation spy machines, and that Israel infects Palestinian children with AIDS.

Can't most people not see how riduclaous this whole Islamic thing now is?

Posted by: Dave | 2006-02-27 6:18:08 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.