China and that obvious double standard

The Times yesterday reported that Steven Spielberg will no longer participate in the Beijing Olympics on account of China’s relationship with Sudan. Your story noted that “China is believed to be able to wield special influence with the Islamic government in Sudan because it buys some 40 per cent of the country’s oil exports while selling it weapons and defending Khartoum in the UN Security Council.”

Steven Spielberg is to be commended for taking this courageous, moral stance. But can we expect to see similar condemnation of Israel by Mr Spielberg for its continued murderous blockade and bombing of the Gaza Strip and annexation of the occupied West Bank? Can we expect that the next Times report on the United States’s relationship with Israel will be couched in the same terms as were used to describe China’s relationship with Sudan? Somehow I fail to expect to read something like this in your newspaper:

“The United States is believed to be able to wield special influence with the Jewish government of Israel because it provides billions in economic aid to the country while selling further billions in weapons and defends Tel Aviv in the UN Security Council.”

Mind you, one need not exclusively cite the United States's special relationship with Israel. There are several other examples (Saudia Arabia, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, etc). But the US/Israel relationship is the greatest of unmentionables, so I mention it here.