Sunday, February 6, 2011

阿明解釋為什麼台灣人不知道 埃及是圓是扁
因為電視報紙 不報埃及 報正妹

Thumbnail4:04

阿明喜歡看正妹.但是正妹不是新聞吧

2/6/11: In Taiwan, you frequently see these reports on hot girls (正妹) on TV news channels, some (東森新聞) more than others. How is this news? I ...

=====

Militants, Women and Tahrir Sq.


When Westerners watched television images of the popular uprising against President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, they winced at the government’s thuggery toward protesters. But some also flinched at the idea of a popular democracy that might give greater voice to Islamic fundamentalism.

In 1979, a grass-roots uprising in Iran led to an undemocratic regime that oppresses women and minorities and destabilizes the region. In 1989, uprisings in Eastern Europe led to the rise of stable democracies. So if Egyptian protesters overcome the government, would this be 1979 or 1989?

No one can predict with certainty. But let me try to offer a dose of reassurance.

After spending last week here on Tahrir Square, talking to protesters — even as President Mubarak’s thugs attacked our perimeter with bricks, Molotov cocktails, machetes and occasional gunfire — I emerge struck by the moderation and tolerance of most protesters.

Maybe my judgment is skewed because pro-Mubarak thugs tried to hunt down journalists, leading some of us to be stabbed, beaten and arrested — and forcing me to abandon hotel rooms and sneak with heart racing around mobs carrying clubs with nails embedded in them. The place I felt safest was Tahrir Square — “free Egypt,” in the protesters’ lexicon — where I could pull out a camera and notebook and ask anybody any question.

I constantly asked women and Coptic Christians whether a democratic Egypt might end up a more oppressive country. They invariably said no — and looked so reproachfully at me for doubting democracy that I sometimes retreated in embarrassment.

“If there is a democracy, we will not allow our rights to be taken away from us,” Sherine, a university professor, told me (I’m not using full names to protect the protesters). Like many, she said that Americans were too obsessed with the possibility of the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood gaining power in elections.

“We do not worry about the Muslim Brotherhood,” Sherine said. “They might win 25 percent of the votes, but if they do not perform then they will not get votes the next time.”

Sherine has a point. Partly because of Western anxieties, fundamentalist Muslims have rarely run anything — so instead they lead the way in denouncing the corruption, incompetence and brutality of pro-Western autocrats like Mr. Mubarak. The upshot is that they win respect from many ordinary citizens, but my hunch is that they would lose support if they actually tried to administer anything.

For example, in 1990s Yemen, an Islamic party named Islah became part of a coalition government after doing well in elections. As a result, Islah was put in charge of the Education Ministry. Secular Yemenis and outsiders were aghast that fundamentalists might brainwash children, but the Islamists mostly proved that they were incompetent at governing. In the next election, their support tumbled.

It’s true that one of the most common protester slogans described Mr. Mubarak as a stooge of America, and many Egyptians chafe at what they see as a supine foreign policy. I saw one caricature of Mr. Mubarak with a Star of David on his forehead and, separately, a sign declaring: “Tell him in Hebrew, and then he might get the message!” Yet most people sounded pragmatic, favoring continued peace with Israel while also more outspoken support for Palestinians, especially those suffering in Gaza.

I asked an old friend here in Cairo, a woman with Western tastes that include an occasional glass of whiskey, whether the Muslim Brotherhood might be bad for peace. She thought for a moment and said: “Yes, possibly. But, from my point of view, in America the Republican Party is bad for peace as well.”

If democracy gains in the Middle East, there will be some demagogues, nationalists and jingoists, just as there are in America and Israel, and they may make diplomacy more complicated. But remember that it’s Mr. Mubarak’s repression, imprisonment and torture that nurtured angry extremists like Ayman al-Zawahri of Al Qaeda, the right-hand man of Osama bin Laden. It would be tragic if we let our anxieties impede our embrace of freedom and democracy in the world’s most populous Arab nation.

I’m so deeply moved by the grit that Egyptians have shown in struggling against the regime — and by the help that some provided me, at great personal risk, in protecting me from thugs dispatched by America’s ally. Let’s show some faith in the democratic ideals for which these Egyptians are risking their lives.

I think of Hamdi, a businessman who looked pained when I asked whether Egyptian democracy might lead to oppression or to upheavals with Israel or the price of oil. “The Middle East is not only for oil,” he reminded me. “We are human beings, exactly like you people.”

“We don’t hate the American people,” he added. “They are pioneers. We want to be like them. Is that a crime?”

Monday, November 22, 2010

表面上: 中央通訊社是 全民買單的 中華民國國家通訊社
實際上: 它是 中國國民黨不用付費的 中國國民黨通訊社 IV

 

如此墮落的中央社 方齋


美國「自由之家」(Freedom House)研究部主任華克(Christopher Walker)十一月十四日應美國福爾摩莎基金會之邀,在洛杉磯向華文媒體簡報「自由之家」所做的「2010年世界自由報告」。
這場記者會之後,中央社發出一則標題為「扁案定讞 自由之家讚體制強化」的新聞稿,撰稿的記者是江今葉小姐。
新聞的導言是這樣寫的︰「前總統陳水扁因為貪污案三審定讞,美國自由之家研究部主任華克認為,這是艱難的一步,但能將貪污政權送進大牢,對體制改革、走向更為健全的民主體制有益。」
筆者從事媒體工作近三十年,採訪與編輯的經驗不算少,當天也是在場的記者之一。前後仔細讀這則中央社的新聞,我懷疑,該則新聞的標題與導言應該不是撰稿記者的原文,而是台北中央社的編輯所加。
然而中央社發出這則「加工」的新聞之後,台灣的藍色媒體立刻廣為刊登(自由時報網站的即時新聞也經由RSS自動登上網頁),確實達到「搶先扭曲」的功效。
當天在記者會上除了媒體記者之外,也有在南加州執業的律師、在大學任教的教授、以及航太、工程博士以及福爾摩莎基金會執行長Terri Giles等人在場。筆者當天為了慎重,也特地將華克先生記者會全程錄影並上載到YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DEB69357920F8D46)。會後們問了多位與會的人士,沒有一個人聽到華克說出那樣的話!
(註︰華克先生也發現自己的說法遭到扭曲,11月18日英文台北時報就有他自己的抱怨與澄清:http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2010/11/18/2003488812)
相 反的,華克說,亞洲國家的民主程度低於全球的平均,雖然他們是朝著民主的方向前進,但很多國家面對公平執法與言論自由的質疑,而且只有百分之五的亞洲人民 享有自由媒體,有的國家在過去幾年經濟成長,但政治還是不民主,即使是民主國家,如台灣、南韓、印度。在人民的自由權上還是面對挑戰。
華克指出,台灣人民的政治權雖有提昇,但公民自由權卻退步,這是因為司法上對被告權利的保護有瑕疵。陳水扁的「貪污案」也讓人民注意到政府處理此案與他案的差異,他還特別提到孔傑榮對扁案司法程序的質疑。在總結時,華克特別指出,雖然國民黨改善與中國的關係,但卻引起人民言論自由與學術自由的關切與憂慮。
其實,11月13日的自由時報在一則「自由之家︰台灣媒體獨立性仍受威脅」的新聞中引述「自由之家」的報告即已指出「中央社和公視都受到政府介入的影響」。
遭「自由之家」年度報告點名的中央社,十四日發出這則「加料」新聞,正好讓所有閱聽人理解中央社「質變」的事實,也更讓人喟嘆這一「公器」竟墮落到如此地步!
(作者為海外媒體工作者)

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

美國人今年十一月大選將同時舉行155個公投
台灣人不知公投為何物
因為中國國民黨不准人民公投

不讓扁陰謀得逞吳伯雄吁全黨阻止"公投綁大選"

華夏經緯網 12月13日 訊:據台灣媒體報道,國民黨主席吳伯雄昨天說,陳水扁為了讓民進黨勝選,連日來的行徑已陷入瘋狂,可見陳水扁不但要“公投綁大選”,更要“公投毀 ...

In total, 155 measures are on the ballots in 36 states, a number roughly unchanged from previous years.

紐約時報: Voters Face Decisions on a Mix of Issues


The nation’s job woes may be the determining factor in which party controls Congress, but voters across the country will also have the chance to weigh in directly — through ballot initiatives — on some of the other contentious issues that have made cameo turns in the spotlight this year.

In Oklahoma, the ballot will feature a measure to ban state judges from using Islamic law, called Sharia, in court decisions, even though it has never happened. In Washington, voters will address an issue similar to one Republicans successfully kept from coming to a vote in the United States Senate: a proposed tax increase for the rich.
Voters in three states will have the opportunity to take a largely symbolic stand against the federal health care law approved this year by declaring that individuals or business cannot be compelled to buy health insurance. And in Colorado, leaders of all political persuasions are joining to urge voters to reject three tax initiatives they say would drive the state to fiscal calamity.
In total, 155 measures are on the ballots in 36 states, a number roughly unchanged from previous years. While lacking the thematic cohesion of years past — when states around the country simultaneously weighed in on issues like abortion, same-sex marriage or eminent domain — this year’s raft of initiatives, referendums and propositions nonetheless capture the political spirit of the season.
Perennially divisive issues are back: Colorado voters will decide whether to define human life as beginning at fertilization; Oklahoma voters will decide whether to make English the official state language; and, in perhaps the nation’s most closely watched referendum, California voters will decide whether to allow the sale of marijuana for recreational use.
But most of the measures to be decided on Election Day are routine housekeeping: fiscal proposals — like bond requests, property tax exemptions and licensing fees — that capture the constant ideological tug of war of taxing and spending.
“What it feels like is that the state legislatures are really fixated on the routine budgetary stuff, trying to keep their ships afloat,” said John G. Matsusaka, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California. “The ballot propositions seem to have become an outlet for all the other issues that the legislators don’t have the time to deal with right now.”
Government spending is at the heart of the three ballot measures in Arizona, Colorado and Oklahoma — which, along with California, have the longest and most controversial lineup of ballot measures this year — that aim to nullify President Obama’s signature health care legislation. The measures, which are similar to one overwhelmingly approved by voters in Missouri this summer and approved legislatively in five other states, would establish that individuals or business cannot be compelled to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty. The effect, however, is uncertain, given that the requirement does not become effective until 2014 and is already the subject of lawsuits.
The proposed constitutional ban on judges’ using international law in general — and Sharia law in particular — in Oklahoma has caused local Muslim leaders to complain that the state legislators behind the proposal were “riding a wave” of anti-Islamic sentiment across the nation, citing the controversy over burning Korans and protest over mosques elsewhere. “Sharia law is not a threat to anyone, I don’t care where you live,“ said Saad Mohammed, a director at the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City. “Bigotry and prejudice is driving this.”
State Representative Rex Duncan, who is chairman of the state judiciary panel and the lead sponsor of the measure, said he knew of no judge ever citing Sharia law in a ruling in Oklahoma and could point to only one case in the country where the law had been cited. (In that case, a Family Court judge in New Jersey cited a man’s Islamic faith in denying a restraining order to a woman who said she had been raped by her husband. The ruling was overturned by a higher court.) But Mr. Duncan said the measure was “a pre-emptive strike.”
Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, has called for a similar federal law, and Mr. Duncan said he had received inquiries from legislators in a dozen other states who expressed interest in adopting a similar ban.
The political rhetoric has grown particularly heated in Colorado, where Republican and Democratic politicians as well as labor and business groups have united to warn that the passage of three tax-cutting measures — dubbed the “ugly three” by opponents — would lead to such fiscal disaster that governing the state would be “nearly impossible.” They cite official state analysis that concluded that the budget would be cut by a quarter and the state would also be prohibited from taking on debt, preventing large capital projects.
“I’ve never seen a fiscal impact comparable to what would happen if all three of these were to pass,“ said Jennie D. Bowser, who studies ballot initiatives for the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The Washington initiative would create the state’s first income tax, exclusively on individuals who earn more than $200,000 — the same figure favored by President Obama, who has proposed extending tax cuts for individuals making less than that amount but allowing taxes to rise for those making more. (The tax rate would be 5 percent and increase to 9 percent for those making more than $500,000.)
The debate follows the national framing. Supporters say that the tax is needed to continue paying for services (it would be devoted to education and health care) and would affect only a tiny fraction of people while allowing taxes to be cut for everybody else. Critics say the increase would discourage business investment and prolong the recession, questioning whether politicians can be trusted with greater access to taxpayer money.
As with all state initiatives, the back and forth features a local flavor. The pro-tax effort is being led by Bill Gates Sr. and endorsed by his son, the Microsoft founder; the anti-tax effort is being supported by the current head of Microsoft, Steve Ballmer.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

為什麼聯合中時從兩大報淪為兩微報? A hint:
聯合民調: 朱立倫45%蔡英文28%

 
聯合民調 太保守了.
何不說
朱立倫 3,000,000,000,000,000,000,000%
蔡英文 0.228%
那不更使墨營人欣喜若狂嗎?

聯合民調:新北市選情 朱立倫45%蔡英文28%

  • 2010-09-30
  • 新聞速報
  • 【中廣新聞/陶泰山】
影音》最新民調!朱立倫45% 蔡英文28%
影音》最新民調!朱立倫45% 蔡英文28%

    聯合報今天公佈新北市長最新選情調查,朱立倫目前以四成五支持率領先蔡英文17個百分點,選情四個月來沒有變化。調查發現,朱立倫目前獲得四成五選民支持,二成八力挺蔡英文,二成六未決定;和五月下旬時的調查結果相比,兩人支持率變動都在二個百分點以內。
    分析顯示,朱立倫和蔡英文在固守政黨基本票源的實力相當,兩人各自都能凝聚八成以上政黨票;不過,朱立倫在中立選民中所獲支持高於蔡英文,是聲勢暫居上風的主因。

Thursday, September 16, 2010

中華保釣協會跟台灣人有什麼相干?

 
中華保釣協會不代表台灣人.  These people can  do whatever they like, but I don't want them to spend my money, and I don't want others to think they represent me.

I protest to The Daily Yomiuri for calling these two 中華 persons Taiwanese activists, and to RTT News for stating
More than 80 Taiwanese protested outside the Japanese trade office
Are 中華 people in Taiwan Taiwanese?   I know 星雲和尙, 郭冠英, 和 馬英九 are not.  Would anyone call 中華愛國同心會 people Taiwanese?

保釣人士無功返台批政府軟弱

中時電子報 - 2 天前
昨晚兩人返抵野柳漁港,對海巡署派出十二艘大、小船艦全程護送仍遭驅趕大表不滿, ... 由中華保釣協會領軍出發的保釣漁船感恩九九,13號下午出發前往釣魚台宣示主權, ...

Taiwan activists enter Japan's contiguous zone

The Daily Yomiuri - ‎2010年9月14日‎
A Taiwan fishing boat carrying two protesters entered Japan's contiguous zone near the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea early Tuesday, in what appeared ...

Anti-Japan Protests In Taiwan

RTT News
(RTTNews) - More than 80 Taiwanese protested outside the Japanese trade office--serving as its de facto embassy--in Taipei over an incident at one of the ...
 

Friday, July 16, 2010

表面上: 中央通訊社是 全民買單的 中華民國國家通訊社
實際上: 它是 中國國民黨不用付費的 中國國民黨通訊社 III


Taiwan's national news agency accused of differential treatment



Taiwan News, Staff Writer
2010-07-16 11:10 AM


+ Enlarge This image
Central News Agency

+ Enlarge This image
Central News Agency
The Central News Agency (CAN), as a national news agency, has violated administrative neutrality by covering too much reports concerning campaign trails of Eric Chu, the ruling KMT candidate for the newly upgrade Xinbei in its news production, noted Kuan Bi-ling, a legislator of the opposition DPP, according to Liberty Times reports.Nearly all of Chu’s public events are reported by CNA including even trivial things like taking a bus and buying breakfast. These reports can amount to enough materials for a travel blog, said Lee Kun-cheng, DPP’s candidate for Xinbei’s councilor election at a joint press conference with Kuan yesterday.
80 % of the respondents in the poll conducted by the Yahoo fell boring and angry concerning the news about Chu’s breakfast. The CNA should not be campaign tool for any specific candidate, said Lee.
 

Responding to the accusation, the CNA noted that the news agency always puts all news on an equal footing and will never have differential treatment for specific figures.
 

Lo Kuang-jen, director of personnel administration in the CNA, noted that the news agency also have reports about Tsai Ing-wen, DPP candidate for Xinbei City mayor, and Su Tseng-chang in Taipei City, since these politicians are all highlights in their daily reports.