(圖片來源:電影 以愛之名：翁山蘇姬)
以下為轉載自諾貝爾獎網站 ,為翁山蘇姬演講詞
Nobel Lecture by Aung San Suu Kyi, Oslo, 16 June, 2012
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highness, Excellencies, Distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Dear Friends,
Long years ago, sometimes it seems many lives ago, I was at Oxford listening to the radio programme Desert Island Discs with my young son Alexander. It was a well-known programme (for all I know it still continues) on which famous people from all walks of life were invited to talk about the eight discs, the one book beside the bible and the complete works of Shakespeare, and the one luxury item they would wish to have with them were they to be marooned on a desert island. At the end of the programme, which we had both enjoyed, Alexander asked me if I thought I might ever be invited to speak on Desert Island Discs. “Why not?” I responded lightly. Since he knew that in general only celebrities took part in the programme he proceeded to ask, with genuine interest, for what reason I thought I might be invited. I considered this for a moment and then answered: “Perhaps because I’d have won the Nobel Prize for literature,” and we both laughed. The prospect seemed pleasant but hardly probable.
(I cannot now remember why I gave that answer, perhaps because I had recently read a book by a Nobel Laureate or perhaps because the Desert Island celebrity of that day had been a famous writer.)
In 1989, when my late husband Michael Aris came to see me during my first term of house arrest, he told me that a friend, John Finnis, had nominated me for the Nobel Peace Prize. This time also I laughed. For an instant Michael looked amazed, then he realized why I was amused. The Nobel Peace Prize? A pleasant prospect, but quite improbable! So how did I feel when I was actually awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace? The question has been put to me many times and this is surely the most appropriate occasion on which to examine what the Nobel Prize means to me and what peace means to me.
As I have said repeatedly in many an interview, I heard the news that I had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on the radio one evening. It did not altogether come as a surprise because I had been mentioned as one of the frontrunners for the prize in a number of broadcasts during the previous week. While drafting this lecture, I have tried very hard to remember what my immediate reaction to the announcement of the award had been. I think, I can no longer be sure, it was something like: “Oh, so they’ve decided to give it to me.” It did not seem quite real because in a sense I did not feel myself to be quite real at that time.
Often during my days of house arrest it felt as though I were no longer a part of the real world. There was the house which was my world, there was the world of others who also were not free but who were together in prison as a community, and there was the world of the free; each was a different planet pursuing its own separate course in an indifferent universe. What the Nobel Peace Prize did was to draw me once again into the world of other human beings outside the isolated area in which I lived, to restore a sense of reality to me. This did not happen instantly, of course, but as the days and months went by and news of reactions to the award came over the airwaves, I began to understand the significance of the Nobel Prize. It had made me real once again; it had drawn me back into the wider human community. And what was more important, the Nobel Prize had drawn the attention of the world to the struggle for democracy and human rights in Burma. We were not going to be forgotten.
To be forgotten. The French say that to part is to die a little. To be forgotten too is to die a little. It is to lose some of the links that anchor us to the rest of humanity. When I met Burmese migrant workers and refugees during my recent visit to Thailand, many cried out: “Don’t forget us!” They meant: “don’t forget our plight, don’t forget to do what you can to help us, don’t forget we also belong to your world.” When the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to me they were recognizing that the oppressed and the isolated in Burma were also a part of the world, they were recognizing the oneness of humanity. So for me receiving the Nobel Peace Prize means personally extending my concerns for democracy and human rights beyond national borders. The Nobel Peace Prize opened up a door in my heart.
The Burmese concept of peace can be explained as the happiness arising from the cessation of factors that militate against the harmonious and the wholesome. The word nyein-chan translates literally as the beneficial coolness that comes when a fire is extinguished. Fires of suffering and strife are raging around the world. In my own country, hostilities have not ceased in the far north; to the west, communal violence resulting in arson and murder were taking place just several days before I started out on the journey that has brought me here today. News of atrocities in other reaches of the earth abound. Reports of hunger, disease, displacement, joblessness, poverty, injustice, discrimination, prejudice, bigotry; these are our daily fare. Everywhere there are negative forces eating away at the foundations of peace. Everywhere can be found thoughtless dissipation of material and human resources that are necessary for the conservation of harmony and happiness in our world.
The First World War represented a terrifying waste of youth and potential, a cruel squandering of the positive forces of our planet. The poetry of that era has a special significance for me because I first read it at a time when I was the same age as many of those young men who had to face the prospect of withering before they had barely blossomed. A young American fighting with the French Foreign Legion wrote before he was killed in action in 1916 that he would meet his death: “at some disputed barricade;” “on some scarred slope of battered hill;” “at midnight in some flaming town.” Youth and love and life perishing forever in senseless attempts to capture nameless, unremembered places. And for what? Nearly a century on, we have yet to find a satisfactory answer.
Are we not still guilty, if to a less violent degree, of recklessness, of improvidence with regard to our future and our humanity? War is not the only arena where peace is done to death. Wherever suffering is ignored, there will be the seeds of conflict, for suffering degrades and embitters and enrages.
A positive aspect of living in isolation was that I had ample time in which to ruminate over the meaning of words and precepts that I had known and accepted all my life. As a Buddhist, I had heard about dukha, generally translated as suffering, since I was a small child. Almost on a daily basis elderly, and sometimes not so elderly, people around me would murmur “dukha, dukha” when they suffered from aches and pains or when they met with some small, annoying mishaps. However, it was only during my years of house arrest that I got around to investigating the nature of the six great dukha. These are: to be conceived, to age, to sicken, to die, to be parted from those one loves, to be forced to live in propinquity with those one does not love. I examined each of the six great sufferings, not in a religious context but in the context of our ordinary, everyday lives. If suffering were an unavoidable part of our existence, we should try to alleviate it as far as possible in practical, earthly ways. I mulled over the effectiveness of ante- and post-natal programmes and mother and childcare; of adequate facilities for the aging population; of comprehensive health services; of compassionate nursing and hospices. I was particularly intrigued by the last two kinds of suffering: to be parted from those one loves and to be forced to live in propinquity with those one does not love. What experiences might our Lord Buddha have undergone in his own life that he had included these two states among the great sufferings? I thought of prisoners and refugees, of migrant workers and victims of human trafficking, of that great mass of the uprooted of the earth who have been torn away from their homes, parted from families and friends, forced to live out their lives among strangers who are not always welcoming.
We are fortunate to be living in an age when social welfare and humanitarian assistance are recognized not only as desirable but necessary. I am fortunate to be living in an age when the fate of prisoners of conscience anywhere has become the concern of peoples everywhere, an age when democracy and human rights are widely, even if not universally, accepted as the birthright of all. How often during my years under house arrest have I drawn strength from my favourite passages in the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
……. disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspirations of the common people,
…… it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law . . .
If I am asked why I am fighting for human rights in Burma the above passages will provide the answer. If I am asked why I am fighting for democracy in Burma, it is because I believe that democratic institutions and practices are necessary for the guarantee of human rights.
Over the past year there have been signs that the endeavours of those who believe in democracy and human rights are beginning to bear fruit in Burma. There have been changes in a positive direction; steps towards democratization have been taken. If I advocate cautious optimism it is not because I do not have faith in the future but because I do not want to encourage blind faith. Without faith in the future, without the conviction that democratic values and fundamental human rights are not only necessary but possible for our society, our movement could not have been sustained throughout the destroying years. Some of our warriors fell at their post, some deserted us, but a dedicated core remained strong and committed. At times when I think of the years that have passed, I am amazed that so many remained staunch under the most trying circumstances. Their faith in our cause is not blind; it is based on a clear-eyed assessment of their own powers of endurance and a profound respect for the aspirations of our people.
It is because of recent changes in my country that I am with you today; and these changes have come about because of you and other lovers of freedom and justice who contributed towards a global awareness of our situation. Before continuing to speak of my country, may I speak out for our prisoners of conscience. There still remain such prisoners in Burma. It is to be feared that because the best known detainees have been released, the remainder, the unknown ones, will be forgotten. I am standing here because I was once a prisoner of conscience. As you look at me and listen to me, please remember the often repeated truth that one prisoner of conscience is one too many. Those who have not yet been freed, those who have not yet been given access to the benefits of justice in my country number much more than one. Please remember them and do whatever is possible to effect their earliest, unconditional release.
Burma is a country of many ethnic nationalities and faith in its future can be founded only on a true spirit of union. Since we achieved independence in 1948, there never has been a time when we could claim the whole country was at peace. We have not been able to develop the trust and understanding necessary to remove causes of conflict. Hopes were raised by ceasefires that were maintained from the early 1990s until 2010 when these broke down over the course of a few months. One unconsidered move can be enough to remove long-standing ceasefires. In recent months, negotiations between the government and ethnic nationality forces have been making progress. We hope that ceasefire agreements will lead to political settlements founded on the aspirations of the peoples, and the spirit of union.
My party, the National League for Democracy, and I stand ready and willing to play any role in the process of national reconciliation. The reform measures that were put into motion by President U Thein Sein’s government can be sustained only with the intelligent cooperation of all internal forces: the military, our ethnic nationalities, political parties, the media, civil society organizations, the business community and, most important of all, the general public. We can say that reform is effective only if the lives of the people are improved and in this regard, the international community has a vital role to play. Development and humanitarian aid, bi-lateral agreements and investments should be coordinated and calibrated to ensure that these will promote social, political and economic growth that is balanced and sustainable. The potential of our country is enormous. This should be nurtured and developed to create not just a more prosperous but also a more harmonious, democratic society where our people can live in peace, security and freedom.
The peace of our world is indivisible. As long as negative forces are getting the better of positive forces anywhere, we are all at risk. It may be questioned whether all negative forces could ever be removed. The simple answer is: “No!” It is in human nature to contain both the positive and the negative. However, it is also within human capability to work to reinforce the positive and to minimize or neutralize the negative. Absolute peace in our world is an unattainable goal. But it is one towards which we must continue to journey, our eyes fixed on it as a traveller in a desert fixes his eyes on the one guiding star that will lead him to salvation. Even if we do not achieve perfect peace on earth, because perfect peace is not of this earth, common endeavours to gain peace will unite individuals and nations in trust and friendship and help to make our human community safer and kinder.
I used the word ‘kinder’ after careful deliberation; I might say the careful deliberation of many years. Of the sweets of adversity, and let me say that these are not numerous, I have found the sweetest, the most precious of all, is the lesson I learnt on the value of kindness. Every kindness I received, small or big, convinced me that there could never be enough of it in our world. To be kind is to respond with sensitivity and human warmth to the hopes and needs of others. Even the briefest touch of kindness can lighten a heavy heart. Kindness can change the lives of people. Norway has shown exemplary kindness in providing a home for the displaced of the earth, offering sanctuary to those who have been cut loose from the moorings of security and freedom in their native lands.
There are refugees in all parts of the world. When I was at the Maela refugee camp in Thailand recently, I met dedicated people who were striving daily to make the lives of the inmates as free from hardship as possible. They spoke of their concern over ‘donor fatigue,’ which could also translate as ‘compassion fatigue.’ ‘Donor fatigue’ expresses itself precisely in the reduction of funding. ‘Compassion fatigue’ expresses itself less obviously in the reduction of concern. One is the consequence of the other. Can we afford to indulge in compassion fatigue? Is the cost of meeting the needs of refugees greater than the cost that would be consequent on turning an indifferent, if not a blind, eye on their suffering? I appeal to donors the world over to fulfill the needs of these people who are in search, often it must seem to them a vain search, of refuge.
At Maela, I had valuable discussions with Thai officials responsible for the administration of Tak province where this and several other camps are situated. They acquainted me with some of the more serious problems related to refugee camps: violation of forestry laws, illegal drug use, home brewed spirits, the problems of controlling malaria, tuberculosis, dengue fever and cholera. The concerns of the administration are as legitimate as the concerns of the refugees. Host countries also deserve consideration and practical help in coping with the difficulties related to their responsibilities.
Ultimately our aim should be to create a world free from the displaced, the homeless and the hopeless, a world of which each and every corner is a true sanctuary where the inhabitants will have the freedom and the capacity to live in peace. Every thought, every word, and every action that adds to the positive and the wholesome is a contribution to peace. Each and every one of us is capable of making such a contribution. Let us join hands to try to create a peaceful world where we can sleep in security and wake in happiness.
The Nobel Committee concluded its statement of 14 October 1991 with the words: “In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize ... to Aung San Suu Kyi, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to honour this woman for her unflagging efforts and to show its support for the many people throughout the world who are striving to attain democracy, human rights and ethnic conciliation by peaceful means.” When I joined the democracy movement in Burma it never occurred to me that I might ever be the recipient of any prize or honour. The prize we were working for was a free, secure and just society where our people might be able to realize their full potential. The honour lay in our endeavour. History had given us the opportunity to give of our best for a cause in which we believed. When the Nobel Committee chose to honour me, the road I had chosen of my own free will became a less lonely path to follow. For this I thank the Committee, the people of Norway and peoples all over the world whose support has strengthened my faith in the common quest for peace. Thank you.
以下為Google 翻譯
翁山蘇姬，奧斯陸6月16日，2012年諾貝爾演講
國王和王后陛下，殿下，閣下，挪威諾貝爾委員會的各位成員，親愛的朋友們，
多年以前，有時似乎許多人的生命前，我在牛津大學聽電台節目，我年輕的兒子亞歷山大的沙漠島光盤。這是一個眾所周知的程序（我知道它仍然）上，來自社會各界的著名人士被邀請談論的八個光碟，旁邊的聖經和莎士比亞全集的一本書，一個豪華的項目，他們希望與他們有他們被困在一個荒島上。在年底的方案，我們倆都喜歡，亞歷山大問我，如果我想我可能會被邀請發言荒島光盤。 “為什麼不呢？”我輕輕地回應。因為他知道，一般只有名人了他接著問，與真正的興趣是什麼原因，我想我可能會被邀請，在節目中的一部分。我考慮了一會兒，然後回答說：“也許是因為我已經贏得了諾貝爾文學獎，”我們都笑了。前景似乎愉快的，但幾乎沒有可能。
（我現在不記得我為什麼給這個問題的答案，也許是因為我最近讀一本書由諾貝爾經濟學獎得主，或也許是因為這一天的沙漠島名人曾是著名的作家。）
在1989年，當我已故的丈夫邁克爾·阿里斯來見我被軟禁期間的第一個任期內，我，他告訴我的朋友，約翰·菲尼斯，我已提名為諾貝爾和平獎。這一次我也笑了起來。對於即時邁克爾看著驚訝，然後他意識到，為什麼我被逗樂了。諾貝爾和平獎？一個愉快的前景，但相當不可能的！因此，如何做，我覺得當我被授予諾貝爾和平獎？向我提出的問題已經很多次，這無疑是最合適的場合上，檢查什麼諾貝爾文學獎對我來說意味著什麼樣的和平對我來說意味著。
正如我在許多接受記者採訪時反复表示，我聽到消息，我在電台上被授予諾貝爾和平獎的一個晚上。它並不完全令人感到驚訝，因為我已經提到在過去的一周廣播獎的領跑者之一。在起草這個講座，我已經很努力地記得我立即作出反應，該獎項的公佈已經。我想，我再也不能肯定，它是這樣的：“哦，所以他們決定把它給我。”這並沒有顯得很真實，因為在某種意義上，我並不覺得自己是相當真實那個時候。
常常在我軟禁的日子，它認為，雖然我已不再是現實世界的一部分。有房子，這是我的世界，是世界上也沒有免費的，但在監獄作為一個社會的人，有自由的世界，每個追求自身的獨立當然是一個不同的星球一個冷漠的宇宙。諾貝爾和平獎是我再一次吸引到世界其他人類以外的隔離區，在我住，我恢復了現實感。這種情況沒有發生瞬間，當然，但是，日，月和獎勵反應的消息通過電波來，我開始明白諾貝爾獎的意義。它使我真正再次提請我回到更廣泛的人類社會。和更重要的是什麼，諾貝爾獎已引起世界的關注，對緬甸的民主和人權的鬥爭。我們是不會被遺忘。
被人遺忘。法國人說，一部分是死一點。被遺忘的太死一點。它是失去一些鏈接錨我們全人類。當我遇到我最近在訪問泰國的緬甸移民工人和難民，許多大喊：“不要忘記我們！”他們的意思：“別忘了我們的困境，不要忘了，盡你所能來幫助我們，不要忘記我們也屬於你的世界。“當諾貝爾委員會頒發和平獎頒發給我，他們承認，壓迫和孤立在緬甸也是世界的一部分，他們認識到人類的統一性。所以我接受了諾貝爾和平獎，是指個人將我超越國界的民主和人權的關注。諾貝爾和平獎，開闢了我的心門。
緬甸的和平理念，可以解釋為停止利於和諧和健康的因素所產生的幸福。 nyein贊詞從字面上翻譯為有益的涼意，當火災撲滅。痛苦和紛爭，火災是在世界各地肆虐。在我自己的國家，都沒有停止敵對行動，在遙遠的北方，西部，社區暴力，縱火和謀殺發生前幾天，我開始給我帶來了今天的旅程了。在地球的其他下游的暴行的新聞比比皆是。飢餓，疾病，流離失所，失業，貧困，不公正，歧視，偏見，偏執的報告;這些都是我們日常生活的票價。到處都是在和平的基礎，離開吃的消極力量。到處都可以發現，為保護在我們這個世界的和諧和幸福是必要的物質和人力資源的輕率耗散。
第一次世界大戰代表浪費了青春和潛在的恐怖，殘忍浪費了我們這個星球的積極力量。那個時代的詩歌有一個對我具有特殊意義，因為我第一次看一次，當我為那些不得不面對的萎縮才剛剛開花的前景許多青年男女同齡。一位年輕的美國與法國外籍軍團的戰鬥中寫道，他1916年在行動中喪生，他會滿足他的死亡：“在一些有爭議路障;”一些受虐山傷痕累累的斜坡上，“午夜”在一些燃燒鎮。 “青春和愛情和生活在無謂的嘗試捕捉無名，unremembered的地方永遠滅亡。為了什麼？近一個世紀，我們還沒有找到一個滿意的答复。
我們是不是仍然有罪，如果少暴力的程度，魯莽，考慮到我們的未來和我們人類的淺見？戰爭並不是唯一的和平做死亡的舞台。痛苦被忽略的地方，將是衝突的種子，痛苦的降低和embitters和狂怒。
一個積極的方面是過著與世隔絕的生活，我有充足的時間在其中玩味的話，我已經知道並接受我所有的生活戒律的意義。作為一個佛教徒，我聽說過關於dukha，一般苦難翻譯，因為我是一個小的孩子。我身邊的老人，有時不那麼老人，人們幾乎每天雜音“dukha，dukha”當他們從遭受疼痛或當他們會見了一些小的，惱人的失誤。然而，這是我多年軟禁期間，我周圍的六個偉大dukha的調查性質。這些設想，年齡，患病，死亡，被分開的熱愛，將被迫住在接近那些不愛。我檢查每6個極大的痛苦，沒有宗教背景，但在我們普通的日常生活中。如果痛苦是我們存在的不可避免的一部分，我們應該嘗試盡可能實用，塵世的方式，以紓緩。我正在考慮是否在產前和產後的方案和母親和兒童保育的有效性;足夠的設施，人口老齡化;全面的醫療服務;體恤護理和臨終關懷。我特別好奇的最後兩種痛苦的，莫過於那些熱愛和被強迫住在接近那些不愛。什麼經驗，可能我們的佛陀在他自己的生活經歷，他已包含了這兩個國家之間的巨大災難？我以為囚犯和難民，移徙工人和販賣人口的受害者，偉大的群眾，那些遠離自己的家園被撕裂的大地從家人和朋友分手了，連根拔起，被迫住了他們的生活，陌生人之間的人並不總是歡迎。
我們有幸生活在這樣一個時代，當社會福利和人道主義援助不僅是可取的，但必須承認。我很幸運地生活在這樣一個時代政治犯的命運時，任何地方已成為世界各地人民的關注，民主和人權是廣泛的年齡，即使不普遍，接受所有的名分。如何在我這幾年經常被軟禁，我從我最喜歡的段落在“世界人權宣言”的序言中的實力：
.......無視和蔑視人權的野蠻暴行，這些暴行玷污了人類的良心，和世界的來臨，人類應享有言論和信仰自由並免於恐懼的自由，並希望已被宣布為最高願望普通老百姓，
......它是必不可少的，如果男人是不是被強迫，有追索權，作為最後的手段，對暴政和壓迫的叛亂，法治，人權應保護。 。 。
如果有人問我為什麼我在緬甸的人權鬥爭上面的段落將提供答案。如果有人問我為什麼我在緬甸的民主鬥爭，這是因為我相信民主體制和做法，是保障人權的必要條件。
在過去的一年中，已經有跡象表明，那些相信民主和人權的努力，已開始在緬甸承擔水果。已經有一個積極的方向變化;已採取步驟走向民主化。如果我主張持謹慎樂觀態度，這不是因為我沒有對未來的信心，而是因為我不想鼓勵迷信。在未來沒有信心，沒有的，不僅是必要的，但可能對我們社會的民主價值觀和基本人權的信念，我們的運動不能被整個摧毀幾年持續。我們的一些戰士在他們的職務下跌，一些拋棄我們，而是一個專門的核心仍然是牢固和堅定的。有時，當我想到年已通過，我很驚訝有這麼多下最艱難的情況下仍然堅定。他們在我們的事業的信心不是盲目的，它是基於對他們自己的力量，耐力和我國人民的願望深深的敬意頭腦清晰的評估。
這是因為最近發生的變化，今天上午，我與你同在我國，這些變化是因為你和其他愛好者的自由和正義，促成全球意識，朝著我們的情況有關。在我國繼續發言之前，我可以說我們的良心囚犯。仍然存在這類囚犯在緬甸。這是必須擔心，因為最有名的被拘留者已被釋放，其餘的，未知的，就會被人遺忘。我站在這裡，因為我曾經是一個良心的囚犯。當你看著我，聽我的話，請記得經常反复的真相，良心犯之一是太多。那些尚未釋放，那些尚未被賦予訪問正義的好處，在我的國家的數量遠遠超過一。請記住他們，並做任何可能影響他們最早的，無條件釋放。
緬甸是一個國家，許多少數民族和對未來的信心只能在成立工會的真正精神。我們在1948年取得獨立以來，從未有過一段時間的時候，我們可以聲稱是整個國家在和平。我們沒有能夠開發出必要的信任和理解，消除衝突的根源。提出了從20世紀90年代初，當這些發生在幾個月的過程中一直維持到2010年的停火協議的希望。一個信口開河的舉動可能不足以消除長期停火。近幾個月來，政府和少數民族勢力之間的談判已經取得進展。我們希望停火協議將導致政治定居點成立後，人民的願望和工會的精神。
我黨，全國民主聯盟，我隨時準備和願意在民族和解進程中發揮任何作用。的改革，都將議案付諸總統ü登盛的政府措施能得到持續的只有所有的內部力量的智能合作：軍隊，我們的種族民族，政黨，媒體，民間社會組織，企業界和，最重要的是，廣大市民。我們可以說，改革是有效的，只有人民生活改善，國際社會在這方面，發揮了至關重要的作用。雙邊協定和投資的發展和人道主義援助，應協調和校準，以確保這些將促進社會，政治和經濟的均衡和可持續的增長。我國的潛力是巨大的。這應該是培育和發展創造不只是一個更加繁榮，但也更和諧，民主的社會裡，我們的人民能夠生活在和平，安全和自由。
我們的世界和平是不可分割的。只要消極力量正在得到積極的力量，更好地在任何地方，我們都處於危險的。它可能會質疑是否所有負面力量可以被刪除。答案很簡單：“沒有！”人性是包含的積極和消極的。但是，它是在人的能力，也積極努力加強，以減少或消除負。在我們這個世界的絕對和平是一個遙不可及的目標。但它是一個，為此，我們必須繼續旅程，我們的眼睛固定在一個沙漠的遊客，修復一個指路明燈，這將導致他的救贖他的眼睛上。即使我們沒有在地球上實現完美的和平，因為完美的和平是不是這個地球上，共同的努力爭取和平統一個人和國家的信任和友誼，有助於使我們人類社會的安全和親切。
我用經過深思熟慮的'仁慈'字，我可能會說，多年的深思熟慮。的逆境中的糖果，讓我說這些並不多，我已經找到了最甜美，最寶貴的，是教訓，我學到了善良的價值。每一個善良，我收到了，大或小，我相信，有可能永遠不會在我們的世界就足夠。是一種是響應靈敏度和人間的溫暖，希望和他人的需要。即使善良最短的觸摸，可以減輕沉重的心情。善良可以改變人們的生活。挪威已在為地球的流離失所者提供庇護那些已經削減從在家鄉的土地上的安全和自由寬鬆的系泊，一個家庭的模範善良。
有世界各地的難民。當我最近在在泰國Maela的難民營，我會見了專門的人每天努力使犯人的生活困難盡可能免費。他們談到了“捐助疲勞症”，也可以翻譯為“同情疲勞”。“捐助疲勞”表示，在削減經費，正是他們的關注。 “同情疲勞”表示本身不太明顯減少關注。一個是其他的後果。我們可以買得起沉迷於同情疲勞？是難民大於成本將隨之轉向漠不關心，如果不是盲目的，對他們的苦難的眼睛，滿足需求的成本？我呼籲捐助國履行在世界各地的人都在搜索的需求，往往要到他們看來，妄圖尋找避難。
在Maela，我負責管理德省和其他幾個營地位於泰國官員的有價值的討論。他們熟悉我的一些難民營的更嚴重的問題：違反林業法規，非法使用毒品，自家釀製的烈酒，控制瘧疾，肺結核，登革熱和霍亂的問題。政府當局的關注是合法難民的關注。東道國也值得考慮和切實的幫助，應對其職責有關的困難。
最終我們的目標應該是創造一個世界流離失所，無家可歸者和無望的，世界的每一個角落是一個真正的避難所，那裡的居民將有自由和在和平中生活的能力。每一個念頭，每一句話，每一個動作，增加了積極和有益的，是對和平的貢獻。每個和我們每個人都能夠做出這樣的貢獻。讓我們攜起手來，努力創造一個和平的世界，在這裡我們可以睡在安全和幸福喚醒。
諾貝爾委員會的結論的話，其1991年10月14日發表聲明：在授予諾貝爾和平獎“......翁山蘇姬，挪威諾貝爾委員會希望履行這個女人，她的不懈努力，以顯示其在世界各地的許多人正在努力通過和平手段實現民主，人權和民族和解的支持。“當我加入緬甸的民主運動，它永遠不會發生在我身上，我可能永遠接受任何獎金或榮譽。我們工作的獎金是一個自由，安全和公正的社會，我們的人民可能是能夠充分發揮其潛力。榮譽奠定在我們的努力。歷史已經給我們的事業中，我們相信給我們最好的機會。當諾貝爾委員會選擇尊重我，我有我自己的自由意志選擇的道路變得不太寂寞的道路可走。為此，我感謝委員會，挪威和世界各地的支持人民的人加強了對和平的共同追求我的信仰。謝謝。
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞 李宗瑞
李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗 李宗
李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟
李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟 李宗瑞光碟
李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單
李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單
李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單 李宗瑞名單
沒有留言:
張貼留言