The prostitution of Nobel Peace Prize

This was once highly acclaimed as a respectable honour when bestowed on a recipient. The recipient in most cases reserved such a recognition without any dispute or controversy. The first misgiving concerning the award of the Nobel Prize was when it was presented to Barack Obama, a greenhorn president that had all words and no actions during his early days as President of the USA. Everyone was embarrassed. Obama too was embarassed. For what had he done to deserve such an honour? Or was the title President of the USA be good enough for such an honour? Probably because he is the first black President of the USA and thus deserved such an honour. Regardless of the reasonings, no thinking person will think that Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. And to rubbish the award further, he went on to increase troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and to continue fighting the wars instead of looking for peace. Many more lives were lost because of his decision to extend the wars. All the previous Nobel Peace Prize recipients must be turning in their graves. And those living must have felt how cheap the award has become. Nelson Mandela was jailed for political reasons for 27 years before he was deemed fit to receive the award. Just a few days back, a Chinese national by the name of Liu Xiaobo, was also given the same honour. He was jailed for only 4 years. Would political prisoners like Chia Thye Poh and Lim Hock Siew, who have both served terms as long as Mandela be more deserving of such an award? No, the Chinaman, with 4 years of jail was chosen, in a way to spite the Chinese authority and an attempt to pressure them, to meddle with their internal affairs. No doubt Liu Xiaobo has made great sacrifices for his cause. He has given up the good life to choose imprisonment instead. But he has become a convenient political pawn for the West to attack China. It is such a shame to the founder of the Nobel Peace Prize. An award to be respected and now being prostituted for political gains.

The art of investigative journalism

The amount of work and effort put in by a reporter to reveal the true identiy of Dr Joseph Ong Chor Teck as the anonymous writer in Temasek Review deserves a lot of praise. Not only that it is newsworthy, it also set a new direction on what investigative journalism is all about and what it can do to tell more interesting stories about people and their backgrounds. We can expect that such important news and news trend would gain more acceptance and popularity both in the main media and in cyberspace. The other new media like TOC and TR and some others with the resources may also feel encouraged to do their own investigative journalism and tell their versions of interesting and newsworthy stories. It will add a lot of zest and jest in cyberspace and the media reporting as a whole. Great development!

Asean now a US protectorate?

Is Asean a US protectorate? From what the Americans are saying or doing, it appears so. In mypaper's front page news today, it has this, 'US: We'll protect states unnerved by China.' This statement was made in Vietnam prior to the Asia defence talks attended by all the Asean defence ministers plus China, US, Japan and other Asia countries. What did Asean do to deserve this honour? Isn't Asean professes itself to be a non aligned organisation, freeing itself from big power rivalry? How did Asean become a US protectorate. No, Asean did not ask the US to be their protector. Asean only invite the US for tea. And on entering the room the US took over the tea room. It then appointed itself as the protector of Asean with China in mind. This is much easier than setting up Seato. Here there is an organisation and the Americans just walked in, declared that it is now the boss. What is happening? If there was any invitation for the US to be the dominant power in Asean to take on China, it is likely to come from Vietnam, and very likely without the approval of the other Asean members. The possibility of confrontation and conflict is very real given the track records of Vietnam and the US, both belligerent countries and trigger happy. Would the peace in the region and Asean's neutrality be compromised and be dragged into a war it does not want? Would the region become another Middle East? In reality, Vietnam does not need Asean to take on China. It has defeated the mighty Americans in the Vietnam War. It is reputed to have taught the Chinese a lesson during their last border war. Vietnam should confront China using its own mightly army, seize the islands it claims. And if China reacts, Vietnam should conduct another border incursion into China like it did before. And now with the Americans supporting from behind, the Chinese would not be able to teach Vietnam a lesson any more. Why the need to drag in Asean into their foray? Would Asean leaders be foolish enough to turn their organisation, painfully built over the years, into another American protectorate, and be sucked into a war it does not want and is meaningless to them? Whatever, the US has now assumed the role as master of Asean. The mafia boss has shown its true intent.

An oasis for freedom of expression

I am proud to say that mysingaporenews.blogspot.com and redbeanforum.com are two rare gems where you can find freedom of expression as best as it could be. Seldom are post deleted, nor are they moderated, or subject to a moderator's whims and fancies. All posts are posted as they are. Rarely were there be exceptions, thanks to the mature bloggers posting in these the blog/forum, that the moderator would have to remove a piece. I have done it a few times on grounds of extreme vulgarities for the sake of vulgarites, or when the posts were inciting violence on religious or racial grounds. I am happy that this simple ground rule is observed by all here. Thank you and continue to post freely and sensibly. Cheers.

Is China being over assertive?

The Western media has been drumming up this tune, that China is being over assertive and bullying its smaller neighbours. Really? China has been a victim of aggression for several centuries. Some of its territories are still in the hands of the colonialists. It suffered trade sanctions, economic embargoes, containment, threats of nuclear attacks, unfair trade practices, isolations etc etc. Then it wakes up one day and sees aggressive countries still conducting war games in its courtyards and backyards. And there are big powers forming military alliances at its front doors with its neighbours. And little upstarts also trying to claim its territories when the territories belong to China for centuries, centuries before these little upstart countries could call themselves countries. Is it wrong for China to drive away the bullies and retake what historically belonged to China? Turn it the other way round, how would the Western countries react if China were to form military alliances with their immediate neighbours, conduct war games in the Carribeans or the Mediterraneans, send spy planes across Europe and the USA? What or how would the West responds or reacts? How would the Americans and Europeans react if China were to incite their neighbours to champion their rights? China should work with the Red Indians and aborigines to defend their rights, reclaim ownership of their land, and ask the perdatangs to go home to Europe. Would that be seen as being assertive? Is reclaiming their rights and land from the robbers, yakuzas, gangsters and frivolous opportunists assertive? Is telling the marauding hordes of hyenas swarming around their homeland and territorial waters assertive?