Mamma Mia...tireless supporter of Human Rights!
Well, I didn't think much of the way Mia Farrow handled her divorce from film director, Woody Allen, but her efforts to raise awareness about Human Rights in Darfur and Tibet are admirable.
In particular, I applaud her criticism of George Bush in that regard.
It's a no-brainer, really!
When George Bush announced his intention to attend the opening ceremonies for the Beijing Olympics, the haughty Texan defended his position by arguing that he sees the Olympics as a way to cheer up the athletes.
Frankly, I didn't know they needed a boost!
And, on the grounds that the Chinese will be "watching very carefully" to determine what decisions are being made by World Leaders, Bush took a giant leap and asserted that "not to go" would be an affront to the Chinese people.
Well, tough ti**y, George.
Is a civilized society supposed to look the other way when Human Rights are being violated and religious freedom is being denied?
What the "offenders" and "evil-doers" think is irrelevant!
George, you have your priorities misplaced.
On the other hand, Ms. Farrow's stance on the issues makes a lot of sense.
In a feature in the "OPINION" section of the Los Angeles Times today, Ms. Farrow - rightly so - notes that Bush's decision to attend the ceremonies was out-of-step for having come at a time when U.S. and International politicians took a stand by eschewing the opening ceremonies (the only component of the games not geared toward celebrating the athletes; but rather, towards the burnishing of the Beijing Regime's political image).
In sum, it appears that George W. Bush is thumbing his nose at a handful of respected leaders (British PM Gordon Brown; Canadian PM Stephen Harper; German Chancellor Angela Merkel; European Parliament President Hans-Gert Poettering) who understand (unlike Mr. Bush) the complexity of the issues - and hence - have chosen not to attend for good reason.
According to Ms. Farrow, President Bush squandered an enormous opportunity.
Especially when one considers that Beijing was notoriously indifferent to diplomatic pressure until the "Olympic Games" were at stake.
Indeed, as Ms. Farrow points out, a presidential boycott of the opening ceremonies may have proved to be a "powerful additional point of leverage" with an otherwise intractable regime. Likewise, a boycott limited to the opening ceremonies would have had the advantage of not targeting the athletes.
I agree with her conclusion that such action would have sent a strong symbolic message to Beijing with little substantive cost to U.S.-China relations.
In the final analysis, Bush's dim-witted stance - which goes against the grain - thwarted what could have been an opportunity to express solidarity to Chinese citizens whose human rights are being denied, demonstrate moral leadership, and underscore the importance of adhering to values and principles this great Nation was founded on.
Heck, Bush doesn't care. In the New Year, he's out on his sorry a**.
I expect he's going to grab all the party invitations he can before he high-tails it out of the White House.
After all, this time next year, he won't be on any A-list!
Dal, We'll meditate on it...
