It should go without saying that I by no means support China's recent position on Tibet.
However, it is nonetheless delicious to read an international opinion piece depicting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as a "muckraker of her own hypocrisy" whose "double standards reveal her motives and those of her kind" that "[refuse] to check their facts and find out the truth" about issues before expressing "indignation [that] is reserved for those occasions when their interests are best served."
Coincidentally, if you exchanged all references to Tibet in this piece with virtually any major issue facing our nation today, the assertions would be dead on target concerning the Speaker's modus operandi.
Consider that as you read the following column by Xinhua's Wang Jiaquan (emphasis added to heighten your entertainment pleasure):
The U.S. Speaker became a muckraker of her own hypocrisy when, out of the so-called concerns about human rights in Tibet, she pompously condemned China in Dharamsala, while enjoying the hospitality of the orchestrators of the Lhasa riots. [...]
Pelosi's double standards reveal her motives and those of her kind: their indignation is reserved for those occasions when their interests are best served.
Finding a leverage to tarnish China, 'human rights police' like Pelosi are habitually bad tempered and ungenerous when it comes to China, refusing to check their facts and find out the truth of the case - who is it who is really trampling on human rights? China or the rioters?
Her views are like so many other politicians and western media. Beneath the double standards lies their intention to serve the interest groups behind them, who want to contain or smear China.
Irrespective of the subject matter, isn't it interesting that a Chinese writer has a better grasp of Pelosi's disingenuousness than America's fawning press representatives?
I'm verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"...and those of her kind
March 23, 2008 - 16:10 ET by JPR1that "[refuse] to check their facts and find out the truth".
Pelosi is a journalist? I didn't know!
Pelosi a Hypocrit?
March 23, 2008 - 16:13 ET by allanfWow, Nancy Pelosi is a hypocrit? The American media would be shocked. Why she is just a grandmother running the House.
What nerve!
March 23, 2008 - 16:36 ET by Jerry MackWhat nerve the Chinese have in telling Nancy to look at both sides of a situation before making a judgement! Doing that could cause her brain damage.
Well Noel, our fawning press is the same..
March 23, 2008 - 16:38 ET by Gary HallWell Noel [Mm, ourselves], our fawning press is the same.. bunch, that while always willing to fall all over the Dalai Lama (and I respect him greatly as well), would never consider allowing his views on abortion or homosexuality to be on the table for discussion.
Always verklempt. (;~>
What are the views of the
March 23, 2008 - 20:01 ET by Dukkha ManWhat are the views of the Dahli Lama on homosexuality and abortion that the press would not allow on the table for discussion? As far as I can see he has very nuanced opinions on both matters - opinions that both the left and the right could take issue with.
*
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other
views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are
other views.” - William F. Buckley
Dukkha - the Dalai Lama
March 23, 2008 - 21:08 ET by Gary Hall‘Abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing.’
— The Dalai Lama
Elsewhere in Buddha teachings:
"In the Buddhist doctrine of nonviolence and non-killing, abortion is not sanctioned. It is actually one of the Boddhisattva's practicing vows to avoid all kinds of killing including human-beings and like-beings."
It first breaks the first precept - to abstain from harming or killing livings beings. He said in 1993, "Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance."
The bottom line here on the issue of abortion, is that each individual, is responsible for the decisions that they make, and this would especially hold true in the case of making the conscious decision to take the life of another living human being. A free, cheap and readily available abortion for all certainly does not fit into the Buddhist way of thinking. At a minimum, he is saying that any person considering an abortion, must first come to the understanding that they are making the decision to kill a human being, and that they must understand the consequences of what it is they are about to do, and they must come to terms with what they are doing.
Homosexuality - I believe I heard him say once, that it just doesn't seem right. A woman has this part, and a man has that part - and they were designed to fit together for a very special purpose. Otherwise it's just not natural. He laughed loudly and said something like, "oh, I just don't know."
And yes, the left and the right could take issue with his views on both of these. But the mainstream media is only interested in finding issue with the right, seldom with the left. So I will stand my ground, and am convinced that the MSM will probalby never interject into a serious debate these very easy to understand views.
I'll live for the day that Katie Couric is interviewing some abortion supporter from Hollywood, and offers up, "but the Dalai Lama would say that abortion is the willing taking of a human life. Are you promoting the taking of human lives. In other words, are you promoting murder without consequences?"
(;~> g
I read the same comment
March 23, 2008 - 22:28 ET by Dukkha ManI read the same comment from him regarding abortion, and I was actually surprised to see that he did not condemn it in all cases. He even seemed a bit flexible on his definition of the circumstances where abortion could be justified. I think, as with all Buddhists, it's about karma. Buddhists believe killing is sometimes the right thing to do (frequent example is against a person who intends to kill a group of innocents) but that person, however justified, still has to carry the burden of his actions with him.
As for homosexuality he did actually use the word "unnatural" for the sex , but that their is nothing wrong with the sexual desires, other than, like all desires, they should not be followed compulsively. Being the Dalhi Lama I'm assuming his use of the work unnatural was being used clinically, not as a judgement.
My take was he was injecting a moral question toward abortion that the MSM would not want to address, but at the same time having an openminded attitude toward homosexuality that, except for his word choice, would be embraced by the MSM.
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other
views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are
other views.” - William F. Buckley
If this had been Bush...
March 23, 2008 - 16:40 ET by acumenOne of you lib commenters help me out here. Is pissing off the Chinese part of the dem House leadership's plan to make good on their promise to improve the US image in the world?
Iraqi freedom = baaaaaaad
Tibetan freedom = gooooood
"I'm Nancy Pelosi, and I approved this message..."
Pelosian Hypocrisy
March 23, 2008 - 21:28 ET by thoridflyIraqi freedom = baaaaaaad
Tibetan freedom = gooooood
There it is.
I think it's funny how the
March 23, 2008 - 17:41 ET by rbosqueI think it's funny how the CHICOMS called her on being a typical pandering politician. And a leftist one at that!
Even a stopped clock ...
March 23, 2008 - 19:55 ET by Dukkha ManPutting everything else aside (and we should occasionally do this) I was proud of what was said by Our Girl Nancy. Bush could not make these harsh comments without impacting relations. We were lucky to have a visiting dignitary in front of the Dahli Lama at the time, to float these remarks without being labeled as "official policy."
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other
views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are
other views.” - William F. Buckley
Everyone should calm down
March 24, 2008 - 06:09 ET by slpOver the top hyperbole has been the norm in ChiCom press since Mao's issued his first press release.
The running dogs of capitalism has always been my favorite.
Pelosi is visiting and talking to the Dalai Lama, an enemy of China and the Chinese people.
Xinhua's Wang Jiaquan is just following the party line in a propaganda piece.
I say this, not from a
March 24, 2008 - 10:21 ET by misterbillI say this, not from a political viewpoint, nor am I a misogynist. There are so many qualified women in the political world, how in heaven's name did this nitwit get to her position?
Maybe she is looking for Tibetan workers for her husband's wine business.
please pity us
March 24, 2008 - 17:07 ET by UndercoverConservativethose of us who suffer under her hypocrisy daily in the Peoples' Republik of Kalifornia. her environmental policies are as warped as her biases.
The Chinese need to realize something about her-it's not really hypocrisy because she treats her "own" people the same way-whatever it takes to get votes, and influence for her family and friends' businesses, which equals more personal wealth and power for her.
Maybe the Chinese would like to lay off of Tibet for a bit and send some hardware and advisors so we can throw off the Pelosi Yoke of Oppression...
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is the same as calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".