I see the Communist ruling elite in China is once again flexing its progressive muscles:

A Chinese gay pageant, said to be the first held in the country, was ordered by police to close an hour before opening, organisers say.

Apparently, the pageant has been cancelled because it did not apply according to procedures. Which, in an authoritarian regime like the one in China, has a certain ring of truth to it. Until you consider this:

Homosexuality was illegal in China until 1997, and officials described it as a mental illness until 2001.

And we all know how the Chinese government feels about the mentally ill. But it is difficult to describe the actions of the Chinese government in any other way than blatantly homophobic. And also I note the number of left-wing movements that end up brutally suppressing their own people when they get into power. I'm pretty sure that the point of a utopia - Communist or otherwise - isn't to describe homosexuals as mentally ill...

The girl at the Olympic ceremony mimed. And some of the fireworks may have been faked.

Oh my God! Lies, fraud and deception from a Communist State! Unprecedented.

Seriously, this is meant to be news?

Olympic Opening Ceremony, China, 2008

And so it came to pass that the eyes of the world turned to the east, and a great peace descended across the planet. Suddenly, there was a feeling of contentment. The wars of yesterday were forgotten in the face of some dancing. The gross abuse of human rights were forgiven because the world could see some festivities through the choking smog. The execution wagons ceased to matter as people waved ribbons. And because we got to see some fireworks, we forgot about the crushing of Tibet and the awful violence of Tiananmen Square. Even the most unforgiving of people, the terrible cynics of the media, decided to let bygones be bygones as editors everywhere realised they could all use the headlines “Let the games Bejing!” And humanity realised that it was pretty much willing to sacrifice anything in return for a bit of a party.

Yep, I am being cynical. And probably naïve. But this gushing praise for a brutal, totalitarian Communist regime simply because they were able to put on a bash to celebrate the start of the Olympics really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I understand the argument that if we engage China, maybe they will become less extreme and actually start implementing much need reform in their country. I also think such logic is hopelessly flawed. China is using these Olympic games to bolster their international image and develop their national ego. Nothing more. The fact that they have managed to put on this glorified school sports day will change precisely nothing within China. And it is disappointing that the coverage of the opening ceremony has so comprehensively failed to acknowledge that.

When is a boycott not a boycott?

When Gordon Brown is organising it.

Because Brown is not going to the Olympics! Except he is. But he isn't going to the opening ceremony! But he may be attending plural ceremonies. Possibly.

If the above is about as clear as mud, apologies - but it is Gordon's fault, not mine. Over to Nick Clegg for some clarity (no, really):

"Chancellor Merkel in Germany and President Sarkozy in France saying quite specifically that they might not go to the opening ceremony shows that the debate has always been about the opening ceremony. So now suddenly to be asked to believe by Number 10 that they never really intended to go in the first place either smacks of a rather odd way of going about things or just downright incompetence."

Quite.

No doubt the Chinese are taking the news that Brown may or may not be attending some or all of the Olympics in their stride. I mean, they'd probably be pleased if he didn't attend. I'd imagine Brown can put the kiss of death on any ceremony, opening or closing.

Ultimately I think this crippling indecision over whether to attend the Olympics and, if so, what to attend, is typical of that complete wanker Brown. It isn't just the Olympics, it will be every single decision that fucker has to make. Every. Last. Decision. That is why our country looks increasingly crippled and utterly without direction. Gordon Fucking Brown.

Hell, I'd even bet Brown was paralysed for days over whether to appear on American Idol - for fear he would be voted off, even though he wasn't a contestant.

Gordon Brown. Not fit for his job. Not fit for any job. What a wanker that man is.

Protesting at the Olympic Flame

As anyone who has even glanced at a news outlet over the past 24 hours will know, there has been a tad of controversy over the Olympic flame being brought through London and now through Paris. Can’t think what might be encouraging the attempts to grab and extinguish the Olympic flame. Except perhaps the utter subjugation of the Tibetan people.

Still, at least we have these comforting words from the IOC:

Speaking in Beijing earlier, IOC President Jacques Rogge said the IOC "called for a rapid, peaceful resolution of Tibet".

Presumably he means resolution of the Tibetan situation, or instigation of a Tibetan nation state. Because the Chinese arguably resolved Tibet many moons ago. When they invaded, and began to wipe out the indigenous culture. Semantics, I know, but words can be important.

However Rogge is quick to let slip what is really on his mind:

He also condemned attempts to disrupt the Olympic torch relay, saying violence "is not compatible with the values" of the Olympic Games.

Absolutely. I would imagine the protests aren’t compatible with the values of the Olympics. But the subjugation, and slow extermination, of the Tibetan people by the Chinese government won’t be compatible with the views of those protesting. At since human lives are at stake, then the protestors probably rank the values of the protests just a little higher than the values of the Olympic Games.

Now, I have serious issues with the Chinese government (a statement which, no doubt, fills the Chinese government with precisely no fear whatsoever). Ignoring for a moment the occupation of Tibet, this is also a totalitarian Communist/Maoist state. There is no democracy in China, and they liberally apply the death penalty and imprison supposed political dissidents. I understand the need for the likes of Rogge to defend China, and to criticise the actions of the protestors. However Rogge and the IOC should have anticipated these protests when they awarded the games to China, and should understand why so many people should attack the symbol of the Olympics as it traverses the globe. Because they are not attacking the Olympics, but rather the totalitarian government ruling the host of the games this year.

Tibet Troubles

China is blaming the current unrest in Tibet on the Dalai Lama. This is an audacious claim to make about a man who has committed his whole life to peaceful regime change in Tibet. It is a staggering claim when you consider that one of the fundamental rules of Buddhism is the commitment to peace, and the refusal to hurt others. It becomes even more of a mind-blowing head fuck when you consider that the claims are coming from the Chinese government - a totalitarian regime with no real concept of what either honesty or basic human rights are.

Needless to say, your humble author is not convinced by the story from the Chinese government. This attempt to paint the Dalai Lama as a cross between a Bond villian and a sub Castro pseudo revolutionary would be funny, if it weren't the backdrop to a story where people are dying.

The Dalai Lama has risen to the claims of the Chinese government by stating he will resign if the violence worsens. Fair play to the guy (and I realise he probably wasn't seeking my approval, but he has it anyway). But this probably won't be the only challenges that China gets this year. That's the problem with hosting the Olympics, see? The eyes of the world tend to turn to you, when you are hosting an endless parade of repetitive athletic events. And, particularly if you are a brutal dictatorship with a reprehensible record in the area of human rights, some of what the world sees ain't going to be positive.

Ghandi changed the world through peaceful protest. The Dalai Lama may not achieve that, but he may yet further show what a mendacious, awful regime currently rules in China. And, for that matter, Tibet.