m*******e
发帖数: 21667 | 1 http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/
Steve Lendman
About Me
I was born in 1934 in Boston, MA, raised in a modest middle income family, a
ttended public schools, received a Harvard BA in 1956 and a Wharton MBA in 1
960. After six years as a marketing research analyst, became part of a new s
mall family business in 1967, remaining there until retiring in 1999. Have s
ince devoted my time to progressive causes, extensive reading, and since sum
mer 2005 writing on vital world and national topics, including war and peace
, American imperialism, corporate dominance, political persecutions, and a r
ange of other social, economic and political issues. In early 2007, began re
gular radio hosting, now The Progressive Radio News Hour on The Progressive
Radio Network.
Nobel Politics
Nobel Politics - by Stephen Lendman
Since first awarded in 1901, Nobel Peace recognition went to 98 individuals
and 23 organizations. Last year, another war criminal won, Barack Obama, one
among many previous ones. A earlier article on the Nobel Committee's long a
nd inglorious tradition may be accessed through the following link:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2009/10/october-surprise-peace-prize-to-war.ht
ml
Nearly always, politics, not merit, determines awards. Consider past winners
, including Henry Kissinger, three Israeli war criminals (Shimon Peres, Yitz
hak Rabin, and Menachem Begin), the Dalai Lama (a past and likely current CI
A asset), Elie Wiesel (a hawkish Islamophobe), Kofi Annan (a reliable imperi
al stooge), and Al Gore, (another war criminal, neoliberal extremist, and no
friend of the earth), a previous article on him may be accessed through the
link below:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2007/10/nobel-hypocrisy.html
A celebratory Western media hailed this year's winner, jailed Chinese dissid
ent Liu Xiaobo, a man New York Times writers Andrew Jacobs and Jonathan Ansf
ield called:
"an impassioned literary critic, political essayist and democracy advocate r
epeatedly jailed (for) his activism,
the Nobel Committee "recogni(zing) his long and non-violent (stand) for fund
amental human rights in China."
Long supportive of US adventurism, The Nation magazine hailed Obama's award
but said little about Liu, save for writer Robert Dreyfuss calling him "a Ch
inese dissident and author of a manifesto for human rights," then adding:
"It's well and good to draw attention to China's treatment of political diss
idents and its harsh restrictions on free speech, meeting, and Internet comm
unications." However, the award "isn't likely to cause Chinese authorities t
o change their minds; if anything, it's more likely to cause them to crack d
own even harder," especially after Obama's disingenuous September 23 General
Assembly speech, talking peace and stressing human rights while waging war
and defiling them at home and abroad even more egregiously than Bush.
Two Wall Street Journal editorials praised "A Nobel for China" and a "Nobel
Vision for a Better China," using the award to bash Beijing, less on human r
ights violations than for becoming an economic superpower, challenging Ameri
ca's dominance. That's the core issue, not pretending humanitarian considera
tions matter.
A Financial Times editorial called the award "A Nobel Peace Prize to celebra
te," saying:
The Nobel Committee "reinstated itself into the best traditions of the award
," recalling past winners like Martin Luther King and Burma's Aung San Suu K
yi, but omitting names listed above and numerous other non-worthies. Saying
nothing either about Western imperial wars, co-sponsored by America, Britain
and Israel, topics major media accounts suppress or gloss over superficiall
y.
Broadcasting US propaganda globally, the Voice of America was jubilant over
Liu's award, saying the Nobel Committee "issued an explicit challenge, calli
ng on China to respect political rights as it rises toward economic great-po
wer status." Omitted was America's support for wealth and privilege, not pop
ulist and human rights it disdains.
Al Jazeera's Imran Kahn reported accurately, calling Liu's award "controvers
ial" and "contentious," citing past winners like Kissinger, the Israelis and
Obama, choices exalting war, not peace.
An In-Depth Alternative View
Posted October 11 on Pravda.ru, Professor Peter Baofu, headlined "The Nobel
Peace Prize, and an Instrument of Western Power," explaining what major medi
a accounts omitted.
Saying awarding Liu doesn't promote peace and prosperity, he gave seven reas
ons:
(1) Despite more improvement needed, China, in fact, "has done much to promo
te freedom at home in the last few decades," in contrast to America where it
's eroded. According to Anne-Marie Brady, a New Zealand University of Canter
bury China expert:
"the average person has so much more freedom than they ever had in the post-
'49 period. There's a strong feeling of 'don't rock the boat too far, don't
prod into sensitive areas," but, compared to earlier, much now is tolerated.
Understandably, China resents being "under-appreciated."
(2) China has "done much to contribute to world peace and prosperity in the
last few decades." For example, it "lifted hundreds of millions of people ou
t of poverty," in contrast to America where it's growing exponentially. In C
hina, poverty dropped from 64% around 30 years ago to 16% in 2004, "a tremen
dous achievement for human rights" gone unrecognized.
In addition, China's explosive growth "became a major engine of the world's
economic growth" because it depends so heavily on raw material and other imp
orts. While it has trade surpluses with America and elsewhere, it's in defic
it to other countries. It also invests heavily overseas to build "roads, rai
lways, sports complexes, hospitals, bridges, schools," and other projects. T
hough exploiting labor, many nations and consumers benefit from Chinese low
prices.
(3) Liu isn't "an innocent defender of peace and freedom in China as popular
ly depicted." For example, in a 1988 Hong Kong Open Magazine interview, he s
aid it would take "300 years of colonialism for (China) to transform into ho
w Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enou
gh," he added. It caused an uproar, but he never retracted.
He was also instrumental in drafting "Charter 08," a political manifesto mod
eled after Czechoslovakia's "Charter '77,' calling for an end to one-party r
ule, respect for human rights, and other freedoms.
"Charter 08" principles include: | c****g
发帖数: 37081 | | m*******e
发帖数: 21667 | 3 妈的，压根不是cnn的人，应该是左翼
【在 c****g 的大作中提到】
: 老将会说丫收了TG的银子，p民的血汗钱。
| h*****n
发帖数: 3270 | 4 美国有线网络（CNN）副总裁兰德曼Stephen Lendman近日在个人博客撰文批评挪威诺贝
尔评奖委员会将2010诺贝尔和平奖授予中国异见人士刘晓波，称诺贝尔评奖委员会（以
下简称诺委会），是臭名昭著的西方工具，它的和平授奖和其他奖项促进的是不被全球
所共享的价值观。
文章称，自1901年首个诺贝尔和平奖颁发以来，至今已有98名个人和23家组织获得
此奖。然而，决定这些奖项的几乎是政治而非功绩。如过去获得诺贝尔和平奖的美国前
副总统戈尔（Al Gore）、以色列战犯佩雷斯和拉宾和达赖喇嘛（现在CIA“资产”）等
。而2010获得诺贝尔和平奖给予了中国异见人士刘晓波。
文章称，狭义上讲，美国就有数百政治犯，他们比刘晓波更应该获得诺贝尔和平奖
，广义上讲，美国还有很多未被提及或承认、甚至遭到非法惩罚的人。选择以诺贝尔和
平奖对中国发起“政治攻击”不是诺委会应该做的。给奥巴马、戈尔和刘晓波等颁发诺
贝尔和平奖是对“和平、自由社会及各项人权原则”这些“诺贝尔证言”的藐视。
对于刘晓波获奖，西方媒体大多表示庆祝口吻和姿态。美国《华尔街日报》发表两
篇评论文章，“中国诺贝尔奖”（A Nobel for China）和“为一个更好中国的诺贝尔
愿景”（Nobel Vision for a Better China），表扬刘晓波获奖，并借此痛击中国，
重点不是人权违反情况，而是“中国的经济超实力挑战了美国主导地位”。《华尔街邮
报》也有借刘晓波获奖批评中国人权的文章。
英国《金融时报》一篇名为“值得庆祝的诺贝尔和平奖“（A Nobel Peace Prize
to celebrate）的社论专门挑选民权领袖马丁·路德·金（Martin Luther King）和缅
甸政治家昂山素姬（Aung San Suu Kyi）表扬诺贝尔评奖委员会，而达赖喇嘛和刘晓波
之辈的名字一个也没出现。美国《今日美国》也是对刘晓波获奖表示欢呼称，诺委会给
向中国提出了明确挑战，即呼吁中国成为世界经济强国的同时尊重公民政治权利。
卡塔尔半岛电视台的卡恩（Imran Kahn）对刘晓波获奖“富有争议”的描述最为准
确。卡恩引述了美国前国务卿基辛格、奥巴马总统、以色列战犯等诺贝尔和平奖得主，
称诺贝尔和平奖选择发功战争的人。
俄《真理报》网站10月11日曾刊登Peter Baofu博士题为“诺贝尔和平奖，西方国
家的工具”（The Nobel Peace Prize, and an Instrument of Western Power）的文
章。文章称，给刘晓波颁奖不会促进世界和平与繁荣。尽管中国有需要更多改进地方，
但是，实际上，中国在过去几十年在国内提升了言论自由，而且其让数百万中国人脱离
贫困，在金融危机中成为世界经济增长的引擎。
文章称，西方社会，尤其是美国，对促进中国人民和自己国家人权方面
没有真正利益存在。在全球范围内，他们只是对内对外进行剥削，但其他方法不奏
效时便发起战争。而且，总体上，西方国家毫不尊重”非西方“国家地区的思想价值观
，现代社会的西方只知道教训和命令他人，方式要么和平、要么暴力。
另外，西方国家尤其是美国也将中国视为自己的劲敌。此次刘晓波获奖将继续延续
中国、西方国家和美国之间、尤其是中美之间进行怀疑的“恶性循环”。结果，只能激
发“中国民族主义情绪”高涨，加强中国内部民族团结。 |
|
