China Clarifies Human Rights Record

BBC News has the story:

Clashes between protesters and security forces in Tibet's main city of Lhasa have left at least two people dead, according to reports.

An emergency official told AFP news agency that many people had been hurt and an unspecified number had died.

The US-based Radio Free Asia quoted witnesses who said they had seen at least two bodies on Lhasa's streets.

Rallies have continued all week in what are said to be the largest protests against Beijing's rule in 20 years.

Well, at least this time they had the decency to kill Tibetans instead of students. After all, the students wanted democracy; the Tibetans just want to have their own country. You know, like they did before China conquered it a number of decades ago. Looks like all those "Free Tibet" stickers weren't quite as efficacious as people might have wanted. Well, but it's the thought that counts. In any case, in the story, the Chinese dispute that Tibet has ever been independent. Seriously.

Richly, yesterday the Chinese government "hit back" on human rights, accusing the Americans of perpetrating the worst human-rights abuses in modern times. Here's a bit:

The report comes in response to the US State Department's annual survey of human rights across the world.

Although the report accuses China of denying its people basic freedoms, the country is not listed as one of the world's most systematic rights violators.

And...hmmm....

"Stop exercising double standards on human rights issues and wrongly meddling in the internal affairs of other countries," said ministry spokesman Qin Gang.

He added that China's achievements on human rights had been "widely recognised by the international community".

Evidently not widely recognized enough. But come, their victims are only crazy religious people like, you know, practicing Christians and Falun Gong members. Still, the bit about meddling in other people's affairs is a bit much, considering that not only did they ruthlessly invade and subjugate the independent nation of Tibet, they also want to take over the utterly unwilling citizens of the free nation of Taiwan. Just WHO is the imperialist aggressor here? I wonder if the "imperialist" charge is used against the United States because it deflects that criticism from the truly imperialist powers, for example the old USSR, today's Russia, and the "People's" Republic of China.

Americans may not care much about Taiwan, but it would be a serious blow to freedom in the world if the nefarious PRC is allowed to subjugate that bastion of freedom, as well.