With Friends Like These...

"[Michael] Danby [Labor member for Melbourne Ports] is the chairman of the Parliamentary Tibetan Friendship Society [sic], and by far the most active and courageous politician from a mainstream party on the issue of human rights in China." (Meeting the Dalai Lama is the right thing to do, Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan, The Australian, 19/5/07)

"I am 'Mr Human Rights' in Canberra. I have a completely different view to most of my parliamentary colleagues on China. I'm the chairman of the Parliamentary Friends of Tibet and, of all people, I work closely with Bob Brown on that - he is a mensch." (Interview with Michael Danby, The Australian Jewish News, 23/11/07)

"Mr Human Rights" is federal parliament's most vocal defender of the State of Israel, an occupying power engaged in comprehensively trashing the human rights of the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The staggering hypocrisy of speaking out against human rights abuses in Tibet, while apologising for them in Palestine, has been exercising the mind of courageous Israeli journalist, Gideon Levy:

"Israelis have no moral right to fight the Chinese occupation of Tibet...No small number of... Israelis have recently joined the wave of global protest that broke out over the Olympics...It is easy; it engenders no contoversy - who would not be in favor of liberating Tibet? But that is not the fight that Israeli human rights supporters should be waging. To fight for Tibet, Israel needs no courage, because there is no price to pay. On the contrary, this is part of a fashionable global trend, almost as much as the fight against global warming or the poaching of sea lions. These fights are just and must be undertaken. But in Israel they are deluxe fights... when one comes to the fight with hands that are collectively, and sometimes individually, so unclean, it is impossible to protest a Chinese occupation.

"Citizens of a country that maintains a military subjugation in its backyard that is no less cruel than that of the Chinese, and by some parameters even more so, and against which there is practically no more protest here, have no justification in denouncing another occupation. Citizens of a country that is entirely tainted by the occupation - a national, ongoing project that involves all sectors of the population to some extent, directly or indirectly - cannot wash their hands and fight another occupation, when a half-hour from their homes, horrors no less terrible are taking place for which they have much greater responsibility.

"The world has fallen in love with Tibet. How easy it is to do. The picturesque figure of the Dalai Lama and the non-violent struggle he leads with his scarlet-robed monks is truly captivating... The Palestinians are not as nice as the Tibetans in the eyes of the world. But the Palestinian people deserve exactly the same rights as the occupied Tibetan people, even if their leaders are less enchanting, they have no scarlet robes and their fight is more violent. There is absolutely no connection between rights and the means of protest, and from that perspective, there is no difference between a Tibetan and a Palestinian - they both deserve the exact same freedom. Moreover, in the first years of the Israeli occupation, most Palestinians accepted it submissively, with practically no violence. What did they get as a result? Nothing. The world and Israel cloaked themselves in apathy and callousness. Only when planes started being hijacked in the 1970s did the world begin to notice that a Palestinian problem even existed. In contrast, the Tibetan struggle also was tainted with violence in the past, and it is reasonable to assume that violence will increase if the Tibetans do not attain their goal.

"There is also no point in asking which occupation is crueler, the Chinese or the Israeli. The competition is harsh and bitter. The Chinese killed and imprisoned more Tibetans, in Lhasa there is less freedom than in Nablus, but in general, the extent of Israeli repression in the territories is much greater today than Chinese repression in Tibet. Nowhere is there a region more besieged and confined than Gaza. And what is the result? The world calls to boycott the occupier in the case of China, while absurdly, with regard to the Palestinians, the world is boycotting the occupied entity...and not the occupier. This, it seems, has no parallel in history....

"In a more just world, no occupation would exist - neither the Chinese nor the Israeli. But until that time, the Israelis have to look inward at their own home and protest what is being done there in front of the Israeli Defense Ministry, before they present themselves with colorful signs outside the Chinese Embassy." (Palestinians vs Tibetans - a double standard, Haaretz, 13/4/08)