• The Naming of Swine Flu, a Curious Matter http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/world/asia/29swine.html?_r=2&hpw

    The argument below happened on 29th, April 2009.

    To Keith Bradsher:

    Sir,

    Your new report which viciously indicates that the swine flu may emerge
    from southeastern China, has already become a laughingstock in China.

    Congratulations!

    Sincerely, Ronnie

    Keith Bradsher <bradsher@nytimes.com>

    Thank you very much for your note. I don't see the article on the web now --
    where did you find it?
    Best,
    Keith

     

    To Keith Bradsher:

    ......Thank you very much for your instant reply, which I rather didn't expect..
     
    Here is it:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/world/asia/29swine.html?_r=2&hpw
     
    The link has been posted on Tsinghua University's forum. That's how I saw it.
     
    Yes, I have to say that you didn't say the exact words that the swine flu comes from China. But the last paragraph does to a large extent viciously indicates it.
     
    And I also disagree very much to the ugly portray below:
     
    Many medical historians believe that the Asian and Hong Kong flus started in southeastern China near Hong Kong, where very high densities of people live in close proximity to hogs and chickens in rural areas and can share their viruses. Some historians also suggest that the Spanish flu also started in southeastern China.
     
    I really don't know why you are using the present tense here when portraying the situations in southern rural areas in China. The situations might be true when the Hong Kong flu happened 40 years ago, but as a Chinese that comes from the southern province of Guangdong and that has a very good knowledge of the rural situations there, I can tell you that using the present tense here can only show your ignorance and viciousness.
     
    Thank you very much again for your reply and report, which makes us once again realize how malicious and hostile some western reporters and media can be.
     
    Ronnie

     

    Keith Bradsher <bradsher@nytimes.com>

    Thank you and you raise good points. I made some revisions to the story earlier, so you might want to check it again. I'm not sure I can get into the story again to change the verb tenses, as the editors do not like changes after the printed paper goes to press.
    best,
    Keith

  • 前不久写了这篇博文咒骂Dalai 其中翻译了五点要求 发在facebook上

    很成功的是 没过两天 一个原来很支持Tibet的希腊同学跟我说 她看了我的文

    问我能否把那文翻译成希腊文 发到她母亲的报纸上。。。
    To be frank, this world-famous monk named Dalai Lama has always been disgusting me, like he always disgusts most of the people in China. In my life I have literally never met any person in the country that feels comfortable about him.

    And once again, he disgusted me when I was visiting the Nobel Museum this afternoon, where they had this video of the monk's accepting the Peace Prize going on and on. As I was feeling really bad in the stomach at the sight of the video, I asked the guide at the museum: “Has the foundation ever withdrawn any prize that has been announced, since sometimes the formerly known good person can turn out to be really bad?” I knew the answer but I just wanted to ask.

    A lot of things are happening recently related to the monk, which inevitably and constantly bring him into my sight, since I have the habit to read news. And these things have convinced myself more than ever of my natural and profound feeling of disgust about him.

    One thing I had always been wondering came clear after the recent breakdown of talks between Chinese officials and envoys of the Dalai Lama. Since the monk claimed that he didn’t request the independence of Tibet, then what does he want? What can the country offer him? How can we satisfy him? This was what I’d been always wondering. Yesterday the senior official, Zhu Weiqun, concluded the 5 points from the monk at a conference in Paris, which are:

    No.1 Do not recognize that Tibet has always been part of China from the ancient times. (However, from the beginning of the Yuan Dynasty, the central government has already started the administrative jurisdiction of Tibet, which has been 700 years of history. Read any report on Tibet from western media, the description is and will be always like this: Tibet, which was occupied by the Chinese troops in 1950...which is rather viciously distorted.)

    No.2 Adhere to the so-called "Great Tibetan Region”. That is, to claim an area that covers not only the present Tibet but also the whole Qinghai Province, parts of Gansu Province, Sichuan Province and Yunnan Province, where there’re few Tibetans. That’s an area of about 2,400,000 square kilometers, more than twice the current Tibet and about four times the size of France. That’s exactly one fourth of the country's territory.

    No.3 In the so-called "Great Tibetan Region" he seeks a high degree of autonomy. That is autonomy of everything except for defense and diplomatic affairs, over one fourth of China's territory.

    No.4 Call for the withdrawal of all national troops from the whole region, so that Tibet will become a so-called "international zone of peace." (I thought the monk just mentioned that the “high degree autonomy” didn’t include defense.)

    No.5 Implement “Tibetanization” in the whole region, that is, to drive away tens of millions of other non-Tibetan people from one fourth of the Chinese territory, imposing ethnic discrimination, ethnic cleansing and ethnic segregation.

    Now I understand how we can satisfy him, clearly. We just sacrifice our whole country. We just sacrifice the hopeful and happy perspectives of all the lives of the 1.3 billion people. We just sacrifice the whole Chinese society that has been developing over the past 3,000 years. And that’s, all.

    And what if we can’t?

    Then this monk instantly reveals his true intent. He had always claimed that he was taking this "middle way" attitude and just wanted Tibetan autonomy within China but not outright independence. However, as is also reported in the newly published news on NY Times, " Tibetan Exiles Meet to Ponder a New Strategy", this most famous monk in the world finally revealed his real intent: The independence of Tibet, or should I say, “the Great Tibetan Region”.

    I have always tried to understand how the western world thinks of him. For example, I noticed these words in the same report of the NY Times: "The Chinese government has tried to bolster the economy of the area it calls the Tibet Autonomous Region, whose gross domestic product of $5 billion in 2007 was the lowest of any region in China." These words totally show the ill will of the writer with an ill mind. Because it just doesn’t make any sense. To mention the LOWEST GDP regardless of the population of the area, it just doesn’t make any sense. How come the report doesn’t mention the more than 12% of annual GDP growth of the past 7 years in Tibet, which exceeds the average developing pace of the whole country, which will really make sense?

    As I was trying to understand those people, I went to a main website (http://phayul.com) that supports the independence of Tibet. I randomly read some articles. And I was just shocked by all the nonsense, which reaches the most ridiculous, most non-logical and most indecent level I’d ever seen. One of the articles posted on the website, “TIBET: A democratic state without a territory” by Kate Heartfield from The Ottawa Citizen reads: It's funny that apologists for China are always saying that it takes a long time for an Asian country to develop into a mature modern democracy. Isolated and impoverished Tibet did it in less than half a century, despite the fact that it had to do so in exile, in a little complex of plain concrete buildings on a remote hillside in India. China, which is infinitely richer, more stable and better-connected, ought to be able to develop even faster. China's government resents Taiwan and Tibet because they have shown just how possible democratization is. Since it’s just happening in some buildings in some remote area in India, since it has never actually practiced upon a real society, since it is just some dream of somebody, how can you at the same time declare it as a mature modern democracy, which China may take a long time to develop? How can you just say these words? How can it possibly tell this nonsense, shamelessly? And by the way, the most basic knowledge, Chinese sometimes don’t like Taiwan NOT because of its democratic society but its independent act, which is exactly the same in the case of Tibet.

    Although, I do think I understand that for many western people, sometimes when they think about something, some place that is really, really far away from their own lives, that they have never been to, that they always have to depend on imagination of, they can be not understanding that just one simple thought in their mind can mean the total different living conditions of thousands in Tibet, whether living in slums or in good apartments; or the peace and struggle of thousands, with smile or blood; or even a war that means the life and death of thousands, that they don’t even know, that they never meet, that they can just totally forget the next day if they get some little trouble in their own everyday lives, like a bad haircut. And these thousands, include both the Tibetans and all other Chinese people.

    Just like the British government announced very recently that it was dropping its formal recognition of Tibet’s suzerainty relationship with China, a status that indicates real autonomy. The recognition dated back 94 years but can be suddenly forgotten just because the finacial crisis is here and UK wants China to be on its side dealing with the crisis. It turns out that the money in their own pockets is so much more important than some stupid monk anyway.

    And a Nobel Prize, in the name of peace, that must have always been greatly encouraging the monk, can mean MUCH, MUCH more than that. If there’s this possibility, that after the monk's declaration of seeking formal independence of Tibet, things get much more worse than the RIOTS that happened this spring; If then it gets even worse that China splits into several parts and there’re civil wars all over China, then the simplest question will be like this: Is it in the name of peace, or in the name of war and practice of death?

  • 刚才终于拨通广东考试院的电话(可在其网上查到,其他存在疑虑的考生家长可去咨询)

    据广东考试院一位十分气急(估计已经接到太多类似电话)的工作人员原话 理科三科平均分相差只有几分 不存在问题 社会上都是谣言(这两天网上盛传广东今年高考化学平均分比生物高出30分,十分不公平)。

    问是否会公布平均分 答曰 不一定

    估计他们是控制住了。

    估计也是 比如广州生物考生最多 控制不住会出人命的。

  • 怎么北京到广州的没怎么提速啊。。。崩溃
    广州到深圳好多动力车 一小时左右
    没找到广梅汕铁路的。。。估计是没提
    上海 杭州那一块就全是动力车了 好爽啊。。。

    T15 北京西 11:00 广州 7:31

    T97 北京西 12:00 广州东 10:13 九龙 13:03

    T107 北京西 20:36 龙川 16:27 深圳 19:49


    T201  北京西 18:10 广州 14:56 茂名东 19:51 三亚 5:06

    T881 广州 6:55 深圳 8:52

    T883 广州16:14 深圳 18:37

    T885 广州东 10:37 深圳 12:11

    T887 广州东 12:12 深圳 13:52

    D703 广州东 12:38 东莞 13:09 九龙 14:15 从D703到D730都是这条线

    D731 广州 6:05 广州东 6:15 深圳 7:20

    D733 广州东 17:53 深圳 18:53

    D735 广州东 11:26 深圳 12:20 (一直排到D936)

    T264 拉萨21:00 广州 13:07

    D531 北京 6:11 天津 7:19

    D653 上海南 7:45 杭州 9:09

     

    果然。。。tears
    N621 广州东 8:40 龙川 12:20 揭阳 16:11 汕头 17:05

    N628 广州 15:32 龙川 19:40 揭阳 22:04 汕头 22:58

    N634 深圳 22:10 揭阳 5:14 汕头 6:09

  • 6.4 - [Commentator]

    2006-06-04
    愿那些曾经躁动过的激愤过的哀恸过的灵魂,安息。。。安息。。。

    愿那些我永远不会有的誓死的勇气  固执的理想  和激昂的青春,永远不会被忘记。。。。。。