馬英九虛偽的道歉

馬英九在新店原住民的溪洲部落不小心講出「我把你們當人看」的話，引發全國不分藍綠如山倒海的批判。

一開始馬英九還在辯稱，說是有心人斷章取義。但兩天下來，馬英九終於道歉了。他說：

『我的若干用語，我知道有些人感覺到不快，我願意為這一點表示歉意。』

這像是在為他的「我把你們當人看」的話道歉嗎？

他如果真的認為他的話有錯並誠心道歉，他會說，我說錯了，為我的話道歉。

但他卻說，我為「有人感到不快」這一點道歉。

聽起來，好像說，若沒有人表達不爽就沒關係，我就不必道歉，「我把你們當人看」就沒問題。

那請問馬先生，你道歉，是因為你認為「講錯了話」，還是因為你認為「有人不爽」？

事實上，馬英九從來沒有說他講錯。他的道歉，是因為他發覺有些人沒有被取悅。他的道歉甚至暗示了那些人不應該不爽。

由這種官僚式的道歉方式，可以看出來，即使全國媒體不分藍綠都把他罵到臭頭，馬英九還是認為錯不在自己講的話。

這種虛偽已極的假道歉，恐怕只有更進一步暴露馬英九的歧視心態罷了。

北市府執意暴露選民投票立場

2008 年立委選舉與公投合併舉行，中央選舉委員會規定採用「一階段投票」，也就是立委、公投的票（共四張）一起領，圈票時在同一個桌子（櫃子）上圈，投票箱也在同一個位置。

這個設計的主要用意，是使得領票者「要不要領公投票」的意願不會被旁觀者記錄下來，以保障人民「秘密投票」的權利。

但是國民黨以總統候選人馬英九以及黨主席吳伯雄為頭，帶領國民黨縣市政府進行杯葛，強力推行「二階段投票」，要求選民先領立委票，投完之後，若想要去投公投的，再去另外一個地方（也許是另外設置的桌子、櫃子，甚至是另外一間房間）領取、圈選公投票。

這樣的設計使得選民「要不要領、投公投票」的意願曝光，使得國民黨地方人士可以「記錄」誰有領了公投票。這種設計「違反秘密投票」的原則，但是所謂泛藍高級知識份子似乎對這「違反秘密投票」的設計仍全力支持。

幾天前台北市開始選務人員集訓 (反制一階段？北市出奇招～一階段領票者派人尾隨)。他們的講師是這樣講的：

『基本上我們也是公務員，我們依法行事。這件事就聽從台北市的規定：領圈投、領圈投，這就是兩階段的投票精神。各位就按照這種精神佈置你的投開票所。』

『各位書上有工作手冊，他佈置的圖例是中選會的案例。這部分台北市既然決定兩階段，它的圖例我們就不用。』

『台北市佈置兩階段，萬一有人硬說要一階段領票
。。。
他一進來就說：「我要一次領四張票」，就是要一階段領票。主任管理員遇到這種情況，你就派一個管理員，類似在他後面跟著他，但是不要靠太近。』

做為一個受過教育的人，我實在不清楚，額外加派一個人去跟在一個「要一次領四張票的選民」後面，到底是何用意。這種作法等於是：即使你不想讓人知道你有（或沒有）領公投票，我們也要想盡辦法讓人知道。

難道，台北市就真的如此非要暴露選民政治立場不可，如此飢渴到，即使到最後是採用一階段投票，他們也要想盡辦法暴露、紀錄、監督選民的投票意向？

更令人吃驚的是，台北市的高級知識份子，對這種設計「犧牲人民秘密投票原則」的荒謬性、違法性，都沒有一點點覺悟嗎？泛藍真的認為，這種設計是合理可接受的嗎？

How AFP tailored a report to mislead readers

The hot news in Taiwan these two days is the violent resistance to the government's removal of the final symbol of authoritarian regime -- the "dazhong zhizheng"『大中至正』 plaque referring to dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) at the gateway to Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall. A bloody crime was committed by a pro-China supporter during the confrontation.

As the foreign media often report biased news of Taiwan following the propaganda put forward by the local pro-KMT media, I am curious for how they are gonna cover this.

It won't take much time before one is spotted. AFP, Agence Frence-Press, claimed to be "the world's oldest established news agency", can't wait to lead the world on manipulating news to serve the particular political agenda of some particular party.

Go see Michael's AFP Again *Sigh* for details on how AFP uses carefully chosen words in their recent report "Taiwan leader defends move to downplay Chiang legacy" to make the story one-sided. What I am going to point out here is how AFP uses selected photos and legends to further achieve that goal.

AFP displayed 3 photos on the same page of that article Michael mentioned.

The first photo shows Chiang Kai-shek supporters sitting on the ground, holding a big photo of Chiang's. The legend says:

"Dozens of pro-opposition Kuomintang supporters display a picture of late president Chiang Kai-shek"

Note what this photo and the legend tramsmit:

Peaceful demonstration of the pro-Chiang supporters, which is not the whole story; No mention of the fact that Chiang is considered a dictator in the eyes of many Taiwanese; No mention that there are many people showed up to support the removal of the『大中至正』 plaque, creating a wrong impression that Taiwanese are against this removal.

(Screen shot of photo and legend #1)

By itself this photo probably won't cause too much misleading. But AFP didn't stop here. The second photo is an arrest of a truck driver by police, with legend:

"The driver(C) of a truck is detained by police during a demonstration in front of the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall"

(Screen shot of photo and legend #2)

Without informing the readers the cause of arrest, this photo and legend might give the readers a wrong impression that Taiwan police arrest demonstrators for no reason. The fact is, the truck driver, Peng Sheng-lu (彭盛露), drove his truck at high speed into a group of people, dragging a journalist underneath the truck, and kept going for 10 meters despite that surrounding people shouting that a guy was under the truck. His violent behavior resulted in serious injuries of several journalists. The one who was dragged underneath, ETTV cameraman Wang Jui-chang (王瑞璋), had to be taken care in an intensive unit of a hospital overnight before it was confirmed that the injury was not life threatening.

Peng denied being intentional, but many witness and police said otherwise, judging from the fact that Peng stopped and charged several times before he was finally stopped:

彭盛露否認故意撞人，供稱為閃避民眾圍毆開車逃離，誤踩油門才撞上媒體記者。不過，警方以他駕車連續三度衝撞媒體記者，有殺人故意；另查出他是某立委參選人的助選員，涉及選舉暴力，訊後將他依殺人未遂、傷害及違反選罷法、妨害公務、毀損等五罪嫌送辦。

Peng committed total of 5 crimes, including one felony of attempted murder. That's why he got arrested. The news was all over local media, yet AFP reporter skillfully hides the crucial criminal fact from her readers but revealed only that a demonstrator was arrested.

Together with the impression presented from the first photo, that the demonstration is peaceful, this photo of "arrest for no reason" misled readers into believing, or at least suspecting, that Taiwan police arrest peaceful pro-Chiang demonstrators for no reason.

It is for obvious reasons that this AFP reporter, whose name is not shown, doesn't want his/her readers to know that the arrested criminal, Peng, is a registered campaign assitant of a pro-China legislative candidate Mei Feng (梅峰), who claims on his website to be a "China Legislative Candidate." (in Taiwan?)



AFP continues her news distorting trick onto the 3rd photo, which gets even dirtier. It shows that one guy is smashing the windshield of a truck, with legend:

"Angry pro-government demonstrators smash the windshield of a truck in front of the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall"

Note what I highlight above. What AFP hid from the readers in this single photo are:

The crime committed by the driver of this truck prior to this windshield smashing act (在眾人驚慌尖叫下，員警、媒體記者和民眾合力擋住小貨車，員警火速拔掉車鑰匙並將彭盛露拉下車。一名台建聯盟成員拿出棍棒猛砸車頭和擋風玻璃 [see here]); The truck was the crime tool of a violent act; The pro-government demonstrators were angry because of that criminal act committed by an anti-government demonstrator; The direct 'cause-and-response' relationship between the crime act in photo#2 and the behavior in photo#3.

(Screen shot of photo and legend #3)

Note that in photo#2, not only the attempted murder charge was hidden from the readers, but also the identity of the criminal, including name and which side he serves for, was not mentioned. But in photo#3, AFP didn't forget to remind readers that the angry windshield-smashing guy is a "pro-government" supporter.

It seems to me that not only the photos and legends are carefully selected, but the order of how those photos are presented is carefully arranged in such a way that readers will be led to have an impression that:

1. Pro-Chiang demonstrators are peaceful;
2. Taiwan police arrested peaceful demonstrators for no reason;
3. Pro-government demonstrators are violent.

Unfortunately none of these covers entirely what really happened there.

When a journalist is accused of being biased, we could think of that he or she is eitehr ignorant or having own agenda. In this case, the AFP reporter saw a confrontation between DPP government and anti-government pro-KMT supporters, but by using carefully selected words and skillfully arranged photos and legends in their report, they hid the negative part of pro-KMT side to make pro-KMT look good, and at the same time hid all the background and historical information to make DPP government and DPP supporters look bad. With AFP's professional effort, this entire event has been painted into a shape that's far away from the truth. This kind of truth distortion can't be explained away by simply being ignorant.

In their own website, AFP claims (highlight by me):

"Today, the agency continues to expand its operations worldwide,... All share the same goal: to guarantee top quality international service tailored to the specific needs of clients in each region."

AFP certainly leads the global media on the "service tailored" part.

------------

Update: I am attaching some other sources to let you see how much AFP has left behind. Comparing them, you would wonder if the writer of AFP is either drunk in some lala land, or is paid to write a propaganda note.

1. BBC Chinese "大中至正"牌匾完成拆除
(with my translation)

支持拆匾的民眾高喊"打倒威權"，並且開紅酒慶祝，反對拆匾的民眾則咒罵陳水扁及民進黨政府，...
The people supporting the removal of the plague shouted "Down the authoritarity" and celebrated with red wine. Those who are against it blamed Chen Shui-Bian and DPP government, ...

在昨天的流血事件中，一名駕駛貨車的立委助選員，意圖沖撞主張拆匾的台獨人士，他在遭阻攔及記者包圍採訪後，駕車沖撞記者造成一名記者被撞倒拖行而身受重傷。
In that bloody incident yesterday, an assitant of a legislator candidate drove a truck, intended to ram those plague-removal supporting TIers (Taiwan Independent supporters). After he was blocked and was surrounded by a group of journalists, he drove his truck into journalists, causing serious injuries onto a journalist who was dragged underneath the truck.

該名主張兩岸統一的立委參選人未獲政黨提名而獨立參選...
The pro-unification legislator candidate was not nominated by his party so he joined the campaign of legislative election without nomination.

該名遭起訴的貨車駕駛雖辯稱是意外事件，但據許多在場記者表示其多次猛加油門，是蓄意沖撞。
The indicted truck driver claimed that the whole thing was an accident, but according to the journalists at the scene, the driver pushed hard on gas paddle several times, indicating that the ramming was intentional.

2. A-gu's Characters down!

A reporter friend called me live from the scene about 10-15 minutes ago to say all the characters are finally down at the gate and on the memorial building itself.

I heard the crowd, which was cheering and very happy.

He said that as the construction workers were removing each nail on the final character at the gate, they would turn around and held it up to show the crowd, which cheered. As they finished and were coming down from their raised platform, they also waved at the crowd which again cheered them.

3. Thanks to Tim Maddog for providing the following links of video clips. Watch what really happened in the scene, and ask yourself: what kind of news agency would pretend that it didn't happen?

-- CNN news clip. From the content, this clip shows what happened right after the ramming started. Police were trying to drag the driver out of the truck, but the truck kept going. You can hear the screaming and crying of bystanders, and frantic "Someone underneath the truck!!" shouting. (Link to the original clip):


-- News clip based on ftv.com.tw (Link to the clip on YouTube)



------------

4. A historical moment of the end of authoritarian regime. Video clip from Taipei Congressman Chuang Rui-Hsiung (莊瑞雄, Nickname Taiwan Bear)'s website. Click to see how Taiwanese cheered and celebrated the removal of Chiang's plague. You can see how far AFP misled the readers. (original link)




5. Tim Maddog sent me this: Taipei Times regrets citing information from AFP because AFP reported distorted news:

In yesterday's issue, an item in the "Quick Take" section said former president Lee Teng-hui urged voters not to support the Democratic Progressive Party in upcoming elections ("Lee Teng-hui turns on Chen," page 3). Lee only urged his audience to make good use of the party ticket vote in the legislative elections. The material was sourced from Agence France-Presse, and the Taipei Times regrets the error.

[0710] 竹聯幫是國民黨的秘密暗殺組織?

今年10月4日，國內第一大黑幫竹聯幫的精神領袖，綽號「鴨霸子」的陳啟禮，在香港的 St. Teresa's 醫院病逝。陳啟禮成為台灣眾所周知的人物，主要是因為他涉及 1984 年的一宗跨海謀殺案，死者是具有美國人身份的台灣同鄉，筆名「江南」的劉宜良。劉宜良住在美國加州，因為寫了一些有關當時總統蔣經國婚外情的內幕而被國民黨視為叛國賊。國民黨以「為國家做事」之名下令竹聯幫幫主陳啟禮執行暗殺任務。

以這樣的任務派令，陳啟禮等於是執行國家任務的情報人員，理當被當作國家英雄對待。但是國民黨過河拆橋，在陳啟禮圓滿達成任務之後，將陳啟禮以重刑犯對待，不但判處無期徒刑，在獄中更是以比對待其他重刑犯更嚴厲的方式對待他，甚至企圖將他殺害滅口。

陳啟禮後來逃到柬普寨以躲避刑罰並在那裡一直待到病亡。

陳啟禮的死亡不但給竹聯幫劃下一個轉捩點，並且，更重要的是，再一次地喚醒台灣人有關國民黨與黑道掛勾的黑暗齷齪本質。最近爆發的另外一件國民黨密謀交代香港著名武打明星王羽前往美國暗殺當時的黨外巨頭之一許信良的暗殺任務，更使得國民黨的利用暗殺剷除異己的殘酷本質更加彰顯。

但更令人震驚的還不止於此。首先我們先試著瞭解一下為什麼會有竹聯幫的成立。

這篇文章 Taiwan's Dirty Business 中提到：

『竹聯幫是 40 年前由蔣介石的國民黨裡幾個高級將領的未成年兒子所組成。這些高級將領逃過毛澤東的共產黨的殺害而躲到台灣。因為他們的父親慘遭失敗而感到羞辱，這些叛逆的青少年組織起來在台北郊區的竹林路與其他幫派火拼。』

The United Bamboo was founded 40 years ago by a handful of teen-aged sons of senior officers in Chiang Kai-shek's KMT army who had encamped in Taiwan rather than be crushed by Mao Zedong's advancing Communists. Disenchanted by the humiliation of their fathers, the young rebels joined forces to fight other gangs along Bamboo Forest Road on the outskirts of Taipei.

另外一篇 Lord Duck Is Dead 提到：

陳啟禮於1943年出生於中國，在1949年跟著家人到台灣。17歲的時候，他跟一群朋友組成竹聯幫。。。。竹聯幫的組成份子是一群在中國出生的青少年，因為受台灣人欺負而組成幫派來自衛。

Chen (Chi-li) was born in 1943 in China and moved with his family to Taiwan in 1949. At age 17, he formed the United Bamboo gang with friends ... the United Bamboo gang was formed by a bunch of teenage students who were born on the mainland, oppressed by local Taiwanese people and got together to defend themselves.

根據這兩篇文章所言，當初之所以會有竹聯幫的組成，大抵也不過是叛逆青少年的幫派英雄式的幻想。如果事實真的是這樣，那我們可以說，國民黨是在有需要的時候，與一個「已經存在」的幫派聯絡、掛勾，以利用該幫派的火力進行政治行動。

但是，根據近日的資訊，這個我們早已耳熟能詳，而且有歷史事實根據的「國民黨與黑道掛勾」的印象，似乎並不能完整呈現國民黨介入黑幫的整個面貌。

當年當陳啟禮因為跨海謀殺案而被起訴的時候，代表劉宜良遺孀的律師不是別人，正是目前民進黨的總統候選人謝長廷。因為是該事件律師，謝長廷當然跟著陳啟禮一起在庭上，並且有機會聽到陳啟禮所有的陳述與自白。

在近日的一篇報導 『謝長廷：當時的政府要陳啟禮組竹聯幫』中, 謝長廷說:

『陳啟禮當年在法庭講過，「當時的政府要他組織竹聯幫，就是要對付所謂的叛徒，殺害這些人，他們當時認為黨外、民主運動人士沒有力量，很可能
可以結合流氓，組織竹聯幫制裁、傷害這些人，這是陳啟禮自己講的。」』

『陳啟禮講的很清楚，公開在法庭講，叫他出來組織竹聯幫，擴大勢力，就是要殺害這些人。』

『他有自白、有錄音，把這經過講得很詳細，當時大家不敢講，看了大家會冒冷汗，是政府去組織黑社會。』

謝長廷還暗示，竹聯幫之所以會成為台灣第一大幫派，是因為有國民黨在暗地裡撐腰。

謝長廷先生的陳述令人震驚。畢竟，「與黑道掛勾」是一回事，但「主動下令組成幫派以進行政治謀殺」則是完全不同的一回事。這些話出自竹聯幫幫主之口，可見我之前引用的，竹聯幫的組成是單純的「叛逆青少年的幫派英雄幻想」的說法並不可靠。

由此可知，台灣人即使經過了幾十年的慢慢覺醒過程而漸漸認識了國民黨「與黑幫掛勾」的本質，但對國民黨的黑幫內在還是沒有真正的認識。現在國人總算可以看清楚，國民黨不僅僅是「與竹聯幫掛勾」而已；竹聯幫事實上是國民黨組成的秘密謀殺組織。

當我們認識了這個事實之後，就可以瞭解，馬英九「當選後要重新調查陳文成命案、林義雄家人謀殺案」的說法是多麼荒謬可笑。他們既然組成了專門執行政治暗殺任務以剷除異己的黑幫，而林宅血案又是在他們的特務人員層層包圍監視，所謂連一隻鳥也飛不過的情況下讓兇手來去自如地發生，這就如陳總統日前講的，「用膝蓋想也知道是誰幹的」，那就把自己的內部檔案公開就可以，何必虛情假意裝無辜地講什麼「重新調查」？

---

[註1]：這篇文章是從我寫的一篇英文
United Bamboo- KMT's Underground Assassination Sector 翻譯而來。有興趣的讀者可以前往一讀。
[註2]：同文發表在媒抗。
[註3]：延伸閱讀：媒抗網友 abiau2 開的欄 『涉嫌陳文成命案的政黨參選人說當選後會查陳文成命案』

[0704] Michael Turton: 國民黨魁訪中國，中國飛彈打台灣

Michael Turton 在他的部落格 The View from Taiwan 裡發表了一篇文章，標題是『國民黨魁訪中國，中國飛彈打台灣』。文裡引用了『英文中國郵報』的一篇新聞報導：『國民黨高層：新任黨主席將訪問中國』。該篇新聞說，根據國民黨副主席關中所言，國民黨新任黨魁吳伯雄將在這個月（2007年4月）月底率領該黨高層與中國的共產黨會談，並言吳伯雄希望該會談能達成「具體協定」。

該報導又指出，吳伯雄的前任馬英九，因為怕被貼上「親中」的標籤而沒有訪中，但是吳伯雄並不在乎這些，因為他並沒有要競選什麼職位。關中說：『他（吳伯雄）不可能被說成過度親中而遭批評。』

我不知道吳伯雄為什麼不怕被說成親中。他既當了黨主席，他的過度親中就代表國民黨的過度親中，難道當真如此明目張膽的硬幹，不怕台灣人質疑？

不管如何，國人不可忽略這篇新聞報導所呈現的象徵性意義。如同 Michael 在他的文章裡提的：

Substantive talks! I get arguments that the KMT isn't cooperating with China because they used to be enemies, because "so many have died." Yet the first thing Wu does as Chairman is visit China for "substantive talks." The symbolism of the leader from abroad who visits China after being selected leader isn't lost on anyone here or in China: [b]he goes to pay tribute to the masters in Beijing[/b]. If it isn't blindingly obvious that the KMT and the CCP are cooperating......no need to finish that sentence.

具體協定！ 我常聽說，國民黨沒有在與中國合作，因為以前兩邊互為敵人，也因為曾因此死了很多人。然而，吳伯雄當選國民黨主席後想做的第一件事，竟是與中國達成「具體協定」。一個外國領導高層在剛就任就急著去「拜訪中國」，這個舉動的象徵性意義，在每一個中國人的眼中都是不言而喻的：『他（吳伯雄）是來北京跟他的主子磕頭的』。國民黨是不是在跟共產黨合作，可說是「司馬昭之心，路人皆知」了。

另外一個值得注意的現象，是這則新聞，竟然在中文媒體上看不到。是這些中文媒體很清楚這個消息的可能負面衝擊性而自動過濾，還是有其他原因？

Cross-post:
http://www.anti-media.tw/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=484185#484185

[0703] Is Taiwanese Holo a Chinese language?

I was reading Michael's post Language and Culture Here and There, in which some language issues are discussed. I found this paragraph:

The weird fact is that the government here is recognizing other Chinese languages as national languages -- and both sides regard this as becoming less Chinese. In fact, I am sure that the pro-China crowd is going to scream that increased use of Chinese languages like Hakka and Taiwanese is an act of "de-Sinicization.

and don't quite agree with it. I wrote a comment below:

Michael, it seems that you consider the Hakka used in Taiwan and the Taiwanese(holo) are "chinese languages." I don't quite agree with this view.

First of all, a language, like biology species, evolves. When a language splits and each isolates from the other for some period of time, they evolve into different languages. This is a general case in all languages.

Taiwan in the ruling of Chiang kei-shih had prevented the contact between people from two sides of the Strait. That provided the necessary requirement -- isolation -- for languages on each side to evolve independently.

Secondly, Taiwan has gone through rulings of different countries, each contributes some of their cultural elements into Taiwanese. This is especially true for Japan. Many Taiwanese words are actually Japanese. I did have a chance to talk with a Holo guy from China. We can understand each other by about 60%-70% of the words we use, but not 100 or 90%. It's NOT like the case of "American English vs. British English," in which the English in USA is not that much deviated from its British cousin.

That means, even it's a fact that Holo was originally from China, the current Holo in Taiwan is a combination of many different influences and is already different from its origin language significantly. Therefore, labeling it a "chinese language" would be misleading.

When comparing the cultures between Taiwan and China, one common misconcept is that "Taiwan culture is part of China culture." Actually, to describe more precisely, we probably have to say, "China culture is part of Taiwanese culture," becaue Taiwan's culture is a combination of many different cultures and Chinese culture is just one of them.

[0703] DPP poll: 69% think Taiwan is an independent state

DPP announced a poll :

Who defines Taiwan status (台海現狀）	Taiwanese 83.2%	China government 1.7%	Both 6.4%
Is Taiwan an independent sovereignty state?	Yes 69.2%
Is Taiwan part of China?	Yes 14.6%
A referendum is required when signing sovereignty-related agreements with China	Yes 84.8%	No 9.7%
Join United Nations in the name of "Taiwan"	Yes 70.6%	No 19.6

It seems that Taiwanese conscience has already become the majority in Taiwan. I recalled President Chen said earlier that, by the time of the 2008 Presidential Election, Taiwanese consicience would rise to a level that any candidate advocating for "Unification with China" will have no chance at all of getting elected. I never truely believe in what he said like this one before ... :)

[0703] Michael Turton - 美聯社錯在哪裡

在台灣的老外圈子裡的部落格中，最受重視的部落格之一是 Michael Turton 的 The View from Taiwan。他對台灣透視犀利，關於台灣政壇的動向分析遠比在台灣自己本土的記者要來得理性且深入。同時，他與其他網友如 Tim Maddog, Stop Ma 等人，持續地在監督外國媒體污衊台灣的報導，並不斷地以部落格、以email等方式在替台灣批判這些外國媒體敗類，避免了英語世界的外國媒體成為偏中的一言堂。

對於這一次美聯社跟 CNN 以「台灣人渣競選總統」來污衊呂秀蓮的動作，Michael 以及與其合作的群體部落格 「台灣時事 Taiwan Matters」 均發表文章加以批判。另外，Michael 還投書到英文報紙台北時報，指出這事件的關鍵不在偏頗，而在外國媒體向來慣於放棄記者「平衡報導的道德要求標準」而主動地一面倒採用北京的觀點與措辭來污衊台灣。

CNN 以「台灣人渣競選總統」為標題來污衊呂秀蓮

這次引發爭議的該新聞報導是由在香港的美聯社派出的中國記者李明（或李閩？）所撰寫。在 CNN 發表的該報導已經在爭議後將標題由「台灣人渣競選總統」改為「呂秀蓮欲成為台灣第一個女總統」，但是內文中仍然保留對呂秀蓮副總統的污衊用語。而且，修改前的「台灣人渣競選總統」一文，仍然可以從 google 的搜尋系統中找到 （到 google 打入 cnn scum of nation然後點選 cached。如果找不到，可以看看我翻印下來的圖形檔。

Michael Turton 在「The View from Taiwan」發表的對 CNN 的批判：
CNN 以北京用語描述呂秀蓮
對美聯社與呂秀蓮爭議的最後評語

Tim Maddog 在「台灣時事」發表的對 CNN 的批判：
CNN:有線新聞媒體的敗類

Michael 在台北時報的投書在這裡。因為很精彩，特別將其全文翻譯置於此：

The recent "scum of the nation" flap, and the response to it from the Taipei Times, Associated Press (AP) and other organizations, shows that the media still do not understand why Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) -- along with those of us who follow international media coverage of Taiwan -- find the story so offensive.

最近有關於「民族敗類」的事件，以及來自台北時報、美聯社及其他機構的反應，顯示出（台灣的）媒體還是沒搞清楚副總統呂秀蓮──和我們這些盯著「國際媒體的台灣報導」的一群人── 為什麼會覺得這整件事是如此冒犯。

The issue is not, as the Taipei Times framed it in a recent editorial ("Annette Lu tames the world press," March 10, page 8), one of naive bias on the part of CNN and AP. Nobody is accusing either organization of slanting stories to favor China. Rather, the issue is the foreign media's uncritical incorporation of propaganda from Beijing into its reporting on Taiwan in a way that is automatic and unconsidered, allowing those opinions to shape its discourse on the nation, instead of developing a robust understanding of Taiwan in its own context.

事情的關鍵並非如台北時報在最近的社論 ("Annette Lu tames the world press," March 10, page 8) 所說的，是 CNN 與美聯社幼稚的偏見。沒有人控訴這兩個單位以偏頗的報導來偏向中國。事實上這件事的關鍵在於，外國媒體很自動地、毫不遲疑地引用北京的政治宣傳用語來報導台灣，完全沒有經過任何批判。相對於先對台灣加以深刻瞭解之後以自己的觀點來看台灣，（這些媒體）充分採用北京的政治語言來對台灣下結論。

The "scum of the nation" story is an excellent example of how this works. Instead of selecting one of the numerous other possible angles on Lu -- Lu the politician, Lu the feminist, Lu the activist, Lu the Taiwanese -- AP chose to lead with what Bejing said. This constant and reflexive use of verbiage from Beijing to frame Taiwan continues throughout the article. Elsewhere in the article the writer, a Hong Kong Chinese, refers to "Beijing's sacred view" of its claim to Taiwan. Once again, we get Beijing's take on things.

這件「民族敗類」的事件是這種行為的最佳例子。美聯社置許多呂秀蓮的可能角色 ─── 政治家、女性主義運動者、行動主義者、台灣人 ─── 於不顧，僅採用北京對呂秀蓮的評語。該文章整篇反覆地出現這種北京用以污衊台灣的措辭。該文作者 ─── 一個來自香港的中國人 ─── 指稱北京對台灣的野心是「北京的神聖使命」。我們又看到北京在這件事情上得逞。

Once again, Beijing frames Taiwan. Why not Taiwan's "sacred view" of its own independence and democracy? And what is the word "sacred" doing in a news report in the first place?

於是，北京再一次地設計搆陷了台灣。為什麼（這些媒體）不說台灣自己的獨立與民主是「神聖的使命」？等一下，一篇新聞報導為什麼會出現「神聖」這兩個字？

The article goes on to offend further, reporting that "Taiwan has been ruled separately from China since the Communists won a civil war and took over the mainland in 1949." This is a common formulation, but the implication that Taiwan and China were one nation prior to this period is a historical error -- yet it is commonly reported in the foreign media as if it were true -- since (it goes without saying) Beijing claims this is the case.

接下來該篇文章繼續冒犯台灣，說「台灣是在 1949 年共產黨贏得內戰並接收大陸後由中國分離出來」。這雖然是一個通稱，但是這其中暗示的「在那之前，台灣與中國是一個國家」卻是一個歷史錯誤。但外國媒體卻不斷地把這個歷史錯誤當作事實一樣地報導，只因為北京這樣宣稱。

Of course, no foreign media article on a pro-democracy politician is complete without referring to the tensions such people allegedly cause: "... and tensions with China would likely rise if she were elected."

很自然地，這些外國媒體好像不報導底下這一條就會覺得他們的報導少了什麼：「 她（呂秀蓮）被選為總統很可能導致與中國之間的關係更緊張」

In fact, tensions would only likely rise if Lu were elected because Beijing would cause them to do so -- as it does whenever Taiwan exercises its democracy. Democracy and its supporters do not cause tensions -- it is opposition to democracy that creates tensions. The article once again chooses a Beijing-centric frame to discuss Taiwan.

事實上，她如果當選，只有北京有可能昇高緊張的情勢 ─── 就如同以往每一次台灣執行民主步驟時一樣。民主與民主的支持者不會造成緊張情勢，只有反民主的勢力才會製造緊張情勢。該篇文章又一次地採用北京的觀點來搆陷台灣。

Longtime media watchers in Taiwan are wearisomely familiar with the international media bogeyman constructed out of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁): "Mad Chen," the "Crazed Independence Radical" -- He Can Cause a War At Any Moment, He's So Crazy! Here we see the script for "Mad Annette" in its first draft.

長期在台灣的媒體觀察者都清楚並厭倦國際媒體小丑污衊陳水扁總統的用詞：「陳瘋子」、「發瘋的獨立偏激份子」、「他隨時會發動戰爭」、「他是如此瘋狂」！現在，我們看到「呂瘋子」的第一個版本。

Near the end of the article the writer refers to the assassination attempt by a pan-blue supporter on Chen and Lu in 2004, noting: "The opposition alleged the shooting was staged to win sympathy votes." Fundamentally, there was no reason to mention the shooting; it is irrelevant to Lu's presidential candidacy. "The opposition" is a coy reference to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).

在文章尾端，該文作者提到 2004 年時一個泛藍支持者試圖暗殺陳水扁與呂秀蓮的事件，並下了這樣的註解：「反對勢力指控該暗殺事件是事先安排以贏得同情票的」。事實上該作者根本沒有必要提到該事件；該事件跟呂的競選總統無關。在這裡「反對勢力」暗指的是中國國民黨。

The writer also failed to mention that no evidence supports the opposition claims, making a hollow pretense of the sound journalistic ethic of balance in assigning equal weight to nonsense claims, and using the phrase "the police said" as if no investigation was conducted and no chain of evidence was followed. Note that the opposition's claim is set off in a sentence of its own, and that it comes last in the discussion of the assassination attempt. It goes with saying that Beijing supports the opposition on that one.

該作者沒有提到反對勢力的該項指控並沒有任何證據為根據，使得新聞記者「平衡報導」的基本道德成為一個空洞的虛言。該作者並刻意使用「警察說」（譯者註：而不是檢查官、法官說）使得整件事看起來好像沒有經過任何調查與搜證。值得注意的是，該反對勢力的指控本身是自說自話，在該暗殺事件的討論中的重要性微乎其微。有人說北京支持反對勢力的該項說法。

The issue here is not that China insulted Lu. The issue is that the foreign media repeatedly use Beijing to frame Taiwan, resulting in a media discourse about Taiwan that is strongly slanted in Beijing's favor. The bias lies not in the stories the international media select, but in the language and underlying assumptions the international media use in describing "The Beautiful Isle."

這整件事（「民族敗類」之言）的關鍵不在於中國侮辱呂秀蓮。重點在於外國媒體不斷地利用北京來搆陷台灣，使得有關台灣的報導一面倒地傾向北京的調調。這種偏見不在於外國媒體如何選擇報導的事件，而在於這些外國媒體在描述台灣這個「美麗寶島」時所用的語言與先入為主的觀念。