 CNN: Dump Cafferty/Apologize to China-01 |
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
1:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
There is no doubt that China—including its government as well as its people—is facing an uphill publicity battle in the wake of the violent unrest which erupted in Tibet last month. The unprovoked violence resulted in the death of nearly 20 innocent people, hackled or torched. Of these victims were five girls, four Han Chinese and one Tibetan, the youngest being only 18 years old.
Though the Chinese government was restrained in its action to end the violence, some of the Western media have responded with incredible vigor and vehemence. One has to conclude that they have promptly seized this opportunity to mount a relentless campaign against China. Some Western journalists and commentators are shamelessly gleeful as the Olympic torch relay was obstructed by Tibetan and anti-Chinese protestors in Paris and London.
It is understandable that some Western journalists are twisting words in their coverage of the developments following the Tibetan unrest. The “best political team” working on a CNN news program The Situation Room—hosted by Wolf Blitzer—has been doing just that.
Though it is reported that German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown have decided not to attend the Opening Ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, most of the Western media have never confirmed that they would “boycott” the Opening Ceremony of the Beijing Olympics this summer.
In an article published by the Guardian on Wednesday April 09 2008, it states as follows: |
|
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
1:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Brown said he will not be boycotting the games since he will be going to the closing ceremony.
"We have always said the prime minister would not be attending the opening ceremony but go to the closing ceremony instead," a Downing Street spokesman said.
In his monthly press conference last week, Brown said Britain would be "present at the Olympic ceremonies and I will certainly be there."
(http://www.guardian.co.u k/world/2008/apr/09/olymp icgames2008.gordonbrown)
However, in “The Situation Room” aired on April 8, 2008, Wolf and his motley “best political team” did not hesitate in defining the absence of Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the Opening Ceremony of the Beijing Olympics as a “boycott.”
BLITZER: To our viewers, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Happening now, politics threatening to taint the Olympic Games, with growing calls for President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies in Beijing in August, just as the British prime minister now says he will do.
(transcripts.cnn.com/TRAN SCRIPTS/0804/09/sitroom.0 3.html)
In another moment, Ms Gloria Borger, one member of the “best political team”—though she often smiles awkwardly and unconvincingly when Wolf Blitzer tirelessly tries to coerce the audience to believe that they are the “best political team”, corroborated the fabled “boycott”.
BORGER: The prime minister in Great Britain has said that he would boycott it (the Opening Ceremony of the Beijing Olympics). So I think the president's (President Bush’s) hanging back and perhaps trying to use this as some leverage with the Chinese.
(transcripts.cnn.com/TRAN SCRIPTS/0804/09/sitroom.0 3.html)
They even went as far as to emphasize “if future torch relays are, in fact, canceled, what you have is a situation that the torch relays started in 1936 with Nazi Germany and may now end possibly end with Beijing in 2008”, apparently insinuating that “Communist China” is possibly as hateful as Nazi Germany, disregarding the ... |
|
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
1:57 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
03
They even went as far as to emphasize “if future torch relays are, in fact, canceled, what you have is a situation that the torch relays started in 1936 with Nazi Germany and may now end possibly end with Beijing in 2008”, apparently insinuating that “Communist China” is possibly as hateful as Nazi Germany, disregarding the fact that the Chinese people are earnestly trying to organize the best Olympic games ever.
Being one of the major news media operating in the world, CNN does have the right to reflect “a wide range of opinions and points of view on every story”, as CNN defended its reporting on Tibet in a recent statement dated March 28, 2008. CNN assured its audience that “CNN's reputation is based on reporting global news accurately and impartially, while our coverage through the use of words, images or video always reflects a wide range of opinions and points of view on every story.” (http://edition.cnn.com/2 008/US/03/28/tibet.statem ent/)
The Chinese people should not even raise their brows when they hear Mr Jack Cafferty, another member of the “best political team”, say “Well, I think, you know, that based on China's record in some of these places, like Darfur and Tibet, that you could justify boycotting the opening ceremonies.” (transcripts.cnn.com/TRAN SCRIPTS/0804/09/sitroom.0 3.html) He is fully entitled to pouring his displeasure at China for hosting the Olympics. For whatever opinionated and bigoted prejudices brewing in his heart, Mr Cafferty is welcome to gut it out, even on CNN.
What’s appalling, nevertheless, is the unexpected and sudden burst of slurs expressed by Mr Cafferty, who characterized the Chinese people (the Chinese leaders in particular) for the past fifty years as “goons and thugs”, followed by a burst of hearty laughter from the “best political team” in the Situation Room. |
|
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
1:58 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
04
BLITZER: One of the arguments that some of the pro-China elements is making, Jack, is that this is a very different China today than existed 10 years ago, certainly 20 or 30 years ago. This communist regime today is almost like a capitalist regime. They're a huge economic superpower and that we have a lot at stake in maintaining this economic relationship with China.
CAFFERTY: Well, I don't know if China is any different, but our relationship with China is certainly different. We're in hawk to the Chinese up to our eyeballs because of the war in Iraq, for one thing. They're holding hundreds of billions of dollars worth of our paper. We also are running hundred of billions of dollars worth of trade deficits with them, as we continue to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food and export, you know, jobs to places where you can pay workers a dollar a month to turn out the stuff that we're buying from Wal-Mart.
So I think our relationship with China has certainly changed. I think they're basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years.
(LAUGHTER)
(transcripts.cnn.com/TRAN SCRIPTS/0804/09/sitroom.0 3.html)
Shame on CNN! You are entitled to reporting whatever “global news” in whatever way you deem as “accurate and impartial”, but you can not and should not insult the Chinese leaders, which will surely be disdained by the Chinese people. By calling the Chinese as “goons and thugs,” you are turning the Situation Room into a despicable place of disgrace and infamy.
By affirming the pursuit of “accurately and impartially” reporting on “global news”, CNN as a new media should not grant to its staff the liberty to verbally attack anyone in the world, much less the Chinese for the last 50 years!
Mr Jack Catterty is not contributing his “valuable insight” to the Olympic torch relay, he is insulting the Chinese. Being a “veteran” journalist of more than 20 years, he should never ... |
|
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
2:01 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
05
Mr Jack Catterty is not contributing his “valuable insight” to the Olympic torch relay, he is insulting the Chinese. Being a “veteran” journalist of more than 20 years, he should never allow himself the freedom to curse as if he was drunken and got himself in a bar brawl. Different points of view should be encouraged to be voiced and heard, both in the United States and around the world, but insults of this kind are senseless and preposterous.
Mr. Cafferty is, by no obligation, required to respect the Chinese leaders. Nor is he required to show any decent courtesy to them. However, supposedly as a payroll professional working for CNN rather than a freelancer, he is required, understandably, by CNN to withhold his urge to insult anyone at his “free will.” From the various statements issued after various controversies its reporting has incurred, CNN has time and again affirmed the principle of fair and impartial journalism. There is no reason to believe that the journalism advocated by CNN condones “insulting journalism,” as demonstrated by Mr Jack Cafferty.
Having worked most of his time as a reporter covering business and other domestic news in the United States, Mr Cafferty is no expert to judge the Chinese leaders in the “last 50 years” on CNN. Except for his possible use of Chinese chopsticks, he most probably has little knowledge of China, much less the “last 50 years” of this country. Having said this, Mr Cafferty does have his freedom to comment on and criticize everything concerning China, either voicing his distaste to the Chinese leaders or crying foul on China’s human rights record, but he simply has to restrain himself from name calling the Chinese leaders.
Mr. Cafferty, might have come to the show “in a time of a lot of frustration”, like Chris Matthews of MSNBC, who, to much applause, apologized to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for his “nasty” remark. However, Chris Matthews, as he explain ... |
|
By: henry_ching
16/04/2008
2:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
henry_ching Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
06
Mr. Cafferty, might have come to the show “in a time of a lot of frustration”, like Chris Matthews of MSNBC, who, to much applause, apologized to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for his “nasty” remark. However, Chris Matthews, as he explained, had been frustrated by what is happening in the United States. We have to wonder what frustration Mr Cafferty might have subjected himself to.
On another note, Chris Matthews is “almost always without a script, and almost always on tricky subjects of gender and race, and right and left, and what's in our country's interest, and who I think is telling the truth, and who I think isn't”, but Mr Cafferty is DEFINITELY NOT the case. He is always with a script, he has got his Cafferty file at www.cnn.com/caffertyfile. He is speaking consciously referring to his cafferty files, or perhaps an invisible teleprompter. In short, Mr Cafferty is not making a careless and unintentional mistake. He must have calculated his move and hit the “set target”, probably to his relief that his insult would be felt strongly. He may be still relishing himself in his choice of words.
By tolerating and encouraging the use of such insulting words, CNN will clearly expose itself in a way which is highly unprofessional and a far cry from the principle that it has striven to uphold. Moreover, CNN will guide its worldwide audience to gain insight not only to how it reports “global news”, but also to how it is designed to report “global news.”
Any willingness and determination shown by CNN to keep Mr Cafferty on its payroll is surmounting to turning CNN into a gutter medium, discrediting and tarnishing its efforts to project itself as a news outlet of presenting fair and balanced reporting it has taken so much pride in. Any reluctance and resistance shown by CNN to apologize to the Chinese government and the Chinese people will prompt an outcry from its worldwide audience. |
|
By: chung4526
16/04/2008
2:10 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: jonathan_email_2000
16/04/2008
3:18 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jonathan_email_2000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
henry ching,
good reading material, thanks for the post. |
|
By: mahesh_dhir
16/04/2008
6:15 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mahesh_dhir Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
cafferty has spoken the truth, although the truth hurts the chinese alot
there is no doubt so many commie thugs are around, being subversive elements in the free world. |
|
By: chung4526
16/04/2008
9:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chung4526 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Chinese Soldiers shooting Tibetan Pilgrims - video link
Copy whole link to see footage
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=afa326ad3e&p=1
Also chinaaid.org
-Christians killed and persecuted
STAND UP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES IN CHINA AND TIBET. |
|
By: scraggyz
16/04/2008
10:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
scraggyz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Some people need to use their common sense. A group of people do not protest for their futures when they're being treated equally, and enjoy their lives. If they were, they would not have cause of protest. It would not happen.
So yes. In a way China did lead to these riots. Unluckily for them the Tibetans just happened to have finally received the perfect opportunity to finally get the world to care.
Do not forget that until recently China was perceived as a group of communist dropkicks that thought Mao was intelligent. Only now that they are taken seriously on the world stage will their conduct be scrutinised. A good case of juxtaposition is Zimbabwe. No power, no influence, and there no international care. |
|
By: dragonfire@y7mail.com
16/04/2008
11:19 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dragonfire@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| mahesh, use your brain when you open your foul mouth. if cafferty was right about what he said when he used the extreme rude and offensive language to describe chinese and chinese made products, then cnn would not have to come out and made a statement to clarify its stand and the meanings of those remarks and apologized to the chinese who might have been feeling offended by this. in that statement, to categorize cafferty's character and therefore to try defend his conduct over this, cnn stated the fact that cafferty, over the years, had also been very critical of the u.s. government. that is same as saying cafferty has been a uncontrolled brat when it comes to the use of his language, even though he holds some fame. and the incident aside, i still hold respect for cnn and cafferty himself, but not you, mahesh, as you have shown no integraty or honesty, except all the worst aspects of an uneducated and ill-informed and in fact someone who is simply incapable to be educated. you are hopeless. let me also tell you another truth you have failed if you think you can use your naivety and slander to hurt us, because no chinese would think your words are worth anything. |
|
By: telltruth2008
16/04/2008
11:26 pm Yahoo! Profile:
telltruth2008 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
To help zimbabwe please go to
amnesty international
just sign petition
Can also go to Avaaz.org (sign petition)
getup.org.au (sign petition) all for Zimbabwe and Tibet |
|
By: telltruth2008
16/04/2008
11:37 pm Yahoo! Profile:
telltruth2008 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
dragon >>I feel sorry for some chinese in Australia because they must feel under attack but people are also speaking out for human rights in china for the people in china .
not all pro-tibet is anti-china.
many chinese also know some suffering in china
there is a website about persecution of chinese minorities where some lawyers are trying to help.
Please don't think we all hate Chinese I have many friends don't look at their race just their heart.
people feel chinese are not even trying to understand Tibetan situation just feel defensive.
Many Tibetan feel ashamed at riot but still feel things are not right they know people who have had bad things happen to family or friends in China.open your heart also |
|
By: bridonta
17/04/2008
12:06 am Yahoo! Profile:
bridonta Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| When somebody ... bash the Chinese ... they have no right ... but when .. chinese bash .. some body .. they have right to do .. so .. ??? .. Cheap propaganda like those products made by them .... |
|
By: dragonfire@y7mail.com
17/04/2008
12:17 am Yahoo! Profile:
dragonfire@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
telltruth2008, it is perfectly fine for people to speak out for human rights in china and anywhere else. i have no issues with that, nor do i think most of the chinese would have problem acknowledging that rights issues still exist.
china is a country that is progressing very fast. at the same time, it is facing many complex issues. ordinary people especially those from the west find it very difficult to comprehend and tend to dwell on one or two issues to try categorize china or the chinese, which is wrong.
on the rights issue in tibet, as i said before i'll say it again, no chinese would feel numb if innocent tibetans or anyone else, are being ill treated. like other parts of china, there are many people still feeling unhappy about the government and their own well-beings, but again, there is no easy solution to those tough challenges china faces. changes will take time. what the majority of the han chinese felt upset about is the blatant distortion of the facts in the recent reports in the west about the riots, not necessarily those that reflected the genuine grievance by the tibetans, especially in their minds they felt the tibetans, for many years, enjoyed preferential treatments that have been denied to the han chinese, as a national strategy to try 'maintain' social harmony in a multi-racial country like china. this, in my view, has been a key point that people failed to understand. |
|
By: dragonfire@y7mail.com
17/04/2008
12:24 am Yahoo! Profile:
dragonfire@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| the chinese feel that the tibetans had not been playing fair - instead of be grateful for receiving those preferential treatments, they turned against china, asking for indepedence. |
|
By: mahesh_dhir
17/04/2008
12:57 am Yahoo! Profile:
mahesh_dhir Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
like I said before, those 'privileges' offered by the chinese are not needed if the tibetans run their own country.
for instance, if tibetans manage their educational system, thier students could achieve better academic results if using tibetan language instead of chinese as the medium of instruction, they can take english as the second language then become more competitive in the anglo-saxon dominated economic environment, therefore the preferential for university admission not needed. no country other than china have a one-child policy, this policy is irrelevant when tibet becomes independent, as for the financial support, i believe the international community will not hestitate to assist the tibetans to build their country once the chinese withdraw. |
|
By: dragonfire@y7mail.com
17/04/2008
8:03 am Yahoo! Profile:
dragonfire@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
mahesh, again you are day-dreaming and finally, like other tibetan separatists, you start to tell some truth about yourself and the real agenda of all these fuss. i thank you for that. because you have made it clear that what they have been trying to do is to achieve tibet indepedence. and i can tell you, in your and my life time, that is impossible!! you can keep on screaming, kicking and yelling, nothing will change about that.
if tibetan people are so capable of standing up on their own feet, give me about a few fact on how the tibetan government have successfully achieved for its people in india or elsewhere. that said, don't get me wrong, i am not saying the tibetan people are second rated and they can not succeed. the issue here is tibetan people in china have been receiving preferential treatments since 1959 and you can't argue they have been treated any worse than the han chinese on the mainland china. more importantly tibet is part of china, like it or not. the whold world acknowledges the fact. the tibetan peolle choose to live there, they have to abide by the laws, no matter how imperfect they might be. same as the tibetan people living in australia, no matter how large or successful its community evantually becomes, there is no way or easy way for a sovreign nation like australia to accept or tolerate an indepedent country or whatever name you want to call it, inside its territory. |
|
By: mahesh_dhir
17/04/2008
9:46 am Yahoo! Profile:
mahesh_dhir Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
you got a square head mr. dragon
the so-called preferential treatments become a 'priviledge' only because the commies have some 'special treatments' for the chinese relative to the tibetans, for instance one-child policy, university enrolment, financial subsidise, it is a basic human right to have more than 1 child, average tibetans need a decent job more than a uni. degree, jobless chinese pouring into tibet is not helping the tibetan economy by causing the tibetans livelihoold even harder, the tibetans really don't need the modern infrastructure, they want a peaceful life not disturbed by the chinese intruders, if they do need modern infrastructure i guess they prefer the jobs done by advanced nations, chinese technologies are a piece of sh!t, if not a copycat.
again let me remind you tibet is currently under chinese occupation, repeating of the 'xinhwa' rhetoric doens't make land grabbing legitimate, tibetans own the sovereignty of tibet, chinese are invaders, the international commmunity understand chinese greediness, irrationality & ruthless, in reality tibetans will face china's killing machine, none wants bloodshed except the chinese therefore we can't do much at present, we have to put up with china while continuing to pressure china to negotiate. to grant the tibetans a full automony is the best option for china and a middling solution for the conflict. |
|
By: dragonfire@y7mail.com
17/04/2008
10:47 am Yahoo! Profile:
dragonfire@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
mahesh, don't mask your real agenda of 'tibet independence' as merely a quest for 'full autonomy'. this has been the tactic the tibet independence movement has been trying for years. it is a futile attempt that the chinese have grown tired of hearing, and sooner the international community will be the same.
tibetan people want peaceful life. while they can have that without going on riots, without smashing innocent people's heads and burning people's shops and the owner alive. are these what peaceful buddists do? yeah, it sounds so reasonable that tibetans want modern infrastructure done by advanced nations, by whom?? are you saying the tibetans would get what they want from the west for free. there is no free lunch in this world, my friend. laziness will get you nothing but becoming a cry-boy, whinging about being ill treated, as it seals the fate for the tibetans. tell me how many decent infrastucture tibet had before the communist take-over, and how many are there under the tibet government in exile in india right now??? we all know the dalai lama himself or his government in india is not poor. he has made a huge sum of money by investment, raising funds, publishing books and giving seminars. don't tell me you don't have money to build anything or you haven't received the money from the west for doing so. stop the nonsense now. |
|
By: chung4526
17/04/2008
11:00 am Yahoo! Profile:
chung4526 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Tibetans are better off now than they were before the 'peaceful liberation'" .....
This incorrectly assumes three things:
[1] that Tibetans are incapable of developing without Chinese intervention (a modern version of the "white man's burden");
[2] that Beijing's developmental priorities and ideas of progress are what Tibetans want; and
[3] that material development somehow excuses the colonialist occupation of Tibet.
To imply that Tibetans are incapable of developing their own country is insulting, condescending and chauvinistic. Nor is it proper to compare apples and oranges: Tibet five decades ago cannot be compared with today, since a free Tibet would not have existed in a vacuum in the intervening years. One only has to look at the model success of the Tibetan refugee community to wonder how much better life in Tibet could be if Tibetans were actually in charge of their own country. |
|
By: scraggyz
17/04/2008
11:02 am Yahoo! Profile:
scraggyz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
dragonfire every autonomous nation has the right to try and maintain its independence if that is what they wish. Clearly, the people of Tibet do not want occupation by a country that receives absolutely no value from controlling Tibet.
In fact, most of you have been stating theyre just innocently trying to help Tibet progress! Clearly that is not true because no country in their right mind does anything without deriving some benefit.
If Tibet does not want Chinese assistance, and the Chinese do not have any need for the region, why shouldthey bother staying? They could get so much more done pumping money into its agricultural areas, the ones you always hear stories of flooding about.
And you cant blame the Tibetans for rioting etc. when it clearly has a valid purpose. Do you blame the party who responds, or the party that initiates the violence? Conduct unbecoming of Buddhists? Yes.
BUT THEY SHOULD NEVER BE PLACED IN A POSITION WHERE THEY HAVE TO CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN SUCH AN UNBECOMING WAy.
In this case, they have been |
|
By: chung4526
17/04/2008
11:04 am Yahoo! Profile:
chung4526 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
secondly dragon
Beijing would NEVER argue that just because Hong Kong under British rule grew to become one of the world's major economic centers and enjoyed one of the highest living standards in Asia,
this somehow justified British imperialism.
It is totally hypocritical for it to use exactly this line of reasoning for Tibet, whether factually valid or not. |
|
By: scraggyz
17/04/2008
11:14 am Yahoo! Profile:
scraggyz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
These guys that come on here trying to convince everybody that China is doing the right thing always have the worst arguments.
Its funny because whenever somebody responds incitefully and there is no response, it has become apparent that thread will be deleted quite quickly. In my mind, it seems many of them know themselves that they cannot justify such conduct beyond 'Umm...the media is lying! Yeah! That must be it!' |
|
CNN: Dump Cafferty/Apologize to China-01 |
|
