Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
发现美最高法院大法官Stephen Breyer 在受邀名单，不知道他要找谁谈谈。
Monday, November 29, 2010
这篇是纽约时报的A Note to Readers: The Decision to Publish Diplomatic Documents
“ After its own redactions, The Times sent Obama administration officials the cables it planned to post and invited them to challenge publication of any information that, in the official view, would harm the national interest. After reviewing the cables, the officials — while making clear they condemn the publication of secret material — suggested additional redactions. The Times agreed to some, but not all. The Times is forwarding the administration’s concerns to other news organizations and, at the suggestion of the State Department, to WikiLeaks itself. In all, The Times plans to post on its Web site the text of about 100 cables — some edited, some in full — that illuminate aspects of American foreign policy.”
Editors try to balance the value of the material to public understanding against potential dangers to the national interest.
On the other hand, we are less likely to censor candid remarks simply because they might cause a diplomatic controversy or embarrass officials.
Of course, most of these documents will be made public regardless of what The Times decides. WikiLeaks has shared the entire archive of secret cables with at least four European publications, has promised country-specific documents to many other news outlets, and has said it plans to ultimately post its trove online. For The Times to ignore this material would be to deny its own readers the careful reporting and thoughtful analysis they expect when this kind of information becomes public.
But the more important reason to publish these articles is that the cables tell the unvarnished story of how the government makes its biggest decisions, the decisions that cost the country most heavily in lives and money. They shed light on the motivations — and, in some cases, duplicity — of allies on the receiving end of American courtship and foreign aid. They illuminate the diplomacy surrounding two current wars and several countries, like Pakistan and Yemen, where American military involvement is growing. As daunting as it is to publish such material over official objections, it would be presumptuous to conclude that Americans have no right to know what is being done in their name.
There are some cables the Guardian will not be releasing or reporting owing to the nature of sourcing or subject matter. Our domestic libel laws impose a special burden on British publishers.
All the publications involved have given early warning to the US government of our intention to publish. Government officials, who are aware of the general subjects we intend to cover, have not disputed the authenticity of the overall material. They have flagged up some specific, and some general, concerns.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
在维基解密的文件中美国驻罗马大使对于贝鲁斯科尼的描述是 feckless, vain, and ineffective，大家觉得这个中文该如何翻译？我查了一下字典，貌似三个字是同义词，她是为了强调老贝是个无用的领导，还是三个词各有所指？或者应该翻译成为 "毫无责任心、空虚、无用" ？
Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi was "feckless, vain, and ineffective as a modern European leader", according to Elizabeth Dibble, US charge d'affaires in Rome. Another report from Rome recorded the view that he was a "physically and politically weak" leader whose "frequent late nights and penchant for partying hard mean he does not get sufficient rest"
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
I walked around the charred building this afternoon to fulfill a citizen's obligation-show my concern and support.
Police presence, if not count in plain clothes, is less than I expected. How can things go out of control while there is no opposition force and the dictators are equipped with high precision dynamos? Yes they can control the emotion of a billion people, but they cannot control the sparkle from a welder, and a cumbersome bureaucracy.
Ten minutes walk from the site, there are vendors of chrysanthemum flowers, the nearer, the more of them. The street is still covered with flowers, each bundle of flower a non-confidence vote to a government, I perceive.
I will thank all the brave and sometime brazen vendors who made this democracy market, where people can buy a vote. And I will also praise the highly professional Shanghai policemen who kept this market in order. And I also hope on Dec 10th there will be a market of yellow ribbon for another great cause.
Isn't it the case that we used to spend too little on justice and democracy? Or the resources we should have used on a righteous society has been robbed by the Party thugs?
But Shanghai can afford the democracy, even though some lawyers and judges are brave, some brazen, but we need this bigger democracy market.
Can we buy out the Party thugs or they buy us out?
Unfortunately as many displacement cases showed, if we are to be buyed out, most probably we are burn out.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Yaozhou Zhang <>
Yaozhou Zhang <>
To cc Subject Re: