【對華政策的範式轉移】絕對是歷史性講話.
#成萬字 #萬言書 #頹譯都譯死人
----小弟頹譯------
蓬佩奧:謝謝。謝謝你們。州長,您的慷慨介紹。的確是這樣:當您在那個體育館裡散步時,說出“蓬佩奧”的名字,人們就會耳語。因為,我有一個兄弟,Mark,他是一個非常好,一位非常出色的籃球運動員。
請為藍鷹榮譽衛隊(Blue Eagles Honor Guard)及飛行員Kayla Highsmith下士對國歌的精彩演繹給多一次掌聲如何? (掌聲)
也要感謝Laurie牧師那動人的祈禱,我還要感謝Hugh Hewitt和尼克遜基金會的邀請讓我在這個重要的美國機構發言。很高興能受空軍人員演唱,由海軍陸戰隊介紹,讓個一個陸軍傢伙站在海軍傢伙的房子前面。 (笑聲)(按蓬佩奧曾在美國陸軍服役 )一切都很好。
很榮幸來到Yorba Linda,尼克遜的父親在那裡建立了他出生和成長的房屋。
在這困難時刻,使今天成為可能的尼克遜中心董事會和工作人員,感謝,感謝我和我的團隊使這一天成為可能。
我們很幸運能在觀眾中見到一些特別的嘉賓,包括我認識的Chris Nixon (尼克遜的孫,Christopher Nixon Cox)。我還要感謝Tricia Nixon和Julie Nixon Eisenhower (尼克遜兩位女兒)對這次訪問的支持。
我還想提一提幾位勇敢的中國持不同政見者,他們長途跋涉並出席。其他尊貴的客人-(掌聲)-尊貴的客人,謝謝您的光臨。那些在帳篷下的人,您們必須支付額外的費用(笑)。
以及那些正在觀看直播的人,感謝您的收看。
最後,正如州長所說,我在Santa Ana出生,離這裡不遠。今天有我的姐姐和她的丈夫在聽眾中。謝謝大家的光臨。我敢打賭,您從沒想過我會站在這裡。
我今天的講話是我在一系列中國演講中的第四組講話,我請國家安全顧問Robert O’Brien,聯邦調查局局長Chris Wray和司法部長Barr陪同我發言。
我們有一個非常明確的目標,一個實在的任務。這是在解釋美國與中國關係的不同方面,數十年來這種關係中出現的巨大失衡以及中國共產黨所計劃的霸權。
我們的目標是明確指出,特朗普總統的中國政策正在解決的對美國人的威脅是明顯的,並且我們正確立保障自由的戰略。Robert O’Brien談到了意識形態。聯邦調查局局長Wray談到了間諜活動。司法部長Barr談到了經濟學。現在,我今天的目標是將這一切匯總給美國人民,並詳細說明中國的威脅對我們的經濟,我們的自由,乃至全球自由民主國家的未來的衝擊。
自基辛格(Kissinger)博士秘密訪問中國以來,到明年已經過去了半個世紀,而尼克松總統訪華50週年也就在2022年。
那時世界大不一樣了。
我們以為與中國交往(engagement)將創造一個帶有友好合作前景的美好未來。
但是今天—今天我們仍然戴著口罩,看著疫性的死亡人數仍在增加,因為中共對世界的承諾沒有兌現。我們每天早上都在讀到鎮壓香港和新疆的新聞消息。
我們看到的中國貿易濫用行為的驚人數字使美國失去了工作,並給整個美國經濟帶來了沉重打擊,包括南加州。而且我們正在看著一支越來越強大,甚至更具威脅性的中國軍隊。
從加利福尼亞州到我的家鄉堪薩斯州以及其他地區,我都有著與美國人心中的疑問:從與中國交往至今,美國人民這50年見到了什麼?
領袖們曾說過的中國邁向自由與民主發展的理論是否正確?
這是中國對 "雙贏" 局面的定義嗎?
實際上,從國務卿的角度來看,美國更安全嗎?我們是否有更大的可能為我們自己實現和平,並為我們之後的子孫後代享有和平?
看,我們必須承認一個硬道理。我們必須承認一個硬道理,它將指導我們在未來幾十年中發展,如果我們要擁有一個自由的21世紀,而不是習近平夢想的中國世紀,那麼與中國盲目交往的舊範式坦白說是沒有贏的機會。我們決不能在此繼續,也絕不能重返。
正如特朗普總統已明確指出的那樣,我們需要一項保護美國經濟乃至我們生活方式的戰略。自由世界必須戰勝這一新的暴政。 The free world must triumph over this new tyranny.
現在,在我似乎不太希望拆除尼克遜總統的遺產之前,我想明確地說,他做了當時他認為最適合美國人民的事情,而且他很可能是對的。
他是中國的傑出學生,冷酷的勇士和中國人民的偉大仰慕者,正如我們一樣。
他意識到中國太重要而不能忽視,即使國力由於自身的共產主義野蠻行為而被削弱。這值得尼克遜給予極大的讚譽。
1967年,尼克遜在一篇非常著名的外交事務文章中解釋了他的未來戰略。
他的話是這樣的:他說:“從長遠來看,我們根本無法永遠把中國留在國際大家庭之外……在中國改變之前,世界不會安全。因此,我們的目標是 —在可能的範圍內,我們必須作出影響,而我們的目標應該是促使改變。”
我認為這是整篇文章中的關鍵詞:“促使改變”。
因此,在歷史性的北京之行中,尼克遜總統開始了我們的交住戰略。他崇高地尋求一個更自由,更安全的世界,並希望中國共產黨能兌現這一承諾。
隨著時間的流逝,美國決策者越來越多地認為,隨著中國變得更加繁榮,它將會對外開放,它會在國內變得更加自由,而實際上在國外所面臨的威脅卻越來越小,它將變得更加友好。這一切似乎都是不可避免的。
但是那個必然的時代已經過去了。我們一直在進行的這種交往並沒有帶來尼克遜總統希望所引起的中國內部的變化。事實是,我們的政策以及其他自由國家的政策使中國經濟從衰落得以恢復,但北京反咬了養活它的國際力量。
我們曾向中國公民張開雙臂,只是看到中國共產黨利用我們的自由開放社會。中國派宣傳員參加了我們的新聞發布會,研究中心,高中,大學,甚至參加了家長教師會議。
我們將台灣的朋友邊緣化,後來台灣蓬勃發展為積極的民主國家。
我們給中國共產黨和政權本身以特殊的經濟待遇,只是看到中共堅持以對其人權侵犯保持沉默作為讓西方公司進入中國市場的代價。
前一天,Robert O’Brien大使舉了幾個例子:萬豪,美國航空,達美航空,聯合航空都從其公司網站上刪除了對台灣的提及,以免激怒北京。在荷里活,這裏的不遠處,距離美國創作自由的中心和自命為社會正義的仲裁者,他們的自我審查可說是對中國發展最不利的參考。
公司對CCP的默許也發生在世界各地。
這種企業忠誠度如何運作?奉承會得到獎勵嗎?讓我引述Barr總檢察長在講話。他在上週的一次演講中說:“中國統治者的最終野心不是與美國進行貿易。是要略奪美國。”
中國剝奪了我們寶貴的知識產權和商業機密,損失了在美國各地了數百萬個就業機會。它從美國吸走了供應鏈,然後添加了一個由奴隸制度製成的小工具。
它使世界上主要的水路對國際貿易而言變得不那麼安全。
尼克遜總統曾經說過,他擔心自己通過向中共開放世界而創造了一個“科學怪人”,這正是如此。
現在,有誠信的人可以辯論為什麼自由國家允許這些年來,這些不好的事情發生。也許我們對中國的惡毒的共產主義幼稚,或者在我們在冷戰勝利後變得自大,或者軟弱的資本主義者被北京所說的“和平崛起”所愚昧。
無論出於何種原因—無論出於何種原因,今天的中國在國內都越來越專制,並開始對其他地方的自由作出干預。
特朗普總統說:夠了。
我不認為兩派的人對我今天所說的事實提出異議。但是即使到現在,也有人堅持認為,為了對話而對話。
現在,要明確地說,我們將繼續討論。但是這些對話的意義是不同的。幾週前,我去了檀香山,與楊潔篪見面。
這是同樣的古老故事—說了很多話,但實際上沒有任何改變任何行為的提議。
楊的承諾,就像中共在他面前做出的許多承諾一樣,都是空洞的。我想,他的期望是我會屈服於他們的要求,因為坦率地說,這是許多前任政府所做的。我沒有,特朗普總統也不會。正如O’Brien很好地解釋的那樣,我們必須記住,中共政權是馬克思列寧主義政權。習近平堅信這已破產的極權主義思想。
正是這種意識形態,正是這種意識形態反映了他數十年來對全球共產主義中國霸權的渴望。美國再也不能忽視我們兩國之間的根本政治和意識形態差異,就像中共從來沒有忽視它們一樣。
以我在眾議院情報委員會,然後擔任中央情報局局長,以及擔任美國國務卿兩年多的經驗,使我對這種中央理解成為可能:
唯一的方式 — 真正改變共產主義中國的唯一方法,不是對中國領導人聽其言,而是觀其行。您會看到美國政策對此結論做出了回應。列根總統說,他是在“信任但要核實”的基礎上與蘇聯打交道的。關於中共,我說我們必須"不信任和核查"。 (掌聲)
我們,世界上熱愛自由的國家,必須像尼克遜總統所希望的那樣,促使中國發生變化。我們必須促使中國以更具創造性和果斷性的方式進行變革,因為北京的行動威脅著我們的人民和我們的繁榮。
我們必須首先改變我們的人民和我們的伙伴對中國共產黨的看法。我們必須說實話。我們不能像其他任何國家一樣,把這個假象視為正常國家。
我們知道,與中國進行貿易不像與一個正常的,遵守法律的國家進行貿易。北京威脅將國際協議視為—將協議視為建議,以作為主導全球的渠道。
但是,通過堅持公平條款,就像我們的貿易代表在獲得第一階段貿易協議時所做的那樣,我們可以迫使中國考慮其知識產權盜竊和損害美國工人的政策。
我們也知道,與擁有CCP支持的公司開展業務與與一家加拿大公司開展業務不同。他們不回答獨立委員會的問題,而且其中許多是由國家贊助的,因此無需追求利潤。
華為就是一個很好的例子。我們不再假裝華為是一家無辜的電信公司,它的出現是為了確保您可以和朋友聊天。我們稱其為真正的國家安全威脅,並為採取了相應的行動。
我們也知道,如果我們的公司在中國投資,他們可能會有意或無意地支持共產黨嚴重侵犯人權的行為。
因此,我們的美國財政部和商務部已批准並將那些危害和濫用世界人民最基本權利的中國領導人和實體列入黑名單。多個部門已就商業諮詢機構合作,以確保我們的CEO了解其供應鏈在中國境內的工作。
我們也知道,我們也知道並非所有的中國學生和僱員都只是來這裡賺錢和積累一些知識的普通學生和工人。他們太多人來這裡竊取我們的知識產權並將其帶回自己的國家。司法部和其他機構已對這些罪行進行了嚴厲的懲罰。
我們知道,解放軍也不是正規軍。其目的是維護中國共產黨精英的絕對統治,擴大中國帝國,而不是保護中國人民。
因此,美國國防部加大了工作力度,擴大了在東,南海以及台灣海峽以及整個海峽的航行操作自由。我們還建立了一支太空部隊,以幫助阻止中國對這一最後邊界的侵略。
同樣,坦率地說,我們在美國國務院制定了一套與中國打交道的新政策,推動特朗普總統實現公正與互惠的目標,以改寫幾十年來不斷加劇的失衡。
就在本週,我們宣布關閉在休斯敦的中國領事館,因為它是間諜和知識產權盜竊的樞紐。 (掌聲)
兩週前,我們在南中國海扭轉了過去八年忽略的國際法權益。
我們呼籲中國限制其核能力以適應當今時代的戰略現實。
國務院- 在世界各地,各個層面- 都與中國同行進行了交流,只是要求公平和互惠。
但是我們的方法不只是要變得強硬。那不可能達到我們想要的結果。我們還必須與中國人民互動並賦予他們權力,他們是一個充滿活力,熱愛自由的人民,他們與中國共產黨完全不同。首先是面對面的外交。 (掌聲)
無論我走到哪裡,我都遇到了有才華和勤奮的中國人。我遇過逃離新疆集中營的維吾爾族和哈薩克族。我曾與香港的民主領袖進行了交談,有陳日君樞機到黎智英。兩天前,我在倫敦會見了香港自由戰士羅冠聰。
上個月在我的辦公室裡,我聽到了天安門廣場倖存者的故事。其中之一今天在這裡。王丹是一名關鍵學生,他從未停止為中國人民爭取自由。王先生,請您站起來,以便我們見到您嗎? (掌聲)
今天與我們同在的還有中國民主運動之父魏京生。他在中國的勞改營度過了幾十年的時間。魏先生,你能站起來嗎? (掌聲)
我成長及服役於冷戰時期。如果我學到一件事,共產黨人幾乎總是撒謊。他們告訴我們的最大謊言是,他們認為自己能代表14億被監視,壓迫和害怕說出來的人。
恰恰相反。中共比任何敵人都更擔心中國人民的誠實觀點,失去對權力的控制。
試想一下,如果我們能夠從武漢的醫生那裡聽到他們的來信,並且允許他們對新疫病的爆發發出警報,那麼世界會變得更好—更不用說中國內部的人了。
幾十年來,我們的領袖一直無視,淡化勇敢的中國異見者的話,他們警告過我們所面對之政權。
我們不能再忽略它了。他們與任何人一樣知道我們永遠無法回到現狀。
但是改變中共的舉動並不單單是中國人民的使命。自由國家必須努力捍衛自由。這不是簡單的事情。
但是我有信心我們可以做到。我有信心,因為我們以前做過。我們知道這是怎麼回事。我有信心,因為中共正在重複蘇聯犯下的一些同樣的錯誤-疏遠潛在的盟友,破壞國內外的信任,拒絕財產權和法治。
我有信心。我之所以有信心,是因為我看到其他國家之間的覺醒,他們知道我們無法回到過去,美國亦如是。我從布魯塞爾,悉尼到河內都聽說過。
最重要的是,我相信我們可以捍衛自由,因為自由本身是漂亮的。
看看香港人因中共加強對這個驕傲城市的控制,要移居海外。他們揮舞著美國國旗。
是的,確實有差異。與蘇聯不同,中國已深入融入全球經濟。但是,北京對我們依賴,甚於我們依賴他們。 (掌聲)
瞧,我拒絕相信我們生活在一個不可避免中國的時代,某些陷阱(按:修昔底德陷阱)是預設的,中共至上是未來。我們的方法不是注定失敗的,因為美國正在衰落。正如我在今年早些時候在慕尼黑說的那樣,自由世界仍在勝利的一方。我們只需要相信它,就明白它並為此感到自豪。來自世界各地的人們仍然希望加入開放社會。他們來到這裡學習,來到這里工作,來到這里為家人謀生。他們並不想留在中國。
是時候了。今天很高興來到這裡。這是完美的時機。現在是自由國家採取行動的時候了。並非每個國家都將以同樣的方式對待中國,也不應該。每個國家都必須對如何保護自己的主權,如何保護自己的經濟繁榮以及如何保護自己的理想不受中國共產黨的觸碰而有所了解。
但是我呼籲每個國家的每一個領導人—如美國所先行的—簡單地堅持互惠,堅持中國共產黨的透明度和問責制。
這些簡單而強大的標準將取得很大的成就。太長時間了,我們讓中共制定交往條款,但不再這樣做。自由國家必須定下基調。
我們必須遵循相同的原則。我們必須在沙子上劃出共同的界線,而這不能被中共的討價還價或他們的野蠻沖走。確實,這就是美國最近所做的事情,因為我們一勞永逸地拒絕了中國在南中國海的非法主張,因為我們已敦促各國成為廉潔國家,以免其公民的私人信息落在手裡中國共產黨。我們通過制定標準來做到這一點。
現在,這確實很困難。對於一些小國家來說很難。他們害怕被人欺負。因此,其中一些人根本沒有能力,沒有勇氣暫時與我們站在一起。的確,我們與北約的盟友並未以其對香港的立場站起來,因為他們擔心北京會限制中國市場的准入。這種膽怯會導致歷史性的失敗,我們無法重複。
我們不能重複過去幾年的錯誤。中國面臨的挑戰要求民主國家發揮作用和精力,民主國家包括歐洲,非洲,南美,尤其是印度太平洋地區。
而且,如果我們現在不採取行動,那麼中共最終將侵蝕我們的自由,並顛覆我們的社會努力建立的基於法規的秩序。如果我們現在屈膝,我們孩子的孩子可能會受到中國共產黨的擺佈,中國共產黨的行動是當今自由世界中的主要挑戰。
習近平總書記註定不會永遠在中國內外施暴,除非我們允許
現在,這與圍堵無關。不要相信這策略。這是我們從未遇到過的複雜的新挑戰。蘇聯與自由世界隔絕了。共產主義中國已經在我們的邊界之內。
因此,我們不能獨自面對這一挑戰。聯合國,北約,七國集團國家,二十國集團,我們的經濟,外交和軍事力量合力,如果我們清楚明確地並勇往直前,無疑足以應付這一挑戰。
也許是時候讓志趣相投的國家組成一個新的團體,一個新的民主國家聯盟了。
我們有工具。我知道我們可以做到。現在我們需要意志。引用聖經經文,我問“要警醒禱告,免得陷入試探。你們心靈雖然願意,肉體卻是軟弱的。”
如果自由世界沒有改變 —沒有改變,共產主義中國一定會改變我們。無法因為舒適或便利而返回到過去的做法。
確保我們脫離中國共產黨的自由是我們這個時代的使命,而美國完全有能力領導它,
因為我們的建國原則為我們提供了這一機會。正如我上週在費城站立時所看到的那樣,注視著獨立廳,我們的國家建立在所有人類都擁有不可剝奪的某些權利的前提下。
確保這些權利是我們政府的工作。這是一個簡單而有力的真理。它使我們成為全世界人民的自由燈塔,包括中國境內的人。
確實,尼克遜在1967年寫道“除非中國改變,否則世界是不安全的”是正確的。現在我們該聽他的話了。
今天的危機已經明確了。
今天,覺醒正在發生。
今天,自由世界必須作出回應。
我們永遠無法回到過去。
願上帝保佑你們每個人。
願上帝保佑中國人民。'
願上帝保佑美利堅合眾國人民。
謝謝你們。(掌聲)
Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you, Governor, for that very, very generous introduction. It is true: When you walk in that gym and you say the name “Pompeo,” there is a whisper. I had a brother, Mark, who was really good – a really good basketball player.
And how about another round of applause for the Blue Eagles Honor Guard and Senior Airman Kayla Highsmith, and her wonderful rendition of the national anthem? (Applause.)
Thank you, too, to Pastor Laurie for that moving prayer, and I want to thank Hugh Hewitt and the Nixon Foundation for your invitation to speak at this important American institution. It was great to be sung to by an Air Force person, introduced by a Marine, and they let the Army guy in in front of the Navy guy’s house. (Laughter.) It’s all good.
It’s an honor to be here in Yorba Linda, where Nixon’s father built the house in which he was born and raised.
To all the Nixon Center board and staff who made today possible – it’s difficult in these times – thanks for making this day possible for me and for my team.
We are blessed to have some incredibly special people in the audience, including Chris, who I’ve gotten to know – Chris Nixon. I also want to thank Tricia Nixon and Julie Nixon Eisenhower for their support of this visit as well.
I want to recognize several courageous Chinese dissidents who have joined us here today and made a long trip.
And to all the other distinguished guests – (applause) – to all the other distinguished guests, thank you for being here. For those of you who got under the tent, you must have paid extra.
And those of you watching live, thank you for tuning in.
And finally, as the governor mentioned, I was born here in Santa Ana, not very far from here. I’ve got my sister and her husband in the audience today. Thank you all for coming out. I bet you never thought that I’d be standing up here.
My remarks today are the fourth set of remarks in a series of China speeches that I asked National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien, FBI Director Chris Wray, and the Attorney General Barr to deliver alongside me.
We had a very clear purpose, a real mission. It was to explain the different facets of America’s relationship with China, the massive imbalances in that relationship that have built up over decades, and the Chinese Communist Party’s designs for hegemony.
Our goal was to make clear that the threats to Americans that President Trump’s China policy aims to address are clear and our strategy for securing those freedoms established.
Ambassador O’Brien spoke about ideology. FBI Director Wray talked about espionage. Attorney General Barr spoke about economics. And now my goal today is to put it all together for the American people and detail what the China threat means for our economy, for our liberty, and indeed for the future of free democracies around the world.
Next year marks half a century since Dr. Kissinger’s secret mission to China, and the 50th anniversary of President Nixon’s trip isn’t too far away in 2022.
The world was much different then.
We imagined engagement with China would produce a future with bright promise of comity and cooperation.
But today – today we’re all still wearing masks and watching the pandemic’s body count rise because the CCP failed in its promises to the world. We’re reading every morning new headlines of repression in Hong Kong and in Xinjiang.
We’re seeing staggering statistics of Chinese trade abuses that cost American jobs and strike enormous blows to the economies all across America, including here in southern California. And we’re watching a Chinese military that grows stronger and stronger, and indeed more menacing.
I’ll echo the questions ringing in the hearts and minds of Americans from here in California to my home state of Kansas and beyond:
What do the American people have to show now 50 years on from engagement with China?
Did the theories of our leaders that proposed a Chinese evolution towards freedom and democracy prove to be true?
Is this China’s definition of a win-win situation?
And indeed, centrally, from the Secretary of State’s perspective, is America safer? Do we have a greater likelihood of peace for ourselves and peace for the generations which will follow us?
Look, we have to admit a hard truth. We must admit a hard truth that should guide us in the years and decades to come, that if we want to have a free 21st century, and not the Chinese century of which Xi Jinping dreams, the old paradigm of blind engagement with China simply won’t get it done. We must not continue it and we must not return to it.
As President Trump has made very clear, we need a strategy that protects the American economy, and indeed our way of life. The free world must triumph over this new tyranny.
Now, before I seem too eager to tear down President Nixon’s legacy, I want to be clear that he did what he believed was best for the American people at the time, and he may well have been right.
He was a brilliant student of China, a fierce cold warrior, and a tremendous admirer of the Chinese people, just as I think we all are.
He deserves enormous credit for realizing that China was too important to be ignored, even when the nation was weakened because of its own self-inflicted communist brutality.
In 1967, in a very famous Foreign Affairs article, Nixon explained his future strategy. Here’s what he said:
He said, “Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside of the family of nations…The world cannot be safe until China changes. Thus, our aim – to the extent we can, we must influence events. Our goal should be to induce change.”
And I think that’s the key phrase from the entire article: “to induce change.”
So, with that historic trip to Beijing, President Nixon kicked off our engagement strategy. He nobly sought a freer and safer world, and he hoped that the Chinese Communist Party would return that commitment.
As time went on, American policymakers increasingly presumed that as China became more prosperous, it would open up, it would become freer at home, and indeed present less of a threat abroad, it’d be friendlier. It all seemed, I am sure, so inevitable.
But that age of inevitability is over. The kind of engagement we have been pursuing has not brought the kind of change inside of China that President Nixon had hoped to induce.
The truth is that our policies – and those of other free nations – resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it.
We opened our arms to Chinese citizens, only to see the Chinese Communist Party exploit our free and open society. China sent propagandists into our press conferences, our research centers, our high-schools, our colleges, and even into our PTA meetings.
We marginalized our friends in Taiwan, which later blossomed into a vigorous democracy.
We gave the Chinese Communist Party and the regime itself special economic treatment, only to see the CCP insist on silence over its human rights abuses as the price of admission for Western companies entering China.
Ambassador O’Brien ticked off a few examples just the other day: Marriott, American Airlines, Delta, United all removed references to Taiwan from their corporate websites, so as not to anger Beijing.
In Hollywood, not too far from here – the epicenter of American creative freedom, and self-appointed arbiters of social justice – self-censors even the most mildly unfavorable reference to China.
This corporate acquiescence to the CCP happens all over the world, too.
And how has this corporate fealty worked? Is its flattery rewarded? I’ll give you a quote from the speech that General Barr gave, Attorney General Barr. In a speech last week, he said that “The ultimate ambition of China’s rulers isn’t to trade with the United States. It is to raid the United States.”
China ripped off our prized intellectual property and trade secrets, causing millions of jobs[1] all across America.
It sucked supply chains away from America, and then added a widget made of slave labor.
It made the world’s key waterways less safe for international commerce.
President Nixon once said he feared he had created a “Frankenstein” by opening the world to the CCP, and here we are.
Now, people of good faith can debate why free nations allowed these bad things to happen for all these years. Perhaps we were naive about China’s virulent strain of communism, or triumphalist after our victory in the Cold War, or cravenly capitalist, or hoodwinked by Beijing’s talk of a “peaceful rise.”
Whatever the reason – whatever the reason, today China is increasingly authoritarian at home, and more aggressive in its hostility to freedom everywhere else.
And President Trump has said: enough.
I don’t think many people on either side of the aisle dispute the facts that I have laid out today. But even now, some are insisting that we preserve the model of dialogue for dialogue’s sake.
Now, to be clear, we’ll keep on talking. But the conversations are different these days. I traveled to Honolulu now just a few weeks back to meet with Yang Jiechi.
It was the same old story – plenty of words, but literally no offer to change any of the behaviors.
Yang’s promises, like so many the CCP made before him, were empty. His expectations, I surmise, were that I’d cave to their demands, because frankly this is what too many prior administrations have done. I didn’t, and President Trump will not either.
As Ambassador O’Brien explained so well, we have to keep in mind that the CCP regime is a Marxist-Leninist regime. General Secretary Xi Jinping is a true believer in a bankrupt totalitarian ideology.
It’s this ideology, it’s this ideology that informs his decades-long desire for global hegemony of Chinese communism. America can no longer ignore the fundamental political and ideological differences between our countries, just as the CCP has never ignored them.
My experience in the House Intelligence Committee, and then as director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and my now two-plus years as America’s Secretary of State have led me to this central understanding:
That the only way – the only way to truly change communist China is to act not on the basis of what Chinese leaders say, but how they behave. And you can see American policy responding to this conclusion. President Reagan said that he dealt with the Soviet Union on the basis of “trust but verify.” When it comes to the CCP, I say we must distrust and verify. (Applause.)
We, the freedom-loving nations of the world, must induce China to change, just as President Nixon wanted. We must induce China to change in more creative and assertive ways, because Beijing’s actions threaten our people and our prosperity.
We must start by changing how our people and our partners perceive the Chinese Communist Party. We have to tell the truth. We can’t treat this incarnation of China as a normal country, just like any other.
We know that trading with China is not like trading with a normal, law-abiding nation. Beijing threatens international agreements as – treats international suggestions as – or agreements as suggestions, as conduits for global dominance.
But by insisting on fair terms, as our trade representative did when he secured our phase one trade deal, we can force China to reckon with its intellectual property theft and policies that harmed American workers.
We know too that doing business with a CCP-backed company is not the same as doing business with, say, a Canadian company. They don’t answer to independent boards, and many of them are state-sponsored and so have no need to pursue profits.
A good example is Huawei. We stopped pretending Huawei is an innocent telecommunications company that’s just showing up to make sure you can talk to your friends. We’ve called it what it is – a true national security threat – and we’ve taken action accordingly.
We know too that if our companies invest in China, they may wittingly or unwittingly support the Communist Party’s gross human rights violations.
Our Departments of Treasury and Commerce have thus sanctioned and blacklisted Chinese leaders and entities that are harming and abusing the most basic rights for people all across the world. Several agencies have worked together on a business advisory to make certain our CEOs are informed of how their supply chains are behaving inside of China.
We know too, we know too that not all Chinese students and employees are just normal students and workers that are coming here to make a little bit of money and to garner themselves some knowledge. Too many of them come here to steal our intellectual property and to take this back to their country.
The Department of Justice and other agencies have vigorously pursued punishment for these crimes.
We know that the People’s Liberation Army is not a normal army, too. Its purpose is to uphold the absolute rule of the Chinese Communist Party elites and expand a Chinese empire, not to protect the Chinese people.
And so our Department of Defense has ramped up its efforts, freedom of navigation operations out and throughout the East and South China Seas, and in the Taiwan Strait as well. And we’ve created a Space Force to help deter China from aggression on that final frontier.
And so too, frankly, we’ve built out a new set of policies at the State Department dealing with China, pushing President Trump’s goals for fairness and reciprocity, to rewrite the imbalances that have grown over decades.
Just this week, we announced the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston because it was a hub of spying and intellectual property theft. (Applause.)
We reversed, two weeks ago, eight years of cheek-turning with respect to international law in the South China Sea.
We’ve called on China to conform its nuclear capabilities to the strategic realities of our time.
And the State Department – at every level, all across the world – has engaged with our Chinese counterparts simply to demand fairness and reciprocity.
But our approach can’t just be about getting tough. That’s unlikely to achieve the outcome that we desire. We must also engage and empower the Chinese people – a dynamic, freedom-loving people who are completely distinct from the Chinese Communist Party.
That begins with in-person diplomacy. (Applause.) I’ve met Chinese men and women of great talent and diligence wherever I go.
I’ve met with Uyghurs and ethnic Kazakhs who escaped Xinjiang’s concentration camps. I’ve talked with Hong Kong’s democracy leaders, from Cardinal Zen to Jimmy Lai. Two days ago in London, I met with Hong Kong freedom fighter Nathan Law.
And last month in my office, I heard the stories of Tiananmen Square survivors. One of them is here today.
Wang Dan was a key student who has never stopped fighting for freedom for the Chinese people. Mr. Wang, will you please stand so that we may recognize you? (Applause.)
Also with us today is the father of the Chinese democracy movement, Wei Jingsheng. He spent decades in Chinese labor camps for his advocacy. Mr. Wei, will you please stand? (Applause.)
I grew up and served my time in the Army during the Cold War. And if there is one thing I learned, communists almost always lie. The biggest lie that they tell is to think that they speak for 1.4 billion people who are surveilled, oppressed, and scared to speak out.
Quite the contrary. The CCP fears the Chinese people’s honest opinions more than any foe, and save for losing their own grip on power, they have reason – no reason to.
Just think how much better off the world would be – not to mention the people inside of China – if we had been able to hear from the doctors in Wuhan and they’d been allowed to raise the alarm about the outbreak of a new and novel virus.
For too many decades, our leaders have ignored, downplayed the words of brave Chinese dissidents who warned us about the nature of the regime we’re facing.
And we can’t ignore it any longer. They know as well as anyone that we can never go back to the status quo.
But changing the CCP’s behavior cannot be the mission of the Chinese people alone. Free nations have to work to defend freedom. It’s the furthest thing from easy.
But I have faith we can do it. I have faith because we’ve done it before. We know how this goes.
I have faith because the CCP is repeating some of the same mistakes that the Soviet Union made – alienating potential allies, breaking trust at home and abroad, rejecting property rights and predictable rule of law.
I have faith. I have faith because of the awakening I see among other nations that know we can’t go back to the past in the same way that we do here in America. I’ve heard this from Brussels, to Sydney, to Hanoi.
And most of all, I have faith we can defend freedom because of the sweet appeal of freedom itself.
Look at the Hong Kongers clamoring to emigrate abroad as the CCP tightens its grip on that proud city. They wave American flags.
It’s true, there are differences. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is deeply integrated into the global economy. But Beijing is more dependent on us than we are on them. (Applause.)
Look, I reject the notion that we’re living in an age of inevitability, that some trap is pre-ordained, that CCP supremacy is the future. Our approach isn’t destined to fail because America is in decline. As I said in Munich earlier this year, the free world is still winning. We just need to believe it and know it and be proud of it. People from all over the world still want to come to open societies. They come here to study, they come here to work, they come here to build a life for their families. They’re not desperate to settle in China.
It’s time. It’s great to be here today. The timing is perfect. It’s time for free nations to act. Not every nation will approach China in the same way, nor should they. Every nation will have to come to its own understanding of how to protect its own sovereignty, how to protect its own economic prosperity, and how to protect its ideals from the tentacles of the Chinese Communist Party.
But I call on every leader of every nation to start by doing what America has done – to simply insist on reciprocity, to insist on transparency and accountability from the Chinese Communist Party. It’s a cadre of rulers that are far from homogeneous.
And these simple and powerful standards will achieve a great deal. For too long we let the CCP set the terms of engagement, but no longer. Free nations must set the tone. We must operate on the same principles.
We have to draw common lines in the sand that cannot be washed away by the CCP’s bargains or their blandishments. Indeed, this is what the United States did recently when we rejected China’s unlawful claims in the South China Sea once and for all, as we have urged countries to become Clean Countries so that their citizens’ private information doesn’t end up in the hand of the Chinese Communist Party. We did it by setting standards.
Now, it’s true, it’s difficult. It’s difficult for some small countries. They fear being picked off. Some of them for that reason simply don’t have the ability, the courage to stand with us for the moment.
Indeed, we have a NATO ally of ours that hasn’t stood up in the way that it needs to with respect to Hong Kong because they fear Beijing will restrict access to China’s market. This is the kind of timidity that will lead to historic failure, and we can’t repeat it.
We cannot repeat the mistakes of these past years. The challenge of China demands exertion, energy from democracies – those in Europe, those in Africa, those in South America, and especially those in the Indo-Pacific region.
And if we don’t act now, ultimately the CCP will erode our freedoms and subvert the rules-based order that our societies have worked so hard to build. If we bend the knee now, our children’s children may be at the mercy of the Chinese Communist Party, whose actions are the primary challenge today in the free world.
General Secretary Xi is not destined to tyrannize inside and outside of China forever, unless we allow it.
Now, this isn’t about containment. Don’t buy that. It’s about a complex new challenge that we’ve never faced before. The USSR was closed off from the free world. Communist China is already within our borders.
So we can’t face this challenge alone. The United Nations, NATO, the G7 countries, the G20, our combined economic, diplomatic, and military power is surely enough to meet this challenge if we direct it clearly and with great courage.
Maybe it’s time for a new grouping of like-minded nations, a new alliance of democracies.
We have the tools. I know we can do it. Now we need the will. To quote scripture, I ask is “our spirit willing but our flesh weak?”
If the free world doesn’t change – doesn’t change, communist China will surely change us. There can’t be a return to the past practices because they’re comfortable or because they’re convenient.
Securing our freedoms from the Chinese Communist Party is the mission of our time, and America is perfectly positioned to lead it because our founding principles give us that opportunity.
As I explained in Philadelphia last week, standing, staring at Independence Hall, our nation was founded on the premise that all human beings possess certain rights that are unalienable.
And it’s our government’s job to secure those rights. It is a simple and powerful truth. It’s made us a beacon of freedom for people all around the world, including people inside of China.
Indeed, Richard Nixon was right when he wrote in 1967 that “the world cannot be safe until China changes.” Now it’s up to us to heed his words.
Today the danger is clear.
And today the awakening is happening.
Today the free world must respond.
We can never go back to the past.
May God bless each of you.
May God bless the Chinese people.
And may God bless the people of the United States of America.
Thank you all.
(Applause.)
同時也有1部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過95萬的網紅sasakiasahi,也在其Youtube影片中提到,The Olympics are starting soon! I'm looking forward to the opening ceremony first! In Japan the opening ceremony starts at 5 AM, so I'll have to wak...
「national flags of all countries」的推薦目錄:
- 關於national flags of all countries 在 馮智政 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於national flags of all countries 在 堅離地城:沈旭暉國際生活台 Simon's Glos World Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於national flags of all countries 在 Firdaus Wong Wai Hung Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於national flags of all countries 在 sasakiasahi Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於national flags of all countries 在 105 Country Flags stock vector. Illustration of artistic - 5862535 的評價
national flags of all countries 在 堅離地城:沈旭暉國際生活台 Simon's Glos World Facebook 的精選貼文
🇩🇰 這是一篇深度報導,來自歐洲現存最古老的報紙:丹麥Weekendavisen,題目是從香港抗爭運動、香港聯繫加泰羅尼亞的集會,前瞻全球大城市的「永久革命」。一篇報導訪問了世界各地大量學者,我也在其中,雖然只是每人一句,加在一起,卻有了很完整的圖像。
以下為英譯:
Protest! The demonstrations in Hong Kong were just the beginning. Now there are unrest in big cities from Baghdad to Barcelona. Perhaps the stage is set for something that could look like a permanent revolution in the world's big cities.
A world on the barricades
At the end of October, an hour after dark, a group of young protesters gathered at the Chater Garden Park in Hong Kong. Some of them wore large red and yellow flags. The talk began and the applause filled the warm evening air. There were slogans of independence, and demands of self-determination - from Spain. For the protest was in sympathy with the Catalan independence movement.
At the same time, a group of Catalan protesters staged a protest in front of the Chinese Consulate in Barcelona in favor of Hong Kong's hope for more democracy. The message was not to be mistaken: We are in the same boat. Or, as Joshua Wong, one of the leading members of the Hong Kong protest movement, told the Catalan news agency: "The people of Hong Kong and Catalonia both deserve the right to decide their own destiny."
For much of 2019, Hong Kong's streets have been ravaged by fierce protests and a growing desperation on both sides, with escalating violence and vandalism ensuing. But what, do observers ask, if Hong Kong is not just a Chinese crisis, but a warning of anger that is about to break out globally?
Each week brings new turmoil from an unexpected edge. In recent days, attention has focused on Chile. Here, more than 20 people have lost their lives in unrest, which has mainly been about unequal distribution of economic goods. Before then, the unrest has hit places as diverse as Lebanon and the Czech Republic, Bolivia and Algeria, Russia and Sudan.
With such a geographical spread, it is difficult to bring the protests to any sort of common denominator, but they all reflect a form of powerlessness so acute that traditional ways of speaking do not seem adequate.
Hardy Merriman, head of research at the International Center for Nonviolent Conflict in Washington, is not in doubt that it is a real wave of protest and that we have not seen the ending yet.
"I have been researching non-violent resistance for 17 years, and to me it is obvious that there are far more popular protest movements now than before. Often the protests have roots in the way political systems work. Elsewhere, it is about welfare and economic inequality or both. The two sets of factors are often related, ”he says.
Economic powerlessness
Hong Kong is a good example of this. The desire among the majority of Hong Kong's seven million residents to maintain an independent political identity vis-à-vis the People's Republic of China is well known, but the resentment of the streets is also fueled by a sense of economic powerlessness. Hong Kong is one of the most unequal communities in the world, and especially the uneven access to the real estate market is causing a stir.
According to Lee Chun-wing, a sociologist at Hong Kong Polytechnic University, the turmoil in the city is not just facing Beijing, but also expressing a daunting showdown with the neoliberal economy, which should diminish the state's role and give the market more influence, but in its real form often ends with the brutal arbitrariness of jungle law.
'The many protests show that neoliberalism is unable to instill hope in many. And as one of the world's most neoliberal cities, Hong Kong is no exception. While the protests here are, of course, primarily political, there is no doubt that social polarization and economic inequality make many young people not afraid to participate in more radical protests and do not care whether they are accused of damage economic growth, 'he says.
The turmoil is now so extensive that it can no longer be dismissed as a coincidence. Something special and significant is happening. As UN Secretary General António Guterres put it last week, it would be wrong to stare blindly at the superficial differences between the factors that get people on the streets.
“There are also common features that are recurring across the continents and should force us to reflect and respond. It is clear that there is growing distrust between the people and the political elites and growing threats to the social contract. The world is struggling with the negative consequences of globalization and the new technologies that have led to growing inequality in individual societies, "he told reporters in New York.
Triggered by trifles
In many cases, the riots have been triggered by questions that may appear almost trivial on the surface. In Chile, there was an increase in the price of the capital's subway equivalent to 30 Danish cents, while in Lebanon there were reports of a tax on certain services on the Internet. In both places, it was just the reason why the people have been able to express a far more fundamental dissatisfaction.
In a broad sense, there are two situations where a population is rebelling, says Paul Almeida, who teaches sociology at the University of California, Merced. The first is when more opportunities suddenly open up and conditions get better. People are getting hungry for more and trying to pressure their politicians to give even more concessions.
“But then there is also the mobilization that takes place when people get worse. That seems to be the overall theme of the current protests, even in Hong Kong. People are concerned about various kinds of threats they face. It may be the threat of inferior economic conditions, or it may be a more political threat of erosion of rights. But the question is why it is happening right now. That's the 10,000-kroner issue, ”says Almeida.
Almeida, who has just published the book Social Movements: The Structure of Social Mobilization, even gives a possible answer. A growing authoritarian, anti-democratic flow has spread across the continents and united rulers in all countries, and among others it is the one that has now triggered a reaction in the peoples.
“There is a tendency for more use of force by the state power. If we look at the death toll in Latin America, they are high considering that the countries are democracies. This kind of violence is not usually expected in democratic regimes in connection with protests. It is an interesting trend and may be related to the authoritarian flow that is underway worldwide. It's worth watching, 'he says.
The authoritarian wave
Politologists Anna Lürhmann and Staffan Lindberg from the University of Gothenburg describe in a paper published earlier this year a "third autocratic wave." Unlike previous waves, for example, in the years before World War II, when democracy was beaten under great external drama , the new wave is characterized by creeping. It happens little by little - in countries like Turkey, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Hungary and Russia - at such a slow pace that you barely notice it.
Even old-fashioned autocrats nowadays understand the language of democracy - the only acceptable lingua franca in politics - and so the popular reaction does not happen very often when it becomes clear at once that the electoral process itself is not sufficient to secure democratic conditions. Against this backdrop, Kenneth Chan, a politician at Hong Kong Baptist University, sees the recent worldwide wave of unrest as an expression of the legitimacy crisis of the democratic regimes.
“People have become more likely to take the initiative and take part in direct actions because they feel that they have not made the changes they had hoped for through the elections. In fact, the leaders elected by the peoples are perceived as undermining the institutional guarantees of citizens' security, freedom, welfare and rights. As a result, over the past decade, we have seen more democracies reduced to semi-democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes, ”he says.
"Therefore, we should also not be surprised by the new wave of resistance from the people. On the surface, the spark may be a relatively innocent or inconsiderate decision by the leadership, but people's anger quickly turns to what they see as the cause of the democratic deroute, that is, an arrogant and selfish leadership, a weakened democratic control, a dysfunctional civil society. who are no longer able to speak on behalf of the people. ”The world is changing. Anthony Ince, a cardiff at Cardiff University who has researched urban urban unrest, sees the uprisings as the culmination of long-term nagging discontent and an almost revolutionary situation where new can arise.
"The wider context is that the dominant world order - the global neoliberalism that has dominated since the 1980s - is under pressure from a number of sides, creating both uncertainty and at the same time the possibility of change. People may feel that we are in a period of uncertainty, confusion, anxiety, but perhaps also hope, ”he says.
Learning from each other.
Apart from mutual assurances of solidarity the protest movements in between, there does not appear to be any kind of coordination. But it may not be necessary either. In a time of social media, learning from each other's practices is easy, says Simon Shen, a University of Hong Kong political scientist.
“They learn from each other at the tactical level. Protesters in Hong Kong have seen what happened in Ukraine through YouTube, and now protesters in Catalonia and Lebanon are taking lessons from Hong Kong. It's reminiscent of 1968, when baby boomers around the globe were inspired by an alternative ideology to break down rigid hierarchies, 'he says.
But just as the protest movements can learn from each other, the same goes for their opponents. According to Harvard political scientist Erica Chenoweth, Russia has been particularly active in trying to establish cooperation with other authoritarian regimes, which feel threatened by riots in the style of the "color revolutions" on the periphery of the old Soviet empire at the turn of the century.
"It has resulted in joint efforts between Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Venezuelan, Belarusian, Syrian and other national authorities to develop, systematize and report on techniques and practices that have proved useful in trying to contain such threats," writes Chenoweth in an article in the journal Global Responsibility to Protect.
Max Fisher and Amanda Taub, commentators at the New York Times, point to the social media as a double-edged sword. Not only are Twitter and Facebook powerful weapons in the hands of tech-savvy autocrats. They are also of questionable value to the protesting grass roots. With WhatsApp and other new technologies, it is possible to mobilize large numbers of interested and almost-interested participants in collective action. But they quickly fall apart again.
The volatile affiliation is one of the reasons why, according to a recent survey, politically motivated protests today only succeed in reaching their targets in 30 percent of cases. A generation ago, the success rate was 70 percent. Therefore, unrest often recurs every few years, and they last longer, as Hong Kong is an example of. Perhaps the scene is set for something that might resemble a permanent revolution in the world's big cities - a kind of background noise that other residents will eventually just get used to.
"Since there is still no obvious alternative to neoliberalism, the polarization that led to the protests initially will probably continue to apply," says Lee of Hong Kong Polytechnic University. "At the same time, this means that the anger and frustration will continue to rumble in society."
national flags of all countries 在 Firdaus Wong Wai Hung Facebook 的最佳貼文
[MRM Reply To FMT's Reader Comment]
Dear Mr. Ravinder Singh
I begin with the greetings of peace and Salam.
My name is Firdaus Wong and I am the person of whom you referred to in your article "Defying one's religious teachings to belittle another's".
First of all, as Muslims, we are taught in the Qur'an that, if we receive news from a person who errs, we should investigate and clarify it first, lest we may end up inadvertently harming others in our ignorance. (Refer to chapter 49:hujaraat, Verse 6). So it would have been a much more appropriate measure and a better conduct for us to have a decent conversation and clarified my point and Dr. Zakir Naik's, instead of posting a public article on Free Malaysia Today, immediately jumping to the erroneous conclusion and false accusation that I have defended an individual who defied his own religion.
In today's age of social media and email, we live in a world today that communication is easy and rather effortless, that it would have been much civilized and easier to contact me in person instead of releasing a such controversial and derogatory article.
Regardless, what's done is done, and moving forward, I write to you with the intent of correcting and clarifying the errors made in your writings; in full acknowledgement and respect that you write the article in sincere intent of clarifying the truth, and not a mere cheap attempt at riding on the bandwagon of Dr Zakir Naik's current popularity just to gain public attention and likes.
What you have said regarding the teachings of Islam, that there is no compulsion in religion, and that we should not belittle others, is exactly correct.
In the Quran chapter 2:Al-Baqarah Verse 256 Allah tells us "there is no compulsion in calling others to religion", and in chapter 49:Al-Hujaraat, chapter 11, Muslims are warned never to scoff and look down on others - "O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How evil is it, to insult one's brother after having Faith [i.e. to call your Muslim brother (a faithful believer) as: "O sinner", or "O wicked", etc.]. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed those who have evil"
Having said that, Dr. Zakir Naik has never belittled or scorned other religions, and neither has he forced others to join the religion of islam. Your article itself has failed to provide any evidence to substantiate this claim.
In fact, if you have watched his videos, when people convert to islam in his public events, it is out of their own sincere willingness. Being a man of integrity, I am sure you have seen at least some of his videos on YouTube, and perhaps have some proof to substantiate your claims.
When Dr Zakir mentions that God does not have son, he quotes it directly from the Qur'an. So how can you say he defies the Qur'an by quoting directly from it?
Your own statement has defied and contradicted your own logic.
Unless, what you are actually trying to say is that, the Qur'an itself is taking negatively about other religions and that islam itself is a bad religion for preaching this negativity.
And where, in his quoting of these characteristics of God, does he speak of in a belittling, negative or derogatory manner of other religions?
What Dr. Zakir Naik does, as with the obligation of every Muslim, is simply promote the religion of Islam transparently as how God has Revealed in His Final, undistorted Revelation, the Holy Qur'an, and through the teachings of His Final Messenger, Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. He does this in full respect of other religions, quoting from their own religious scriptures on what their true teachings are, not simply what their culture or tradition dictates. He never makes derogatory remarks on others, in the same way that, if we were to clarify our country's Laws to other countries which contradict what our country has legislated, we never did that with the intent of belittling or degrading their Law, simply stating our differences and an attempt to convince the other party that perhaps our point may be stronger and worthy of consideration to be implemented. But if you are not convinced and still feel your law is more worthy of implementation, and that you wish to remain in your ways, then by all means, I will not penalize or disrespect you - and hence what is meant by "there is no compulsion", and "to you, your religion, and to me mine".
But this does not negate our duty to propagate and promote the message of Islam.
As Muslims we propagate islam, because we are passionate about our religion and what we are convinced of as the Truth, because that gives us happiness and contentment in this life and a positive outlook on the life to come. And in knowing this beautiful way of life, it would be utterly selfish for us to reserve this message to ourselves, and hence we propagate the religion islam as we wish for others the same goodness that we have been blessed with, and that is why we are commanded by Allah not to be stingy of this faith :
"Invite mankind to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom and fair preaching, and argue with them in a way that is better." (Chapter 16:An-Nahl, Verse 125)
Your claims that "Zakir seems to have come on a political mission to get PAS and Umno to form a coalition" is completely baseless, speculative and provocative. You have no right to judge his intent as political, and this statement seems to be an unprofessional attempt of character assassination to instigate undeserved hatred against Dr Zakir.
When Dr Zakir makes the claim that it is better for them to form a coalition, this is not with political intent, rather reiterating the beautiful unity and harmony God asks the Muslims to achieve, to be United and cooperate on the terms of faith and not the terms of flags, borders, political parties or organizations.
"And hold tightly, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah (i.e. this Quran, this religion), and be not divided among yourselves, and remember Allah's Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together (through faith)" (Chapter 3:al imran, Verse 103)
A HOUSE NOT WELL KEPT?
Regarding your statement,
Shouldn’t the pious Muslim be more concerned over his brethren who are not following the teachings of the Quran and go on a jihad to bring them back to the right path instead of trying to get more people to convert to Islam?
Simple logic: If your house is not well kept, how are you going to make it well kept by bringing more “property” into it and strewing it all over the place?
Firstly it is quite apparent by your statement that you are not aware of the multitude Islamic initiatives and organizations currently in existence and in operation, both in the country and globally - all in the intent of continuously educating, correcting ourselves and helping each other towards righteousness. Thousands, millions of Muslims collaborate and benefit each other through these initiatives.
Having said that, This does not negate our obligation to propagate the religion and expand ourselves. Rather, both efforts come hand in hand.
Mr Ravinder, as an educated person I'm sure you know, an organization that does not expand itself, is doomed for failure. So should a company stop expanding just because it has a few troubled employees? Should a country stop scientific advancement and research because many of its citizens are lacking in scientific knowledge?
But the reality is, the Muslims, just like any other organization, no matter how excellent or perfect our self-improvement initiatives are, there will always be shortcomings in individuals, and it is the nature that God created us differently as a test to ourselves and to others.
"It does not matter if God has a son or not"
You speak of our religion as an outsider, without proof. On the contrary, referring to our Qur'an, it DOES matter; in the teachings of Islam, the trait of having a son is a sign of imperfection that is not befitting of the Majesty and Perfection of God.
"They say: God has begotten a son! Glory be to Him: He is the Self-sufficient: His is what is in the heavens and what is in the earth; you have no authority for this; do you say against Allah what you do not know? Say: Those who forge a lie against Allah shall never be successful." (Chapter 10:Yunus, Verse 68-69).
"Don’t ask others to partake of your religion by promising them the joys of heaven and threatening them with the fires of hell."
Well, Mr Ravinder, this is essentially the message of the Qur'an, not the personal whims of Dr Zakir Naik. Mr Ravinder, for the benefit of myself and the beloved Malaysian readers of FMT, please clarify : are you trying to tell Muslims to stop following the commandments of our own religion? Are you challenging the reference of the country's official religion? Are you hypocritically belittling the official religion of the soil which you live in?
"Nobody has gone to heaven or hell and come back to tell about these places. As such, all talk about heaven and hell is hearsay, and hearsay carries no weight."
Mr Ravinder, by your statement here you have demonstrated a lack of understanding in the purpose of revelation. What are books of revelation? Why do books of revelation exist?
Books of revelation are divine scriptures revealed from God Almighty to help give guidance to mankind; as the Creator, He Knows human beings more than they know themselves and hence Sends Revelation to guide mankind to the truth according to His Wisdom. Of all books of Revelation, the final and undistorted one is the Qur'an. Hence it is part of Muslim faith to take the Qur'an as undisputed truth from the Creator, affirmed by reason, rational thinking, and scientific research. And it is within this definite proof, that the existence of heaven and hell is substantiated and proven, by proof of testimony.
Hence the implications of your claim that these beliefs as "heresay" is in fact an attack on islam, that our beliefs are false and based on speculation without basis, which again as I mentioned earlier, is a blatant attack on the official national religion of our country.
I find it ironic that your article emphasizes on defiance and belittling of others, when your article actually implicated belittling Dr Zakir Naik, Muslims and the religion of Islam in general, and defies the customs of our national religion.
In conclusion, it is with these messages therefore, Mr Ravinder, that you should see that your article is false and only serves to stir controversy, provocation and an attack on Islam, and not just the individual person of Dr Zakir Naik. It is with this also I request this article to be deleted, and a public apology issued on behalf of your good self and another apology on behalf of FMT for releasing such provocative and derogatory articles.
When all is said and done however, I continue to respect you as a human being and humbly request we meet in person to discuss this as civilized men in seeking the truth.
Thank you for your time; and may God Guide us all the Truth and keep us steadfast and sincere on the Path of righteousness.
national flags of all countries 在 sasakiasahi Youtube 的最讚貼文
The Olympics are starting soon!
I'm looking forward to the opening ceremony first!
In Japan the opening ceremony starts at 5 AM, so I'll have to wake up early to watch it.
Of course, I'm looking forward to watching all of the different competitions, but what made me realize how wonderful it is for people around the world to enjoy something together was being able to make videos on YouTube and being able to feel closer to everyone, and that has made that feeling stronger.
So in that way, I'm truly grateful to all of you for all of the warm comments and support that you always give me.
So for that reason, I'm hoping that Japan will be able to win a medal at the awards ceremony, and I will try making a lipstick design based on the Japanese flag!
Even though it's a very simple national flag when compared to others throughout the world, I like it because a sense of power and plain beauty unique to Japan can be felt in its simplicity.
Since I believe the Olympics are a time when we feel more pride in our countries than usual, let's do our makeup in honor of our countries or the countries we support and have some fun!
First, I thought it would be fun to make lipstick designs based on the flags of different countries, but since not every flag is as simple and easy to design as the Japanese flag, feel free not to limit yourself to just lipstick!
I think full make up to show your support is great too!
Also, everyone please feel free to make videos and post responses to my video:)
I'm looking forward to to seeing all of the different countries' flag designs together in the video responses to this video!
世界中のク リエイターが2012年ロンドン夏季オリンピックのためにこれまでで最も素晴らしいオリンピックビデオをYouTubeで提供する。すべての素晴らしい金メダルのビデオを見るためにhttp://www.youtube.com/user/creatorhub に行こう。
For the London 2012 Summer Olympics creators from all over the world are taking over YouTube with the most awesome Olympics videos ever.
Go to http://www.youtube.com/user/creatorhub to see all the amazing gold medal videos.
PRODUCTS USED:
L.A.girl Eyeliner white
NYX Matte Lipstick pure red08
MAYBELLINE Line and Design Lipliner 105
RIMMEL Nude Plump Lip Lacquer 019
LANCOME Color Forever Gloss 021
Music by epopsan.
"restart"
http://www.jamendo.com/en/track/771126/restart
http://www.youtube.com/epopsan12345
national flags of all countries 在 105 Country Flags stock vector. Illustration of artistic - 5862535 的推薦與評價
Illustration about a set of flags of 105 different countries isolated on a ... of illustrator vector a List of all Countries National flag in the world by ... ... <看更多>