Pot Calling Kettle Oppressive
So apparently China has decided to put the "Human Rights Record" of the United States on display. Is it justifiable, or is it Anti-capitalist propaganda? I'll let you take one guess.
Here's a hint: the most commonly used media sources are the NYT, LAT, Washington Post, and Baltimore Sun. T-riffic.
Frontpage gives a good fisking of it, but we can always go farther, can't we?
Key Line: " The US freedom of the press is filled with hypocrisy."
As opposed to the PRC, where freedom of the press is non-existent.
Key Line: "Power and intimidation hang over the halo of press freedom. The New York Times published a commentary on March 30, 2004, saying that the US government's reliance on slandering had reached an unprecedented level in contemporary American political history, and the government prepared to abuse power at any moment to threat potential critics."
You'd think if that were true, then the New York Times would not DARED to have printed that, wouldn't you?
Key line: "The practice of treating illegal immigrants like criminals has become a national trend."
Damn. I never would have guessed that "illegal" was not actually against the law.
Key line: "In 2004, US army service people were reported to have abused and insulted Iraqi POWs, which stunned the whole world. The US forces were blamed for their fierce and dirty treatments for these Iraqi POWs."
Had to bring up Abu Ghraib, of course. Can't have a discussion about America without bringing up VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES WITH PRISONERS! Nowhere is it mentioned that the people responsible for the torture were swiftly punished. Also, nowhere is it mentioned that China's record with prisoners is generally abysmal.
Update: Oh, I'm sorry - those aren't prisons - those are "re-education by Labor" camps (freedomhouse.org)
It should also be noted that the Chinese have "googlebombed" the phrase "Prisoner Abuse in China" so that all ten of the first results come up with Abu Ghraib, and eight of them lead to Chinese-owned-and-operated websites.
Key Line: "Racism recurs on campus of American universities. Fascist slogans and posters promoting superiority of white people, along with threats by weapon or words were found on college campuses including University of California at Berkeley."
Frontpagemag and the People's Republic of China find themselves in agreement. UC-Berkeley as a bastion of white supremacy and FASCISTS? I bet that this is the first time in history that the student populace at UC-Berkeley has been called Fascistic.
Key Line: "People of minority ethnic groups are biased against in employment and occupation. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of the United States received 29,000 complaints in 2003 of racial bias in the workplace"
As opposed to say..."The London-based Tibet Information Network (TIN) is reported in the article as saying that "dramatic changes" in the number and relativity of Tibetans in state jobs and blames this on Beijing's "discriminating policies". TIN claims that in 2000 Tibetans held 71.6 percent of state cadre jobs in the TAR (Tibetan Autonomous Region) however, since 2000 the number has declined sharply to 49.7 percent in 2003." (http://uygurletter.blogspot.com)
Yep... compared to China, the US sure is racist. We are, assuming, of course, that each one of those 29,000 cases are each filed by separate people.
By the way, according to the EEOC website itself, that number is 27,700, and only 932 of those were due to actual "color bias". Seeing as how the report keeps mentioning the plight of "Colored People", you'd think they'd mention this. But no, why use the true number of 932, or even 27,700, when 29,000 is sitting right there on the webpage? Another thing to note is that the discriminations against the Tibetans is government-sponsored, whereas most of the 29000 cases of racial discrimination filed under Title VII were against private employers.
I bet they don't have anything close to a Title VII in China.
Key Line: "After the Sept. 11 incident, the United States openly restricts the rights of citizens under the cloak of homeland security, and uses diverse means including wire tapping of phone conversations and secret investigations, checks on all secret files, and monitoring transfers of fund and cash flows to supervise activities of its citizens, in which, people of ethnic minority groups, foreigners and immigrants become main victims."
There they go throwing out the "minorities are the main victims of EVERYTHING" canard again. I do like the fact that they mention all of our diverse means, including "wire tapping... secret investigations... checks on all secret files, and monitoring transfers of fund and cash flows..."
Let's see what Freedom House's report has to say about China here. "Police frequently conduct searches without warrants, and at times monitor telephone conversations and other personal communications to use as evidence against suspected dissidents." So, of course, China can do whatever it wants to regular citizens, but the United States is not allowed to look out for National Security. Oh - yeah, that's EXACTLY what China wants the situation to be!
Key Line: "The situation of American women and children was disturbing. The rates of women and children physically or sexually victimized were high. According to FBI Crime Statistics, in 2003 the United States witnessed 93,233 cases of raping. Virtually 63.2 in every 100,000 women fell victims."
I wonder how that compares to women in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do I even need to mention China's forced sterilization policy? I didn't think so.
Key Line: "because of the "lingering atmosphere of fear" stemming from the Sept. 11 attacks and fallout from the Iraq War, there were 1,019 anti-Muslim incidents in the United States in 2003, representing a 69 percent increase."
I'm sure that the Uighar Muslims of western China would kill for the "lingering atmosphere of fear" that practitioners of Islam face here. And how about those Falungong extremists? I hear they aren't persecuted due to an atmosphere of fear in China. Oh... wait.
Notice a recurring theme here? China frequently is using its own human rights abuses, and then comparing them to what the United States does. There's one small problem with that. The Chinese government is the one responsible for most of the destruction in China, whereas individuals, not the government, are causing the "abuses" cited in China's report. Are we supposed to equate government sanctioned murder with stupid and hateful individuals? Apparently so. I'm not buying it.