Cambodia 1979

An excellent account of what happened in a Cambodian town in 1979, when Vietnam invaded Cambodia. Part one and two. Can't wait for part 3 next week.

Insight into the Cambodia lives pre and post invasion, general sentiment toward the Khmer Rouge, the invader, the occupation, and even the repercussion of the China-Vietnam border war. Perhaps even a lesson on the 'economic of occupation' for Iraq of today.

Categories:

• asia
• pol
• history

Maybe there is no conspiracy

China sacked the head (party chief) of its largest municipality(*), amid corruption investigations. As usual, rumours are afloat that it is related to certain political struggle between ex-party-boss Jiang's Shanghai Gang and new boss Hu Jintao's Youth League Gang. (update WaPo)

Most of all so-called China observers (even BBC, and NYT**) are eager to speculate, except very few rational minds

• 郎咸平说，“我是不希望把反腐的事情跟各地领导班子换届的关系扯到一起。我不认为他们有必然关系，我认为反腐就是反腐倡廉，对于腐败官员要有严刑峻法的方式严加处理。但是，不要把这两个事扯在一起。我认为反腐跟政治斗争不应该扯在一起。这是两回事。所以我今天所强调的中央政府的反腐的力道必须加大。”
• Lang Xianping said, "I do not hope to see the anti-corruption matters to be linked to the sucession of the [CCP] leadership matters. I do not think there is necessary connection between the two.

Conspiracy theories are interesting. There are media values in them. Conspiracy theories are also easy to fabricate. All one needs is some 'confidential source' which may not even exist, and an audience who refuse to accept the simple (but often factual) explanation. "Look, how can the CCP have any intention to do anything morally right?"

When Beijing Mayor Chen Xitong was caught, the same conspiracy emerged. It was said the Jiang's Shanghai Gang used corruption as an excuse to oust the Beijing Gang. Back then, I have my own little conspiracy theory as well:

• Chen was so corrupted in 1989 that he feared that he would be caught once the student movement in 1989 succeeded. He then plotted and misled Deng Xiaoping and engineered that tragedy in June that year. This is, of course, not the full story. But if we look at history, the overwhelming examples of anti-democracy suppression, from Marcos to Ceausescu, have been plotted by corrupted officials. Because the corruptors are those who fear the consequence of a transparent system the most.

What I believe to be more likely, is that the CCP leadership has realized by now that it is impossible to continue the economic reform without tackling the corruption problem. Because corruption leads to unfair competition and discourages business innovation. A more sophisticated economic system, as China is developing into gradually, requires a fair system and infrastructure. Corruption hinders such development. As most people can now agree, the first priority of CCP is economic development (some said it is the only way to continue the 'legitimacy' of its rule). It is only logical that they are focusing on anti-corruption now. The motivation for anti-corruption can be very simple, i.e., economic.

Aside from the above discussion. I do not care if Hu Jintao (or Wen Jiabao) is a black cat or a white cat, if he has caught the corrupted mice, he is a good cat, at least at this particular job.

P.S. more in the comment section.

* in China's bureaucratic system, head of province and the 4 municipalities, together with the Ministries, are one rank below Deputy Prime Minister. Shanghai is one of the most important province/municipalities, making Chen Liangyu among the top of the promotion list among these provincial chiefs. i.e. Chen is only 2 steps from the Premier Wen and Party Boss Hu.

** NYT is even worse. Joseph Kahn reported, "It is exceedingly rare in China for members of the ruling Politburo to face legal trouble, even when the authorities have evidence of corrupt activities by them or people close to them. Mr. Hu almost certainly would not have approved of the action unless he considered Mr. Chen an obstacle to his political control or his policy agenda." 1) It is rare because it is hard to collect evidence 2) How about "Mr. Hu almost certainly would not have approved of the action unless he considered there is sufficient evidence for the charge"? 3) It is also rare because the more senior the criminal is, the more careful (and harder it is) the investigation needs to be.

Categories:

• china
• pol

Outline of post-war new world map (1941)

This is a very interesting map, created by Maurice Gomberg in 1941 (published 1942).

You can download a hi-resolution (14MB) map through this link in the lower left corner of the link above,. The format is jp2000, and a viewer can be downloaded here. I have used Kakadu View and it works fine (open with kdu_show.exe).

If you don't mind the hassle of zooming online (less user-friendly, and often subject to internet delay), you can also zoom the map here.

This is the short introduction given by most web-sites

• 1942 world map. "Outline of post-war new world map" by Maurice Gomberg,
• Philadelphia, Feb. 25, 1942. Shows protectorates and peace-security bases.
  
• Includes quotes from President Franklin Roosevelt's message to the 77th Congress on the State of the Union, including the Four Freedoms and the Moral Order.
• SOURCE: Library of Congress Geography and Map Division Washington DC.

A few sites have summarized the "new order" outlined by Gomberg, note also that the map was completed in October 1941, before Pearl Harbor. The full text of the "order" is listed here. A few highlights relevant to the world order today -- as paraphrased by penncrier.com, emphasized by yours sincerely. I have also skipped the outdated notion of commodity nationalization (globalization and amrekit efficiency seem to be quite effective in solving this problem) and demiliatarizing the "war-mongering" Europe (Europe has quietly evolved past that phrase)

• The U.S.A. must, altruistically, assume the leadership of the newly established world order.
• The U.S.A., Britain, and the U.S.S.R. will undertake to guarantee peace to the nations, which will be permanently disarmed and demilitarized.
• The U.S.A. will become invincible as a military, naval, and air power.
• A world common monetary system will be established.

It is interesting to compare this to the pre-WWII, WWII map, and the order created immediately after WWII.

Here are a few obvious notes when comparing this map with that of 1950. (Critique on the flaws of this map does remind me of Kaplanistic foot soldier "I surrounded you, Ha!" march)

• the whole of Germany and Austria given to the Great USSR, Iran also a Sovier SSR.
  
• Korea, Indochina, Thailand and Malaya given to China
  
• Burma and Afghanistan to Federated Republic of India (Pakistan was not carved out)
• USA expanded, naturally, not only to include the rest of North and Central America (Canada, Mexico, Greenland, Carribean), all islands in North Atlantic as outposts (Iceland, Bermuda, Azores, Canary Is, Cape Verdes), all of the Pacific islands, Sulawesi(Celebes), Taiwan and Hainan -- the 3 Guyana's were said to become a USA state in the text, but not shown in the map
  
• British Commonwealth to give up Africa and South Asia, but retaining Australia/NZ and taking out some of Dutch East Indies (Indonesia)
• Other notes: note how Arabian FR and Hebrewland was drawn, Albania with Greece, Northern Ireland with Ireland, Madagascar and Sri Lanka stayed with British Commonwealth
  

As to how the "world order" should be modified under today's world, I would leave that to our intelligent readers (perhaps a better way to discuss is to open a thread for each one of Gomberg's lines). Some questions to ask/ threads are (especial in the post Kuwait-Iraq world)

• One hegemone ("Invincible") vs multiple leader
• How crucial is genuine altruism/neutrality of the hegemone? (which also leads to the question of single vs multiple hegemone)
• Is there any medium/small nation that owns meaningful (offensive) weapon today? Is there a need for the smaller nations/federates to own meaningful weapon?
• If smaller nations do not own meaningful offense/defense, what should the hegemones' commitment to the small be?
• How similar/different is Gomberg's new order compared with Thomas Barnett's PNM?
• What assumption of Gomberg become (or close to) reality in today's world? How would this change (or not change) the order of 1950s (vs the order Gomberg proposed)?
  
  

Categories:

• geo
• map

Quick note: Yau vs New Yorker

You have probably noticed that I have a particular interest in the Yau Shing-tong vs Beida controversy. A while earlier I found a New Yorker article (via ESWN, the cartoon is shown here) about the newest Field Medalist Perelman, the Poincare conjecture, and Prof Yau. The article was quite informative, except that it was highly ignorant of the research environment in China, or how research was conducted in general, and the whole Yau Shing-tong vs Peking University/Tian Gang controversy. I wondered if the reporters had talked to Yau at all.

It turned out that they did talk to Yau and communicated with him for some length, and basically ignored the story from his side (or mostly other knowledgeable poeple). Therefore, it comes as no surprise that Professor Yau is preparing for taking legal action against the New Yorker this week. (via inmedia). Yau's rebuttal echoes my first reaction when I read the New Yorker report, I am pretty sure Yau would win this one. If that is the case, New Yorker may have to donate a few million dollars to a mathematics institute in New York or in China.

Update (Sep 23):
1) commentator LW pointed to a report that New Yorker stands by its story, looks like that leaves Yau with no other option than filing a law suit.
2) (Sep 24) AMS's account of Poincare conjecture (PDF)
3) Yau's lecture in Beijing about Poincare conjecture
4) Scientific American points to Scott Aaronson's blog and new post
5) Testaments of other mathematics professors (from comments on Aaronson's blog)

• a Clarification from MIT mathematician Dan Stroock:
  
  I, like several others whom Sylvia Nasar interviewed, am shocked and angered by the article which she and Gruber wrote for the New Yorker. Having seen Yau in action during his June conference on string theory, Nasar led me to believe that she was fascinated by S-T Yau and asked me my opinion about his activities. I told her that I greatly admire Yau's efforts to support young Chinese mathematicians and to break down the ossified power structure in the Chinese academic establishment. I then told her that I sometimes have doubts about his methodology. In particular, I told her that, at least to my ears, Yau weakens his case and lays himself open to his enemies by sounding too self-promoting.
  As it appears in her article, she has purposefully distorted my statement and made it unforgivably misleading. Like the rest of us, Yau has his faults, but, unlike most of us, his virtues outweigh his faults. Unfortunately, Nasar used my statement to bolster her case that the opposite is true, and for this I cannot forgive her.
• State University of New York at Stony Brook professor Michael Anderson's email to Yao:
  Dear Yau,
  I am furious, and completely shocked, at what Sylvia Nasar wrote. Her quote of me is completely wrong and baseless. There are other factual mistakes in the article, in addition to those you pointed out. I have left her phone and email messages this evening and hope to speak to her tomorrow at the latest to clear this up. I want her to remove this statement completely from the article. It serves no purpose and contains no factual information; I view it as stupid gossip unworthy of a paper like the New Yorker. At the moment, the print version has not appeared and so it might be possible to fix this still. I spent several hours with S. Nasar on the phone talking about Perelman, Poincare, etc but it seems I was too naive (and I'm now disgusted) in believing this journalist would report factually.
  I regret very much this quote falsely attributed to me and will do what
  ever I can to have it removed. I will keep you informed as I know more.
  Yours, Michael
• Michael Anderson's further announcement:
  Many of you have probably seen the New Yorker article by Sylvia Nasar and David Gruber on Perelman and the Poincare conjecture. In many respects, its very interesting and a pleasure to read. However, it contains a number of inaccuracies and downright errors. I spent several hours talking with Sylvia Nasar trying to dissuade her from incorporating the Tian-Yau fights into the article, since it was completely irrelevant and I didn't see the point of dragging readers through the mud. Obviously I was not successful.
  The quote attributed to me on Yau is completely inaccurate and distorted from some remarks I made to her in a quite different context; I made it explicit to her that the remarks I was making in that context were purely speculative and had no basis in fact. I did not give her my permission to quote me on this, even with the qualification of speculation. There are other inaccuracies about Stony Brook. One for instance is the implication that Tian at MIT was the first to invite Perelman to the US to give talks. This is of course false - we at Stony Brook were the first to do so. I stressed in my talks with her the role Stony Brook played, yet she focusses on the （single） talk Grisha gave at Princeton, listing a collection of eminent mathematicians, none of whom is a geometer/topologist.
  I was not given an opportunity to set the record straight with the New Yorker before publication; this was partly because I was travelling in Europe at the time this happened, and there was a rush to publish; the publication date is the same as the announcement date of the Fields Medals I think. I was not sent an advance copy of the article for checking. I spoke with Sylvia on the phone this morning, to no avail. I've also had some email correspondence with Yau on the matter over the last day. I apologized to him and expressed my anger and frustration about what was done, confirming to him the quote attributed to me is false and baseless. The email to Yau is now already posted on a Chinese blog site!）.
  I've learned my lesson on dealing with the media the hard and sour way and am still considering what path to pursue to try to rectify the situation, to the extent still possible.
  Sincerely,
  Mike
• Princeton Professor Joe Kohn's email to Yao:
  Dear Yau,
  I learned from Andreea that you were very hurt by my remarks quoted in the New Yorker. I did not mean to hurt you. You are universally recognizd as one of the foremost mathematicians of our times, which explains my first remark. I know how deeply you care about Chinese mathematics and therefore I assume that you would like to be as effective as possible in your leadership of the Chinese mathematical community - and this explains my second remark.
  Best regards,
  Joe

Categories:

• china
• sci

Polarization of market share and "difficulty" in China market

Background:
1) the stories of Google and Baidu (NYT article also cached here).
2) Google aground in China, MySpace sailing for trouble? (via ESWN)
3) Google losing traction in China - China Herald
4) Economist on Alibaba

Trend in search engines market share in US and China


In both charts a bi-polarization trend is observed, i.e. the market leader is widening the gap. This is quite typical in the technology industry, as was demonstrated since the Win-tel era, and reached a susperstitious peak in the dot-bomb era when everyone rushed to reach #1, at all costs, with the MBA-student-naive superstition thinking first mover advantage. Of course, not all sectors follow this rule. There are a few pre-requisites

• The market leader need to be a well-run company, continue innovation is a must (e.g., google, microsoft)
  
• A well defined sector where similar business rules applies for all competitors (hard for the challenger to innovate)
  
• Users are fairly sticky and lazy to switch
• A highly scalable business model for all, such that the leader continues to have more resource to invest (due to its larger starting scale of revenue) -- a positive feedback cycle (borrowing the concept in electronic science)
• Shift in market rules is either slow, or inter-related with the choice of the market leaders. i.e. market leader has the clout to influence the shift in market place
  

The second question is related to one that NYT asked, what is so special about China?

• China is the largest (or potential largest) market outside USA (or larger than USA), scale-wise -- just see the number of internet users, so that much of the US model which could not be replicated elsewhere (e.g. smaller European and Asian countries) could be make profitable in China
• China market may have many aspects which are different than the US market (e.g. credit card and payment, consumer segmentation, geographic fragmentation), but it also has a lot of similarity. There is NO fundamental difference IMO.
• e.g., Consumer behavior in China also bears a number of similarities with the US: Chinese are more receptive (than Europeans) of tested models in US such as Walmart and Disneyland
• e.g. the importance of branding is doubly magnified in China market, as a result of inadequate consumer protection by the government
• The difference in these MNC cases boils down to one key factor, people. In all cases cited, yahoo, ebay and google alike, multinationals did not have the talent to manage the China business. No doubt Kaifu Li is a great scientist. But I am not sure if he is a great business executive, or that he was given such mandate by the people in CA. Google China may churn out some very innovative product for google worldwide, but it is much less likely to win the China market for google. (Ludington's said "running Google China from Mountain View, CA" here, in that Li was hired for running a research institute, not a real business)
• The google/yahoo phenomenon is not alone for the internet business. Other industries, such as PepsiCo (Consumer goods), pharmaceuticals (mostly all except Jansenn and SKF, especially Glaxo), had all experienced a long learning cycle (a decade) before turning profitable. A HK/Taiwan/Singapore ethnic Chinese manager, though fluent in Mandarin Chinese and familiar with western management skills, may not be the best choice. (e.g. Yahoo, Unilever, Glaxo, Microsoft in late 1990s). A reluctant ex-pat is the worst choice.
• How to succeed? Do not use the particularity of the internet industry as an excuse. Yes, times have changed, the Chinese managers are more competitive today than 10 years ago. I insist there is no fundamental difference. and
• Study the success stories of Janssen, KFC and P&G. Study the failure lessons of Yahoo, eBay, Glaxo and Whirlpool.
• Hire the right people. It does not necessarily have to be ethnic Chinese or Mandarin speaking (think Ghosn). Though experience in mainland and MNC are very important, many MNC have confused language ability (e.g. manager from Singapore, Taiwan) with experience in China market. The person needs to have the will and ability, and a clear goal to achieve.
• Do not micro-manage. But set very objective and measurable milestones to monitor progress. Change the China CEO before it is too late.
  



Categories:
• biz
• china

Taiwanese now fans of Chairman Mao

It seems that Chairman Mao has taken over Taiwan, according to DPP Chairman SK You and pro-DPP FTV. First SK You (and others) accused the Red Camp of chosing the color red (he forgot to mention Manchester United and Coca-cola) and started the protest on the anniversary of Mao's death (Is this the way Chinese honor the dead?).

Now it went from bizarre to bizarreR. FTV alleged the Red Camp's campaign of being inspired by an old CCP Red Army adapted folk song in 1930s:

• Osmanthus Flowering Everywhere in August (or here)
• Lyric:
  八月桂花遍地开，鲜红的旗帜竖呀竖起来，张灯又结彩呀，张灯又结彩呀，光辉灿烂闪出新世界。
  红军队伍真威风，百战百胜最英勇。活捉张辉瓒呀，打垮罗卓英呀，粉碎了蒋贼的大围攻，一杆红旗飘在空中，军队伍要扩充。
  保卫工农新政权，带领群众闹革命，红色战士最光荣。
  
  八月桂花遍地开，鲜红的旗帜竖呀竖起来，张灯又结彩呀，张灯又结彩呀，光辉灿烂闪出新世界。
  红军队伍真威风，百战百胜最英勇。
  活捉张辉瓒呀，打垮罗卓英呀，粉碎了蒋贼的大围攻，一杆红旗飘在空中，红军队伍要扩充。
  亲爱的工友们哪亲爱的工友们哪，拿起刀枪都来当红军，拿起刀枪都来当红军。

Evidence? again, the color red, and the coincidence of the pretty common Chinese phrase "flowering everywhere" (see bold characters in the lyric).

FTV went on further to interview a self proclaimed CCP specialist hack called Lin Baohua. Lin found an album called "100 years of Chinese Song" where the song listed right after this one is called "All under the sky for the public 天下为公", which is synonymous to Red's next campaign "All under the sky go seige 天下围攻". Lin seems to be a prophet, picking out from hundreds of albums which includes this folk song this special collection album as the delphi. If the red is indeed following the delphi, it is probably invincible? Wait, isn't this a confucius saying, and repeated many times by Dr Sun Yat-sen? (大道之行，天下为公). In fact, Bill Clinton also quote this line in his speech given in Xi'an. The Red said its theme was actually inspired the synonym of the Confuscius phrase (大盗之行也，天下围攻), by changing Confucius' "When the great Way prevails, a public spirit will rule all under the sky" into "When a great thief prevails, the public all under the sky will siege [the city]".

There are only seven colors in the rainbow. Blue, Green, Orange were taken by DPP, KMT and PFP. New Party took Yellow. If the Red is to use another color, it would be Violet or Indigo, which would probably be accused as a cousin color to Blue.

A desperate attempt by the Chen apologists, which is usually a sign of showing weakness.

The Red is also quick to countered the accusation. They pointed out that there are plenty of CCP party songs about "We stand here facing the sun 我們站在向陽的地方", which was the title for the pro-Bian demonstration on Sep 16th.

• PLA Army Song: Our Troop Always Face the Sun 向前向前向前！我们的队伍向太阳，
• I love Beijing Tiananmen: 我爱北京天安门，天安门上太阳升。伟大领袖毛主席，指引我们向前进
• And plenty more: 红小兵向太阳 mp3, 葵花向太阳. 大寨人心向红太阳, 红太阳, 太阳最红毛主席最亲, etc

Hmmm, it seems both the Green and Red are Mao's fans. Next time I am going to claim a rainbow flag and use the solar eclipse as my totem, so that I can claim everyone in Taiwan as my fans.

Update: "林保华说，连倒扁集团所提出的礼义廉耻，都几乎跟胡锦涛所推动的「八荣八耻」，在意识形态上也是类似的。为什么满脑子都和共产党目前的号召和宣传碰在一起？令人不解". According to Lin Baohua, Hu Jintoa even monopolized confuscius' 4 moral pillars of a country (courtesy, loyalty, frugality, awareness of shame - 礼义廉耻，国之四维) by his generalization to 8honors+8disgraces. Therefore, anyone who follows Guan Zhong's 4 pillars is also following CCP's 8+8.

(Sep 26) There is now a video clip compiled by a pro-Bian netizen. Trying hard to make the connection, he made one mistake of linking "天下围攻" with "粉碎蒋贼大围攻", as the lyric means the "Siege" would be defeated.

Categories:

• taiwan
• pol

Economic solution to a political deadlock

A year ago, I wrote a short proposal to solve Iran's nuke problem, advocating an IAEA managed nuclear fuel stockpile.

I am glad to see now that it is finally becoming a solid plan.

• "Billionaire investor Warren Buffett, CNN creator Ted Turner and former Sen. Sam Nunn pledged $50 million to the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency Tuesday to create a uranium stockpile.
  
• The aim is to discourage countries from developing their own nuclear programs. The reserve would ensure supplies of low-grade fuel for nuclear power plants around the world. One example of a program they hope to discourage is in Iran, which critics fear is ultimately aimed at developing weapons."
  

Yes, I am aware of the fact that for the cases of Iran, nuclear power is probably just an excuse. For Pyongyang, even though it has declared nuke capability and intention, it is dying for energy. To provide them with affordable nuclear fuels in the form of low grade purified uranium and plutonium isotopes may not be the full recipe to dissuade them away from the nuclear program, but it removes a major excuse they could use. It would be useful to delay, if not suspend, their current project.

Much more important is that we should expect more countries (of which most will be on purely economic motive) expressing interests in developing their own nuclear program, especially when the price of fossil fuel (oil, gas, coal, etc) is becoming more and more expensive. Even if fossil fuel is abundant and cheap, nuclear energy, counter-intiutively, is a lot more cleaner option...

• Several life cycle analyses show similar emissions per kilowatt-hour from nuclear power and from renewables such as wind power [75]. According to one life cycle study (van Leeuwen and Smith 2001-2005 [source 1]), carbon dioxide emissions from nuclear power per kilowatt hour could range from 20% to 120% of those for natural gas-fired power stations depending on the availability of high grade ores.
  

...provided that proper safety management is exercised, both on the power plant construction and operation, and that of the fuel rods.

Since fossil fuel can only provide us for a few centuries (the number of depending on different estimates), and nuclear energy would provide us for many BILLIONS of year. So it is a matter of sustainability and inevitability that we have to switch to nuclear, sooner or later. (see also Wired Magazine and FAQ from Stanford Professor John McCarthy) Regarding the melt-down of a nuclear power plant (Chernobyl) vs damage from fossil fuel plants, a good analogy would be comparing the total casualties in accidents in flying a plane vs accidents in crashing a car.

Unfortunately, nuclear power should have been much cheaper than it is today, if more competition is introduced to the market. The new international stockpile effort will introduce new competition to the fuel rod supply, and hence boost the market size and scale of power plant construction, which will in turn lower the cost of building and operating a power plant. Since the fuel rods from this international stockpile will be more affordable than those available on the market today, an attached condition to the buyer could be a strict safety operating standard. This will ensure the safety of the plants.

All these benefits are, on top of what it will achieve for non-proliferation.

Categories:

• biz
• pol
• world

"Nightmare on Beijing Street"

Read UCLA Professor Tom Plate's insightful essay: Nightmare on Beijing Street. (via Michael Turton)

For those who are not familiar with Taiwan matters, Josepg Wu is the Chairman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), appointed by Chen Shui-Bian. His preference and his enthusiasm in his job is well discussed in Plate's essay.

As usual, Michael has DPP spin defends his party line on the matter . His solution sounds like a legitimate alternative, but it assumes at least 10 "if's" and alliances with a dozen countries. The probability chain breaks down when any one of those "if" fails to turn up. I believe Michael himself have also written about the Taiwan Relation Act, showing that it is just an option (not an obligation) for US, not to mention that Japan's remilitarization (and another big "if" to interference on the Taiwan strait) is still far from the horizon.

Plate is insightful in the reality of an arms race

• "[Taiwan]try to match the mainland missile for missile -- that's just not feasible..."

I have actually been able to backed up his claim with solid numbers a year go. It is 21st century already. I can't imagine anyone other than Kim Jong-il is still obsessed with the idea of arms race. Plate is spot on in suggesting the "killer peace offensive".

P.S.
1) The same strategy is applicable to the mainland side as well
2) (Update) See also Chu Shulong interview. According to Chu "Beijing's priority is economic development, and will be happy as long as there is no crisis in Taiwan". That is pretty much what the world (except the Green in Taiwan) see it. Therefore, even Professor Plate seems to have asked the wrong question, as Taiwan is not under any real security threat at this moment, or at least in the next 30 years.

• 北京倒不關心台灣會亂，北京關心的是陳水扁會不會在兩岸關係議題上作文章，例如以改變台海現狀來轉移焦點，改變他的處境。 問及北京是否擔心呂秀蓮繼任總統時，楚樹龍說，最壞的情況都在李登輝和陳水扁執政時發生了，沒什麼好擔心了。
• 北京已理解到，統一是長期目標，急也急不來。胡錦濤上任後，把施政重點放在經濟建設，提出戰略經濟.....台灣問題仍然重要，但已不是第一重要，只要海峽相安無事，北京就會把關心重點擺到其他地方
  
  

Categories:

• taiwan
• china
• pol

A parody of a parody of a parody 恶搞徐志摩

《原来 - 我也能写新诗》

当
广大网友
恶搞诗坛芙蓉姐姐
国家级女诗人赵丽华
的时候

你们可有
想过
其实
赵丽华是在
恶搞
徐志摩

---

网友仿写

1)
这为什么
不是诗

我说它就是
不是也是

诗为什么需要
别人看懂？
为什么需要
像诗？

2)
MSN Parody

iwillipo 12:29:57
《海淀桥下堵车了》
靠
DaemonMagic 12:30:15
啥？
iwillipo 12:30:25
我刚创作的诗
DaemonMagic 12:30:37
靠

3)
抓了一个贪官
还有贪官
还抓吗？
抓!

抓了一个贪官
还有贪官
还抓吗？
抓!

抓了一个贪官
还有贪官
还抓吗？
抓!

4)
赵丽华立功了，
赵丽华立功了！
不给莎士比亚任何的机会。
李白、杜甫他们可以提早回家了！
伟大的中国轻松、写实、幼稚主义现代湿人！
她继承了搞恶的光荣的传统。
芙蓉、木子美在这一刻灵魂附体，
赵丽华一个人她代表了搞恶悠久的历史和传统，
这一刻她不是一个人在战斗，
她不是一个人！…
… 是成千上万的网民!

---
原作品选:

　　《傻瓜灯——我坚决不能容忍》　　赵丽华
　　我坚决不能容忍
　　那些
　　在公共场所
　　的卫生间
　　大便后
　　不冲刷
　　便池
　　的人

《巴松错》
莜麦菜还小
就可以吃了
后来丝瓜结了
可以每天去摘

---
有关连接:
1) 在大众被"诗坛芙蓉姐姐"---赵丽华 恶搞之后
2) 女诗人作品网上遭嘲笑 (“她的诗还是有趣的，但是毕竟只是小聪明。”诗人徐勇韬如此表示，他认为“诗歌不仅仅只是去关注那些虚弱的风花雪月和玄幽的精神痛苦”。对网友的反应，他表示“她的诗本身是对经典文本和经典诗意的一个反讽，而网友则又对这种反讽进行了反讽”。 )
3) List of Parody^2

Thai coup succeeded?

I was chating with a friend in Bangkok on MSN.

He said the army has controlled the TV stations now. It seems the coup succeeded. Earlier there was rumour of the coup and tanks in the city. Thaksin delivered a speech of emergency on Thai TV (from UN in NY), but Thaksin's speech was suspended in the middle. All TV stations seem to be under military control now.

It was said that the trigger was that the army was pissed when Thaksin tried influence the promotion of some army officials.

Keep an eye on google news.

Update: it has been more than 12 hours now, I guess we all know what happened. It was reported all major media had theri website closed. Apparently the Chinese newspaper World Daily (I think it is affiliated with UDN of Taiwan) is not one of the major media.