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. --