Look: "I also do find it quite convenient that such a rage of
conviction for other world events usually surges in the wake of
a highly publicized one." Think about it. The UN-highly
publicized accounts were _invisible_ *until* the highly
publicized one. I didn't know about the Beirut issue until the
Paris situation. The "isn't it convenient" speaks not to me, who
didn't know about it, but to those who present the news. Perhaps
it works out better: By publicizing one excessively, it
accidentally creates a backlash of "what about x, y, z too?" and
brings them up in the news. The thing is: People WERE talking
about the other events when they happened. But Western media did
not generally care that much until it hit Paris. This is RIGHT?
We only know the news we get. The rest? We don't. You have
things backwards I believe, my friend. Flip it around, and
you'll get it right. - It makes sense, but it is our
desensitization that is the larger problem. The way evil wins is
to become invisible by being commonplace. Didn't France just
start a bombing campaign against Syria a few weeks ago? That's
novel too. Entering war does have its consequence, although I'm
not by any means justifying what happened in Paris of course. --
