陈凯论坛 Kai Chen Forum 不自由，毋宁死! Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! 陈凯博客 Kai Chen Blog: www.blogspot.com 陈凯电邮 Kai Chen Email: email@example.com 陈凯电话 Kai Chen Telephone: 661-367-7556
自由与专制奴役--谁在蚕食谁？ Who is Politicizing t
自由与专制奴役--谁在蚕食谁？ Who is Politicizing the Beijing Olympics?in 陈凯论坛 Kai Chen Forum 不自由，毋宁死! Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! Fri Oct 14, 2011 3:53 pm
by fountainheadkc • 1.369 Posts
Who is Politicizing the Beijing Olympics?
从联合国到国际奥委会到西方左派把持的地方，专制奴役的强大腐败力量已向世人证实在自由与专制奴役之间是没有共存共处的中间地带的。 热爱自由的人们一定要认识到自由的停滞与被动就是专制奴役的进取与胜利。 由此每一个追求自由的人都有义务责任用自己的每一个选择与表达去全力推进自由的事业。 --- 陈凯
From UN to IOC to the realms controlled by the leftists in the West, the powerful corruptive effect from human despotism and slavery has proven to us that there is no middle ground for freedom and tyranny to coexist in peace. Freedom-loving people in the world must realize our stagnation, complacency and passivity in advancing the cause of freedom is the victory for despotism and tyranny. Thus everyone of us - the freedom loving individual - has a moral obligation to use our choices and expression every moment to consciously advance the cause of freedom and vanquish the evil despotism and slavery. --- Kai Chen
I will paste the article from LA Times today entitled "Juggling Free Speech for Beijing Olympics" below for you to read.
The counter attack from the world of despotism and tyranny on the free world is getting more intense now, since the end of the cold war and the downfall of the USSR. From Islamic fascists to the comeback of a Russian Empire to the rise of a Chinese evil dynasty to the threat of Iranian nuclear ambition.., freedom is under attack in many corners of the world.
Australia, UK and some other countries' recent announcements to restrict their athletes' free speech during the Beijing Olympics further demonstrate my point that wherever freedom stops to advance, despotism and tyranny will recover and counter attack. The corrosive encroachment by the dark forces from tyranny onto the free world, via UN, IOC, World Trade Organization and others now starts to bear abundant poisonous fruits. We as freedom loving people must pluck up our courage, keep our vigilance and take actions to wake up the world from a self-induced stupor, for another Pearl Harbor, another 9/11, another disaster of unimaginable magnitude will occur in our life time if we fail to advance the cause of freedom every where on the planet of earth.
Who is changing whom? This is a question we must ask. Should we comply with Beijing's request to muffle our own voices? Should we comply with Shria Laws in the West? Should we allow poisons seeped into our mind via some Wasabe Mosques and Confucian colleges? Should we allow the Olmpic movement be manipulated by a criminal, illegitimate Chinese government to advance their agendas?
We must answer these important questions? We must answer to our own conscience?
Best. Kai Chen 陈凯
[size=24]Juggling free speech for Beijing Olympics[/size]
Salvatore Di Nolfi / Associated Press
Chinese dissident Wang Youcai poses next to a person in T-shirt protesting 2008 Games in Beijing.
As Britain shifts position, U.S. Olympians learn they can say what they want -- in certain areas
By Philip Hersh, Special to The Times
February 12, 2008
A member of the U.S. Olympic team would face no official rebuke for wearing a T-shirt that said, "Free Tibet," while walking the streets of Beijing during the 2008 Summer Games.
Wear that shirt in the Olympic Village or any sports venue, and the athlete might be on the next plane home after violating the international Olympic Charter.
U.S. athletes can criticize China's human rights record if asked about it at any time or place -- as long as it isn't at a news conference specifically organized for that purpose in an "Olympic area."
Athletes from other countries may have to be even more careful about what they say and where they say it.
Confusing rules and the desire of some countries to avoid anything that might offend their Chinese hosts have created both misunderstanding and attempts by some national Olympic committees to censor their athletes in China this summer.
The latest controversy involves Britain, which had drafted a clause telling its athletes they "are not to comment on any politically sensitive issues" in an agreement 2008 British Olympians are to sign.
Facing a firestorm of criticism after a British newspaper revealed the clause Sunday, the British Olympic Assn. immediately said it would redraft the agreement. Simon Clegg, BOA chief executive, said his organization had no "desire to restrict athletes from freedom of speech, and the final agreement will reflect this."
In the last two weeks, the Belgian and New Zealand Olympic committees also had drawn strong condemnation from human rights organizations for apparent attempts to muzzle their athletes in Beijing.
USOC spokesman Darryl Seibel said no U.S. athlete would be reprimanded or censured for expressing a critical opinion about China's human rights record, either before or during the Olympics, so long as it is done in an appropriate setting.
The code of conduct that 2008 U.S. Olympians will sign asks them only to respect the terms of the Olympic Charter.
"We will not prohibit free speech," Seibel said, "but in speaking with our athletes, most seem to feel it would be highly inappropriate to use the Games as a forum to make a political statement."
The Olympic Charter, in longstanding rule 51 (3), says, "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues, or other areas."
The Belgian Olympic Committee has extended that to include what athletes say in such places about issues such as Darfur, China's role in Tibet and what Amnesty International calls China's crackdown on human rights defenders and repression of spiritual and religious groups.
"Our athletes are allowed to have freedom of speech, but not in Olympic areas," said Guido de Bondt, secretary general of the Belgian Olympic Committee. "We think there are other places where they can express their opinions. China is a large country."
New Zealand Olympic Committee spokesperson Ashley Abbott said via e-mail that New Zealand Olympians always have signed an agreement with "reasonable limitations on what they can and can't say. . . . It is not a question of where views are expressed, it is a question of making statements to the media or public demonstrations that may have a negative effect on the NZOC or the IOC [International Olympic Committee] and that are not in keeping with the Olympic Charter."
Sun Weide, deputy communications director of the Beijing Olympic Organizing Committee, said in a recent interview: "The Olympic Games are a celebration of sport, not a political convention. We are strongly opposed to any attempt to politicize the Beijing Games."
Spokesmen for the Italian and Spanish Olympic committees said they had adopted no restrictive policies for athletes in Beijing. Mexican Olympic Committee spokesman Juan Landa said, "There have been no discussions on the subject."
Before Britain backed away from restricting its athletes' free speech, Russian Olympic Committee spokesman Gennady Shvets said he supported the British idea but that Russia had yet to discuss what policy it would have for Beijing.
"This decision is justified and a good example for others to follow," Shvets said. "It doesn't mean that we will do it. But no one needs conflict during the Olympic Games, and not being careful with respect to what the athletes say could lead to problems."
The impact of Olympic Charter rule 51 would be to prohibit an action like the black-gloved protest U.S. sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos made on the 200-meter medal stand at the 1968 Olympics. The charter says violations may lead to disqualification or withdrawal of accreditation of the person involved.
RE: 自由与专制奴役--谁在蚕食谁？ Who is Politicizing the Beijing Olympics?in 陈凯论坛 Kai Chen Forum 不自由，毋宁死! Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! Fri Oct 14, 2011 3:55 pm
by fountainheadkc • 1.369 Posts