瘋人瘋語

「我離港前到過一間精神科醫院。當時有位病人禮貌地問,一個以作為世上最悠久民主政體而自傲的國家,如何能夠將此地交給一個政治制度非常不同的國家,且既沒諮詢當地公民,又沒給予他們民主的前景,好讓他們捍衞自己的將來。一個隨行同事說,奇怪,香港提出最理智問題的人,竟在精神科醫院。」彭定康 金融時報

“During a visit to a mental hospital before I left Hong Kong, a patient politely asked me how a country that prided itself on being the oldest democracy in the world had come to be handing over his city to another country with a very different system of government, without either consulting the citizens or giving them the prospect of democracy to safeguard their future. Strange, said one of my aides, that the man with the sanest question in Hong Kong is in a mental hospital.”Chris Patten Financial Times

Non Chinese literate friends, please simply switch to English Version provided by LOUSY Google Translation

Please participate in the unregistered demography survey of visitors at the right hand side bar. You are: ?

敬請參與在右下方的不記名訪客分佈調查問卷,你是: ?

Thursday, December 31, 2009

功高蓋主

功高蓋主



中國人有一句:『功高蓋主!』 自己實力、勢力、功力未齊時,切忌過份鋒芒太露,輕者被人燉冬菇,擺上枱當炮灰,重者招致殺身之禍,永不昭生。


翻查漢英詞典『功高蓋主』,祇有直譯,而沒有一句英諺,剛巧有著同一意義。咁!究竟西方社會,是否真的沒有因為『功高蓋主』,而產生妒忌,招致殺身之禍呢?


在網上找到這篇文章 功高蓋主怎麼辦?《陳凱》

針對這個問題,我覺得可以套用現在流行的一句話,長得醜不是你的錯,出來丟人現眼就是你不對了:功高蓋主不是你的錯,但是時不時炫耀就是你不對了。

如果你是功高蓋主之人,有幾點你要注意了:

第一,態度上要端正。你要認定形勢,無論你的老闆多麼無能,他就是老闆,你就是下屬,你不能改變而且必須面對。

第二,行動上要低調。將心比心,你也不希望下屬的鋒芒蓋過你吧?所以,不論在公共場合或者私底下,你都要給足老闆面子。比如寫個報告、文案,做好後可以給老闆審閱,讓他做些無傷大雅的修改;有老闆在的話,別人表揚你的工作不要忘了附帶一句,謝謝老闆的支持;在大家討論工作問題時,不要和老闆發生激烈的爭執,有話可以私底下好好説,這些細節就不一一敘述了。給老闆面子時,分寸的掌控和你公司的環境也有關係,一般歐美公司對功高蓋主的人會寬容一些,在等級森嚴的公司,比如日本、韓國的公司,需要更加小心謹慎。其實老闆都是聰明人,如果你足夠能幹又給足了他面子,大部分老闆還是會為你的加薪和晉陞助一臂之力的。

第三,千萬不要越級彙報和邀功,這在很多公司都是非常忌諱的事情。最多也就是給你加薪,級別升高,要把你換到比原來老闆還高的職位基本不可能。我曾經遇到一個案例,李偉覺得很多工作都是自己做的,但是老闆把他的勞動成果佔為己有,後來他給大老闆發了一封郵件説明情況,後來他的級別升了,工資加了,但還是在原來老闆下面,可是他的日子卻更加難過了。如果確實很多工作都是你做的,老闆也沒給你足夠的肯定,建議還是先和直接老闆溝通。如果溝通未果,可以向你的大老闆做一些説明,但是這需要非常有技巧。千萬不要通過正式的溝通,這種事情是紙包不住火的。這樣即使你獲得了提升,收入得到了增加,你在公司還是很難立足的,你的老闆會給你很多小鞋穿。

最後,你的付出始終無法獲得應有的回報,或者你的才能發揮總是受到限制,看不到晉陞和發展的機會,不妨考慮跳槽。比起越級彙報或者邀功,跳槽可能會是一個更好的選擇。



個人則不認為低調,就可以幸免于難,不論老闆、上司或 Boss,中外好、人也好、鬼也好,男也好,女也好,遇到了個比自己還弱的老闆、上司或 Boss,遲早是個死症。


別以為弱老闆、上司或 Boss,會因為要依靠你,而不殺你,因為他她可以容忍,閣下『功高蓋主』一段短時間,祇因為你為他她辦事,當然包括擋災,但若閣下一旦坐大了,有跡象、有風聲、有閑言,威脅到他她的權力、權威、利益,就是行死刑的時間。


WHY?因為他她隨時可以搵個第二個代替閣下,世上“冇話冇咗你唔得呢件事!”nobody is indispensable,閣下可能是個“列外”,恭喜你!但是 exception 的連續性 habituality 會是幾多呢?


後記:
所謂『工字不出頭』,有很多人會選擇,自己做老闆或 Boss,但要承受風險,風險這一瓣,各人各有不同。『打工仔』搵兩餐,除了勞力、勞心,落力為老闆、上司或 Boss賣命,不過也要暗裡為自己打算,所謂兩手準備,給自己多一條路,無可厚非!


伸延閱覽:
功高蓋主 或 功高震主 谷歌搜尋
馬鼎盛:『功高蓋主』 thethirdmedia.com
功高蓋主怎麼辦? 51job.com


我的舊文:
誰能當主角?
聰明反被聰明誤!
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
從政者的胸襟


Wednesday, December 30, 2009

聰明反被聰明誤!

聰明反被聰明誤!




楊修之死 《羅貫中》
操屯兵日久,欲要進兵,又被馬超拒守;欲收兵回,又恐被蜀兵恥笑,心中猶豫不決。適庖官進雞湯,操見碗中有雞肋,因而有感於懷。正沈吟間,夏侯惇入帳,稟請夜間口號,操隨口曰:「雞肋,雞肋。」惇傳令眾官,都稱「雞肋」。

行軍主簿楊修見傳「雞肋」二字,便教隨行軍士,各收拾行裝,準備歸程。有人報知夏侯惇,惇大驚,遂請楊修至帳中,問曰:「公何收拾行裝?」修曰:「以今夜號令,便知魏王不日將退兵歸也。雞肋者,食之無肉,棄之有味。今進不能勝,退恐人笑,在此無益,不如早歸。來日,魏王必班師矣,故先收拾行裝,免得臨時慌亂。」夏侯惇曰︰「公真知魏王肺腑也。」遂亦收拾行裝,於是寨中諸將,無不准備歸計。

當夜曹操心亂,不能穩睡,遂手提鋼斧,遶寨私行。只見夏侯惇寨內軍士,各準備行裝。操大驚,急回帳召惇問其故。惇曰:「主簿楊德祖,先知大王欲歸之意。」操喚楊修問之,修以雞肋之意。操大怒曰:「汝怎敢造言亂我軍心!」喝刀斧手推出斬之,將首級號令於轅門外。

原來楊修為人,恃才放曠,數犯曹操之忌。操嘗造花園一所,造成,操往觀之,不置褒貶,只取筆於門上書一「活」字而去。人皆不曉其意。修曰 :「門內添「活」字,乃「闊」字也,丞相嫌園門闊耳。」於是再築牆圍,改造停當,又請操觀之。操大喜,問曰:「誰知吾意?」左右曰:「楊修也。」操雖稱美,心甚忌之。

又一日,塞北送酥一盒至,操自寫「一合酥」三字於盒上,置之案頭。修入見之,竟取匙與眾分食訖。操問其故,修答曰:「盒上明書「一人一口酥」,豈敢違丞相之命乎?」操雖喜而笑,心惡之。

操恐人暗中謀害己身,常吩咐左右:「吾夢中好殺人,凡吾睡著,汝等切勿近前。」一日,晝寢帳中,落被於地,一近侍慌取覆蓋,操躍起拔劍斬之,復上床睡,半晌而起,佯驚問:「何人殺吾近侍?」眾以實對,操痛哭,命厚葬之。人皆以為操果夢中殺人,唯修知其意,臨葬時指而歎曰:「丞相非在夢中,君乃在夢中耳。」操聞愈惡之。

操第三子曹植,愛修之才,常邀修談論,終夜不息。操與眾商議,欲立植為世子,曹丕知之,密請朝歌長吳質入內府商議。因恐有人知覺,乃用大簏藏吳質於中,只說是絹疋在內,載入府中。修知其事,逕來告操,操令人於丕府門伺察之。丕慌告吳質,質曰:「無憂也,明日用大簏裝絹,再入以惑之。」丕如其言,以大簏載絹入,使者搜看簏中,果絹也,報曹操,操因疑修譖害曹丕,愈惡之。

操欲試曹丕、曹植之才幹,一日令各出鄴城門,卻密使人吩咐門吏,令勿放出。曹丕先至,門吏阻之,丕只得退回。植聞之,問計於修,修曰:「君奉王命而出,如有阻當者,竟斬之可也。」植然其言。及至門,門吏阻住。植叱曰:「吾奉王命,誰敢阻當!」立斬之。於是曹操以植為能。後有人告操曰:「此乃楊修之所教也。」操大怒,因此亦不喜植。

修又嘗為曹植作「答教」十餘條,但操有問,植即依條答之。操每以軍國之事問植,植對答如流,操心中甚疑。後曹丕暗買植左右,偷「答教」來告操,操見了,大怒曰:「匹夫安敢欺我耶﹗」此時已有殺修之心,今乃借惑亂軍心之罪殺之。



在上面的文章,講曹操忌才,楊修太聰明,他每把曹操信所思所想的,猜得通透,而遭殺身之禍。在電影《赤壁》把曹操說成多疑,把荊州降將 蔡瑁、張允 兩人殺掉。這兩人為曹操訓練水軍又熟識水戰,並通曉江南天氣的蔡瑁、張允,成了周瑜心腹大患,曹操派蔣幹到吳營當間諜,但周瑜利用反間計,令聰明一世的曹操中了計。


曹操祇是『劫天子以令諸侯』,到他死後曹丕才篡漢,自立為帝稱『魏文王』(亦稱魏文帝),追封 曹操 為『魏武王』(亦稱魏武帝),可惜富不過三代到曹叡死後,傳位曹操曾孫曹芳,不久就被司馬氏奪取江山,成立晉朝。晉朝不久又發生了『八王之亂』、繼而『五胡亂華』、瀛成『南北朝』,整個中原地區進入大混亂,到了安定下來,已是隋朝唐朝。


歷史多是由得勝的一方,派史官去寫的,每有褒貶,成王敗寇,把被打敗的妖魔化,讓成王者站在道德高位,是天命所歸。


曹孟德的陵墓,最近被國內的考古學家,證實經已找到,並發掘出被無數次盜墓後,所剩餘的古物,又發現一男二女的遺骨,說男的正是:曹操、曹孟德、魏武王、魏武帝。


【明報專訊】「挾天子以令諸侯」的魏武王曹操葬身何處?中國考古專家昨天揭開了這個千年之謎,認定河南省安陽縣安豐鄉西高穴村的一座東漢古墓,就是文獻記載中的曹操高陵。專家指出,墓中出土的刻銘石牌是證明墓主身分的有力證據,而墓裏一具男性骸骨,可能就是曹操。

河南省文物局與國家文物局的專家學者,昨晨在北京開記者會公布了曹操墓的發現詳情。這座佔地約740平方米的磚墓,位於安陽縣安豐鄉西高穴村南。墓的平面為甲字形,坐西向東,拱頂墓道貫連前後室和四個側室。前後室頂部為四角攢頂,東西兩側各有一個耳室。兩個土坑磚石墓室最深離地16米。

男骸骨料為曹操遺骨
考古學家在墓室發現部分人頭骨、肢骨等,經初步鑑定為一男兩女;其中墓主人為60歲左右男性,與曹操終年66歲吻合,故專家推測那應該是曹操的遺骨。

專家指出,陵墓雖曾多次被盜掘,但值得慶幸的是,它仍保存了一些重要的陪葬品。河南省文物考古研究所自去年12月獲批准進行考古發掘和追繳被盜品以來,共起出了200多件器物。其中出土刻銘石牌59件,有長方形、圭形等,銘文記錄了隨葬物品的名稱和數量。

這些物品中尤以8件圭形石牌最為珍貴,分別刻有「魏武王常所用格虎大刀」、「魏武王常用格虎大戟」等銘文。在追繳該墓被盜出土的一件石枕上,刻有「魏武王常用慰項石」銘文。文獻記載,曹操生前先封為「魏公」,後進爵為「魏王」,死後謚號為「武王」,這些銘文器物成為證明墓主就是曹操的最有力證據。此外,文獻明確記載曹操主張薄葬,也可從這座墓葬取得印證。

開啟曹魏研究新篇章
其他出土器物,主要有銅帶鉤、鐵甲、鐵劍、玉珠、水晶珠、瑪瑙珠、石龜、石壁,以及大量畫像石殘塊。那批畫像石畫工精細嫺熟,雕刻精美,內容豐富,有「神獸」、「七女復仇」等圖案,並刻有「咸陽令」、「紀梁」、「侍郎」、「宋王車」、「文王十子」、「飲酒人」等文字,屬漢畫像石精品。

考古專家認為,曹操高陵的發現具有極其重要的意義,既印證文獻中對曹操高陵的位置、曹操的謚號及所倡導的薄葬制度等有關記載均屬確鑿可靠的信史外,還提供許多新歷史信息,為研究曹操及漢魏歷史開啟新的篇章。

曹操生前雖未稱帝,但歷來被視為三國時曹魏真正開國君主。其兩名「死對頭」孫權、劉備的陵墓早已確認,只有曹操墓成謎。

雖然曹操較劉備早3年身故,但劉備的墓最早為世所知,他在公元223年於白帝城以63歲病逝,遺體後移往成都,安葬於惠陵,現位於成都武侯祠內,佔地2000平方米,清乾隆53年(1788年)還立有「漢昭烈皇帝之陵」碑。

孫權為3人之中最後離世者,他在252年以71歲之齡逝世後,被葬於南京紫金山南麓孫陵崗,現稱梅花山,位處明孝陵正南300米。南京民間流傳,明太祖朱元璋建孝陵時,曾說「孫權也是一條好漢,就讓他給我守門吧」,故孫權墓未被破壞,明孝陵的神道也要繞道。孫權墓目前僅存一座石碑、一座石橋、一個註釋牌及一座孫權石像。

在中國傳統小說和戲曲裏,曹操的奸角形象活靈活現;但在陳壽的《三國誌》裏,曹操是「非常之人,超世之傑」。

曹操(公元155-220年),字孟德,小字阿瞞,沛國譙(今安徽亳縣)人。據史書記載,他生於官宦世家,少時已以俠義自任。入仕後曾參與鎮壓黃巾軍,後起兵討伐董卓,直至建安元年(196)迎漢獻帝定都許昌,挾天子而令諸侯,取得政治上優勢。

漢末天下大亂,他實行抑制豪強兼併及用人唯才等一系列措施,並創立屯田制,讓士兵在休戰時期耕作,減輕糧食負擔。建安5年,他在官渡大敗袁紹後逐漸統一中原。建安13年,他率軍南下企圖一統天下,但在赤壁之戰敗於孫權與劉備聯軍,中國歷史上魏蜀吳三國鼎立,自此形成。

曹操軍事與文學造詣均高,著有《孫子略解》、《書接要》等軍事著作和《觀滄海》、《短歌行》,其詩作以氣魄沉雄,慷慨悲壯見稱。

曹操晚年先後自封魏公與魏王,但未稱帝。宋代理學思想崛起,推崇忠節,曹操漸被文學著作描述成顛覆漢室的奸臣。《三國演義》便因推崇漢室正統而大貶曹操。



歷史貶低曹家父子,但曹家父子的文學很有名,有《三祖陳王》之說:《三祖》是曹操、曹丕、曹叡,而《陳王》就是曹植。


有野史說,聰明的曹操為免自己屍骸墓穴被打擾,刻意平凡低調,並以簡樸為主,並造了很多假的墓穴,有『七十二疑塚』之說。

【維基百科】曹操在建安二十五年正月廿三庚子日(220年3月15日)薨逝於洛陽,享年六十六歲。謚曰武王。他臨死前留下《遺令》,內容為:「吾死之後,葬於鄴之西岡上,與西門豹祠相近,無藏金玉珠寶。餘香可分與諸夫人,不命祭。吾婢妾與伎人皆勤苦,使著銅雀台,善待之。」


到如今一千七百多年後,最終被人把自己的骸骨研究。但中國人愛弄虛作假,今次又是否為了製造景點,為以後經濟效益而為之,網上就有很多『真偽』的論說。


伸延閱覽:
曹操 維基百科
楊修之死 維基百科
曹操墓現安陽 千古謎解開 雅虎新聞網
三國三雄 僅曹操墓成謎 雅虎新聞網
超世之傑奸臣形象 雅虎新聞網
有專家質疑曹操墓出土之說 雅虎新聞網
曹操墓穴的真偽 谷歌搜尋
七十二疑塚 谷歌搜尋



我的舊文:
李清照的七首《浣紗溪》
《木蘭辭》和《木蘭祠》
《赤壁》與《赤壁懷古》
《滕王閣》與《滕王閣序》
《岳陽樓》與《岳陽樓記》
《大觀樓》~《長聯》



Monday, December 28, 2009

四首歌:Stale 國語流行曲

四首歌:Stale 國語流行曲


我是個慢幾拍的人,我聽這些國語流行曲,是等到很後期 Stale 了,是在臺北唱片鋪內,當然不是流行歌曲架子上找到的,而是放在懷舊金曲架子上,還是經別人推薦才買下的:《伍思凱》和《趙傳》的專輯。


返港聽過之後,擺放上架子,就沒有再拿出來聽過,忘記得乾乾凈凈,到上次打掃時,才發現原來買了,《伍思凱》和《趙傳》的專輯,聖誕假期最後一天,整個下午不停地播下面四首歌


特別的愛給特別的您~伍思凱


分別以後才懂得擁有~伍思凱 竟 然在“你喉”和“土豆”都沒有登載,容後再補登罷。


我终於失去了你~趙傳


我很醜可是我很溫柔~趙傳


不想開畫面的:可以點擊,伍思凱 兩首 趙傳 兩首 ,這裡四首歌齊全,可以連播。


後記: 登文之後,又再想想,這兩隻『專輯』碟,又好像是在高雄市六合路的唱片鋪買的。記當年出差臺灣,很多時是先去臺北,再南下高雄,有時由高雄直接返香港,有時就返臺北執埋啲手尾,才飛返香港。


中華航空多年前,意外頻生,為人詬病,國際航班必不選搭中華,但要飛臺灣內陸線,中華又比其他的臺灣內陸航空公司較佳,總之一句,為了搵兩餐,要用條命仔博。


內陸機在臺北的舊機場『松山機場』出發,又因為為了方便和省時間,總好過天濛光出發,那就很多時是在臺北下班之後,稍為吃些小食,就拿著行履,到『松山機場』上機,抵達高雄已經九時十時,辦妥入住酒店旅館手續,才匆匆找些吃的填肚子。


很多時這個 Side Trip 是單獨前往,在臺北高雄的日子,若沒有一班同事同往出差,臺灣同事們也不可能每晚輪流陪同,下班之後就孤單一個人吃喝,而最佳消閑就是逛書局和行唱片鋪。


自始養成『獨行俠』的習慣,在週末獨自在臺北高雄看電影,自己拿住地圖,去週遊本地名勝。 噢!後記越寫越長,長過正文,哈!哈!哈!Those were the days, 年輕時冇有怕,喜歡孤身上路!


我的舊文: 童安格的三首歌


Saturday, December 26, 2009

Bed Side Story

Bed Side Story ~~
今天聖誕節普世同歡,
但不要忘記有欠缺的。




小燕子要飛去南方過冬了,

路過王子石像停下來休息,

突然一滴水掉到它的頭上,

原來是王子石像在流眼淚,

小燕子飛到王子石像肩膊。


王子石像便告訴了小燕子:

王子生前生活得很是快樂,

他絕不知道民間窮困疾苦,

到如今石像站在城市高處,

他看盡了人間不斷的悲劇。

王子希望小燕子能夠幫忙,

把鑲在像邊寶劍上的寶石,

送給城西的久病窮困老翁,

小燕子經不起王子的哀求,

就含著寶石送了到老翁處。

回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


第二天早上王子又哭起來,

他看到南邊城外孤兒寡婦,

窮困得已經幾天沒有進食,

王子哀求小燕子把腰帶上,

那一顆珍珠送給孤兒寡婦,

小燕子經不起王子的哀求,

就含著珍珠送了到寡婦處。

回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


第三天早上王子又哭泣了,

他見到廣場中的瞎眼乞丐,

幾天沒有進食身體很虛弱,

王子哀求小燕子把皇冠上,

其中一顆藍寶石送給乞丐,

小燕子經不起王子的哀求,

就含著寶石送了到乞丐處。

回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


如是者小燕子每天都幫忙,

為快樂王子石像送出禮物。









回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


最後王子哀求把他的左眼,

那顆錄色寶石也送去城外,

山腳下一對十分年老夫婦,

他們的兒子意外受傷死了,

小燕子經不起王子的哀求,

就送了綠寶石給年老夫婦,

回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


到天亮祇剩下右眼的王子,

看到北方森林有位老獵人,

他已經有好幾天沒有獵物,

小燕子經不起王子的哀求,

把最後綠寶石眼睛送出去,

回來時已經天黑黑很晚了,

小燕子就在石像腳下渡宿。


整夜下了場很大很大的雪,

翌日清早沒有眼睛的王子,

再也不能看到甚麼慘事了,

王子不斷地呼喚著小燕子,

但錯過南飛過冬的小燕子,

已於昨夜凍僵在石像腳下。



以上的故事,是我幼兒時在睡前,母親為我兩兄弟,講的床邊故事,Bed Side Story 講完了,我倆都還沒睡覺,情感豐富的弟弟他哭了,我沒有哭但也很傷感。母親借題解釋,給我們上了一課社會課,世上是有很多不幸的,人間是有很多欠缺的,社會是有很多不公平的。


幼年時雖然不是生在富貴之家,沒有錦衣美食,也沒有工人差使,但得到父母親的關愛,衣食溫飽總算無缺,沒有很多購買的玩具,但有父親親手為我們造的木製小玩具。沒有鮑參翅肚,但有母親親手泡製的兩餐,至今仍然是回味無窮。還有母親親手為我們編織的毛衣,我還有一件留在身邊。


前幾天讀完別人網誌,剛巧有感而發,沒有上網查找,祇是把腦海中的故事,默寫了出來當作回應,可能與原故事,有所出入不同了,希望不要見怪,今天移植過來。


今 天 聖 誕 節 普 世 同 歡,

但 不 要 忘 記 有 欠 缺 的。



後記:
有沒有留意我故事中,有冇不合理的地方呢?注意王子石像,是沒法轉動他的頭,他祇能看見前面大約100度左右的事情,我初默寫出來時,已經留意到這個視覺物理學上缺堪,那麼請問王子石像是面向那個方向呢?王子石像的頭也應該不是平視的,應該是側了頭的,那麼是側向那一邊呢?沒有上網查找,究竟有沒有作者渾然忘記了!



我的舊文:
Charlotte's Web 莎樂的神奇網網
Horton and Dr. Seuss


我的其他小故事:
小白兔
檸檬茶
第二次『龜兔賽跑』
第三次『龜兔賽跑』
聽過一個故事
A Self Explanatory Story



Friday, December 25, 2009

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas



紅紅的火爐,紅紅的火光,帶來溫暖的感覺!





特別為你挑選了聖誕歌曲和音樂!
Christmas Songs and music chosen for YOU!


請點擊 Listen 收聽


多謝各位光臨!

謹祝:

聖誕快快樂樂!



有顆祥和的心!





Appendix 附加:
A Heart Warmer 心靈暖劑
明報專訊奇蹟發生,總是一秒間的事。某天,正在休假的腦外科醫生黃海東打開電郵,未有如常刪除訂閱的網誌通知,這個不如常的動作,讓他看到一張青海少女的純真笑臉,但看下去,發現這名叫斗格的15歲少女原來只剩4個月壽命。

不欲見死不救的他,取得斗格的腦部造影,與其他醫生商量後發現斗格「有得救」,立即安排她來港接受手術,現已康復的斗格正等待身體狀况穩定,便會返回家鄉與她最想念的妹妹重聚,分享她在香港度過首個聖誕節的感受。

剛經歷人生中的生死一關,眼前的斗格身穿粉紅色民族服,束起鬢辮的她雖然一直沉默不語,不時露出羞澀的純真笑容,難以想像她的小腦曾出現如高爾夫球大的腫瘤,令她受折磨多年。


與妹相依為命 福利院長大
自小生長在青海省河南蒙古族一條小村莊的斗格,母親長年卧牀,5年前終敵不過病魔去世,父親卻一聲不響離家遠去,斗格與妹妹頓成孤兒。

兩姊妹其後被送到基督教勵行會與青海政府合辦的黃南州兒童福利院,性格文靜的斗格最愛看書,在福利院當宿舍長的她對妹妹和其他小朋友特別照顧,深受大家歡迎。然而,頭痛、頭暈一直纏繞斗格,直至上月中,更頭痛加劇,出現間歇昏迷、四肢麻木和大小便失禁。當地3間醫院的醫生,都判斷她只有4個月壽命。


腦瘤惡化 頭痛失禁間歇昏迷
得悉這消息,斗格只想到一個問題:「我死了,妹妹怎麼辦?」

基督教勵行會總幹事張洪秀美獲悉後,本想放棄,最終決定把她的事寫在網誌,希望大家為她祈禱。看到這篇網誌的中文大學腫瘤科中心名譽臨牀助理教授黃海東說:「當時第一反應是『怎可一下子說她無得救』,其後想到她在香港醫治的成功機會有六七成,於是作出回覆。」

取得斗格的腦部造影後,黃海東與腦(神經)外科主任潘偉生、腦(神經)外科名譽臨牀副教授朱獻倫商議,一致認為斗格的腦瘤較大可能屬良性,於是由張洪秀美安排斗格在本月9日來港,兩天後動手術,同時籌募手術費,終在兩周內籌得13.5萬元。

潘偉生說,斗格的腦瘤發展下去,先會雙目失明,然後會昏迷直至死亡,其間會相當痛苦,「她甚至沒有4個月(壽命),可能只有4星期」。回想手術過程,潘醫生說﹕「切除腦瘤後才知道是相對安全的良性膠質瘤,我當時已開心定先。」

經歷整整4小時手術,斗格很快蘇醒,兩日後可以下牀活動,一手拯救她逃出鬼門關的黃海東記得,在深切治療病房觀看卡通片的斗格展露出天真爛漫的樣子,那一張笑臉已叫他大感安慰,他說﹕「心情就好似拾得滄海遺珠一樣。」


掛念妹妹 初來港拒吃飯
從未離開過青海的斗格來港後,並沒有受香港這個花花世界所吸引,她來港初期整天不發一言,飯也不願吃,工作人員一問之下,她才說出擔憂﹕「我來到香港,在家鄉的妹妹怎辦?」手術後,斗格和翻譯同住在麥當勞叔叔兒童之家,二人不時結伴去買菜做飯,翻譯轉述斗格某天提着兩袋菜跟她說﹕「我很好,都沒事了,明天可以回去(青海)了!」可見孤身來港治病的斗格心中並沒有「生與死」這大課題,在她單純的心底,只有家鄉的妹妹和外婆、福利院的朋友,手術過後,她只知頭不再痛,只想回到她熟悉的地方,重過昔日的簡單生活。


首度聖誕 下月可望回鄉
不諳普通話的斗格接受訪問時一直低着頭,由翻譯代言,偶爾她會抬頭望望大家,微微一笑,提到家鄉,斗格立即收起笑容,低頭飲泣,但看到朋友的慰問信,斗格又拭乾眼淚,重展甜美笑容。記者透過翻譯恭喜她能夠康復,着她回去努力讀書,為將來當醫生的夢想奮鬥,一直低着頭聽的她,微微抬頭望着記者,輕輕說了當天唯一的話﹕「謝謝!」



除了身體因為紅紅的火焰,感到溫暖之外,讀到一段 Heart Warmer
心靈暖劑,令冰冷了的心靈,也感到溫暖起來。


我的舊文:
聖誕快樂 Merry Christmas
普 天 同 慶
普天同慶 聖誕快樂
Seasonal Greetings




Thursday, December 24, 2009

遲了點看的電影:阿凡達 Avatar

遲了點看的電影:阿凡達 Avatar



來頭很大的“阿凡達” Avatar,由上次把我引得笑足成場戲的名導演:占士甘馬倫執導,他令我在看“鐵達尼”,於散場時放聲大笑,結果被週圍左右的女生們,投以鄙視的眼光,雖然已十多年前,但記憶猶新。


今次香港祇有3D版,在我家園最近的戲院,週六早場票價都要七十大圓,環顧之前上映的 Christmas Carol 祇要過多幾個星期,就降價到五十圓,所以把心一橫,遲點才看!


但“阿凡達”引誘力驚人,我卒之願意多付,先睹為快。這還有另一原因的,因為聖誕臨近,可能要等到新年假期完結,才會真正降低票價,那就要等足兩個多星期。


今次,甘大導沒能把我引得大笑,反而令我差點下淚,亦很罕有的令我感到傷感,自步出電影院後,一路步行返回家時,心情很是沉重。


Avatar 港譯:阿凡達Trailers & Clips ,講人類進攻一個星球上的 humanoid 生物叫作 Na'Vi 納威人,這個星球叫 Pandora 潘朵娜星。各位一定想起,Pandora Box 潘朵娜的盒子,這個經典故事,"HOPE" is humanity's final reliance,“希望”成為我們人類最終的依靠,但結果納威人還有沒有希望呢?




圖片來源: 維基百科




Starring:
Sam Worthington Jake Sully 雙腳癱瘓的前海軍陸戰隊員,Zoe Saldana Neytiri 納威人族長女兒,Sigourney Weaver Grace 女生物學博士,Laz Alonso Tsu'tey 納威人勇士,Wes Studi Eytukan 納威人族長,CCH Pounder Moat 族長妻子 精神領袖 納威人的智者。


Directed by: James Cameron


(注意:以下包含部分內容)

故事:
潘朵娜星球的大氣層,是充滿著對人類有毒的氣體,但那裡住了一種 humanoid 仿似人形的高等生物,他們有一對長耳朵,足足有十英呎高,頭上有一條長辮子,和一條長尾巴,一身逞藍色的 Na'Vi 納威人,星球上還有各式各樣,其他飛禽走獸並存。有毒的大氣層,保育了納威人、星球上的生物、和美麗的自然環境,納威人過著如原始人類般的漁獵、畜牧、務農的簡樸生活,但倒是樂也悠悠。


直至人類採礦公司,意外發現潘朵娜星蘊藏了,價值連城的“能源礦石”,貪婪的人類,就開始開發礦場採礦。但礦苗最豐富的地點,卻剛巧就是納威人聚居的 Omaticaya 村落所在,那便需要把所有那裡的納威人搬遷,才能夠全面開採豐富的礦產,並且減低開礦成本,增加利潤。


礦務公司受到極高利潤誘因,便出資讓女生物學博士,研究出破解毒氣的技術,女生物學博士 Grace 利用生物科技,培育出人類與納威人,合成基因的仿納威人”阿凡達”,並可由捐出基因的人類,透過機器遙距控制這”阿凡達“的思想、行為、行動。


納威人散居在整個星球,女博士和她的助手們的“阿凡達”,去到其中一個納威人叫 Omaticaya 村落,進行研究,並教他們說英語,所以一部份納威人是可以用英語,可和人類溝通。就如歐洲殖民時代,傳教士們去到印第安人中間傳教、辦學、教導英語。


貪婪的人類礦物公司礦場領導,需要派一個志願者成為“阿凡達”,進人潘朵娜星球納威人 Omaticaya 村落,充當間諜,負責刺探地形,搜集防衛情報,計劃武力佔領納威人的 Omaticaya 村落。他們本來已有一個隊員,但不幸死亡,因為培育的“阿凡達”需時,而且祇可接受有共同基因者遙控,一個下身雙腿癱瘓的前海軍陸戰隊員 Jake Sully,就被送到潘朵娜星球,因為他就是死去隊員的孿生兄弟,他有相同的基因,結果 Jake 成功成為“阿凡達”。


於是就由女生物學博士的“阿凡達”,帶領著 Jake 的“阿凡達”,乘坐直升機深入 Omaticaya 村落野外受訓。在一次受訓時,Jake 的“阿凡達”落單了,又剛巧受到猛獸襲擊,在逃跑時跳落大瀑布,迷失了路,要在野外過夜求生,入黑後 Jake 的“阿凡達”就受到更多猛獸群攻擊,幸宜得到納威族長的女兒拯救了,就帶了他回到部落裡。


傳統的納威人 Omaticaya 部落族長是一位男性勇士,而他的妻子就是精神領袖,也是族中的智者。一武一文負責管治納威人部族。族長的女兒已經和一位年輕納威勇士立了婚約,將來他們就會組成新的一對領導班子,繼續負責起管治 Omaticaya 的納威族人。


族長妻子是部落的精神領袖,也是族中的智者,她認為可以通過 Jake 增加人類和納威人的互雙了解,就讓 Jake 的”阿凡達“留下來,並指令女兒教導 Jake 的”阿凡達“納威語言,風俗習慣,生活方式,訓練 Jake 的”阿凡達“為一位納威戰士。另一方面,她亦可以仔細觀察 Jake 的“阿凡達”,研究人類的思想行為,云云。


但礦物公司礦場主管和雇傭兵團領導,並沒有太多耐性等待,他們決定向納威村落進攻,強行把納威人趕走,好讓公司繼續開採礦藏。他們預先準備好,就在進攻之時,把 Jake 和 女生物學博士 Grace 的真身跟他們的“阿凡達”連繫的訊號切斷,兩人的“阿凡達”立刻暈倒下來了。無助的納威人,慘被無情的炮火,亂轟亂擊,死傷忱寂,族長也蒙難了,慶幸生還的納威人,唯有逃到納威人的神聖地方,“聖樹”所在之處,暫時躲避。


得到女生物學家的助手和女直升機機師的幫助,Jake 和女生物學家的真身一起逃脫,但女生物學博士 Grace 卻受了槍傷。 Jake 的真身成功重新進入機器內,令到 Jake 的“阿凡達”再騒醒過來,並成功馴服了納威人傳說中的”巨神鳥“,他騎著”巨神鳥’飛去到,納威人躲避的地方,”聖樹“所在地,成功說服了慶幸生還的精神領袖族長妻子、她的女兒、和立有婚約的勇士,和他統領幸存的納威戰士。他們四處聯絡,並且團結了散居的其他納威人部族,一起反抗人類兵團的入侵。


他們的人數比人類兵團多了幾倍,但祇有弓箭、刀劍、和長矛等原始武器,卻被採礦公司雇傭兵團的領導,說成他們是野蠻人,而且人多勢眾,這次是人類在潘朵娜的生死存亡一戰,要求人類兵團士兵,要切底地不分男女老幼殺戮,要殺死每一個納威人,這是要領令到納威人屈服,不敢再反抗,起了示範作用,是減少以後和其他納威族人,發生衝突的最佳方法。


結局,當然是由 Jake 的”阿凡達“帶領納威人,打敗了人類的兵團,至於怎樣能夠利用簡陋原始的弓箭、刀劍、和長矛等武器,打敗武器精良的人類兵團呢?受了重傷的女生物學博士生死如何呢?就請各位購票入場捧場觀看。


我見:
電影可分成兩部份,一半部戲是人類社會,就如一般電影拍攝。而另一半部,就集中在潘朵娜星球上,納威人的生活部份,是利用 motion capture animation technology 技術,由真人演員全身包括面部都貼上感應器,在電影廠內拍攝而成。


不過甘馬倫的創新技術,是讓收集演員動作和面部表情時,即時 real-time 就由電腦數碼即時譜成納威人,再加上人工電腦背景,在線即時完成畫面,讓導演立刻看到知道成果,作出改善重拍。而不是事後,才利用電腦美工,再把人和景物結合而成。顧此風景美麗得如畫如仙境般的潘朵娜星球,和靈活矯捷的納威人動作,結合得更緻完美完善,甘馬倫的技術是比以前的,更進一大大大步。


【維基百科】Unlike previous performance capture systems, where the digital environment is added after the actors' motions have been captured, Cameron's new virtual camera allows him to observe directly on a monitor how the actors' virtual counterparts interact with the movie's digital world in real time and adjust and direct the scenes just as if shooting live action. 詳情請參考以下維基百科的連結。


整部片子映像,實在太過繽紛,根本就是目不暇給,再加上 3D效果,我根本就未能專一地,多方面地,細緻地去仔細欣賞,是顧得睇頭,睇不到腳,是顧得睇風景,睇不到動作 etc etc,若不再購票多看幾次,那可能要等到買到影碟,才能細心欣賞過夠,才能感受得到盡。那麼甘大導投巨資研究開發,是否合附成本效益要求呢?


Anyway 這方面的創新技術,是可以轉賣給其他後來的導演、制作人、投資者,可利用會計 Research and Development 研究發發這開支理論。不知美國稅局和投資者之間,就本部電影的利潤與成本,如何討價還價,怎樣去抽稅呢?這不是討論范圍之內。


整部電影整個故事,映射歐洲人殖民主義 colonialism,對中南北美洲殖民,殺戮土著人口,強佔土地,奪取資源,這一段黑暗歷史外。又有像電影『風中奇緣 Pocahontas』故事,有一位白人和土著公主相戀,公主拒絕了印第安勇士的婚約。


故事還有抄襲『與狼共舞 Dances with Wolves』個別橋段的嫌疑,好像納威人教 Jake 說土語,又讓 Jake 馴服神馬神鳥,至于納威人對納威人談話時,未有發覺出現說英語的蝦碌,當然還有 Jake 的轉變,他最後成為納威人一份子,共同對抗人類兵團。雖然如此,但甘馬倫的創新意念,可算是多方面的,要抄過來的都已經稍為變調,增加了趣味性。


以女生物學博士為首的一班科學家,祇是著眼在研究潘朵娜星球的納威人、星球上的生物、植物,並且教納威人英語,給納威人兒童上課,這情形就如殖民主義時代的一群傳教士,是存著善意的,但祇屬小數。


一群受雇于礦物公司的職業軍人,卻祇是散兵游勇,收人錢財,替人消災,他們的目標祇是向錢看,殺死納威人就如殺一隻蟻,沒有任何道德觀念。這包括初來的 Jake,他的唯一目標是為礦物公司的兵團當間諜,以換取醫治他一雙癱瘓了的腿。


Jake 每次和他的“阿凡達”結合後,深入納威村落,刺探情報,到脫離連結醒來,他的真身回到人類社會中,都會作報告,還有他的日誌 daily log,記下他自己的感受,卻後來成為他背叛的證據。到了後來 Jake、和負責駕駛直升機女機師、還有女生物學博士和她一班助手,一起背叛人類兵團和礦物公司,與納威人并肩作戰,都祇是小眾的同情者,並不代表主流。


Omaticaya 的精神領袖,也是納威族的智者,同時亦是族長的妻子,她是否太過草率下決定,讓 Jake 的“阿凡達”深入 Omaticaya 村落,又教曉 Jake 很多納威人的風俗習慣,是否自己拿石頭砸自己的腳呢?而 Jake 到了 Omaticaya 不夠三個月,就由職業軍人觀念,變成納威人的同情者,這是否太過容易,也太快了呢?


甘馬倫利用高科技畫成的潘朵娜星球優美景色,令我眼前一亮,尤其是 floating mountains 《浮山》,就很有中國山水畫的味道。《浮山》就像中國的黃山、廬山、張家界,石林,而石山上長滿了勁松,又有飛瀑由山頂飛瀉而下,一座座《浮山》懸在半空,在雲霧中漂浮,若隱若現,就像是置身仙境中。


甘馬倫又設計納威人的長辮子末梢,是長有神經線纖維的,這可以和潘朵娜星球的神馬和神鳥的辮子,連結一齊,那就可以和它們,利用腦波來溝通,通過連結人獸合一,騎在神馬背上在地面,任意奔馳,坐在神鳥背上飛上天空,傲翔天際。


還有納威人有一棵”聖樹“,導演甘馬倫把”聖樹“描繪畫成一顆白色會發光的樹,這和幾年前十分時興的光纖白色聖誕樹一般,是會發光和轉換顏色,很是美麗。這一條條光纖般的聖樹樹枝,是可以和納威人長辮子末梢的神經線纖維連結,這樣納威人就和聖樹連結合一,也可以向著“聖樹”祈禱,云云。


臨尾當看到無助的納威人,慘被無情的炮火,亂轟亂擊,死傷忱寂。人類兵團士兵,要切底殺戮,不分男女老幼,殺死每一個納威人,這是要令到納威人屈服、屈從,以後不敢再反抗人類。這豈不就是日本人,當年在南京展開大屠殺,就是要讓中國人知道,反抗祇會帶來屠殺的嚴重後果,是要中國人屈服、屈從,看到這裡差點令我落淚,要找包 Tempo 紙巾出來。


而最後亦最令我心噏的是,結局雖然打敗了人類兵團,這一次勝利卻是一場慘勝,族長和勇士都不幸戰死了,很多納威人犧牲了。打敗了人類兵團,讓戰俘返回地球,包括礦物公司的礦場主管,他們回到地球會講出真相嗎?


由于珍貴的礦石豐厚利潤,祇會引來更多的人類兵團,下次他們再來時,就陣陣有詞,說成是野蠻的納威人,無理殺害了人類,他們處于道德高位,要為戰死的人類復仇,要拿回屬于礦物公司價值連城的礦石,那就得殺死更多納威人,戰事會更加慘烈,就會更加殘酷!


一路看電影,令我差點下淚,亦很罕有的令我感到傷感,自步出電影院後,一路步行返回家時,心情很是沉重。我相信甘馬倫已經準備好下集的故事了,Pandora Box 潘朵娜的盒子,這個經典故事,"HOPE" is humanity's final reliance,“希望”成為人類最終的依靠,但結果納威人 Na'Vis,還有沒有 HOPE?會有希望呢?



後記:因為結局不難估到,各位多能意會納威人,今次必能打敗了人類兵團,所以寫出了結局出來,但是其中過程是另有蹺蹊,不想掃打算購票入場朋友的慶緻,暫時保密,是怎麼樣如何演變成,這個結局?三週後才補登罷。



伸延閱覽:
Avatar (movie) 維基百科
阿凡達(電影) 維基百科
Avatar 北美雅虎電影
阿凡達 香港雅虎電影
Pandora Box 維基百科
風中奇緣 Pocahontas 維基百科
與狼共舞 Dances with Wolves 維基百科
幫你做個”阿凡達“大頭相 Mcdonalds Finland

我的舊文:
歐洲殖民主義
續談:Avatar 阿凡達



Wednesday, December 23, 2009

殖民主義

殖民主義



殖民主義 Colonialism,先是歐洲人掠奪中南北美洲、加勒比海群島、非洲、中東、南亞、澳洲大陸的土地資源、天然資源、人力資源,在整個掠奪過程中,同時進行種族清洗。


繼控制了中南北美洲、加勒比海群島、非洲、中東、南亞、澳洲大陸之後,歐洲殖民主義就向東亞地區伸展,對東南亞地區實施殖民統治,安南、緬甸、菲律賓、爪洼、蘇門答臘、香料群島、馬來半島,星加坡,相繼落入歐洲人手中,成立殖民地政府。


腐敗的滿清皇朝,受到列強借顧無理侵略,簽下眾多不平等條約,割地割租界,給予歐洲列強。棄亜入歐的日本,加入行列,在中國人土地上,發動“日俄戰爭”,打敗俄國,大量把國民移民到朝鮮半島,對朝鮮半島實施殖民統治。


日本更趁著清朝腐敗,辛亥革命新中國未穩、國共內訌、進而積極侵華。甲午戰爭、馬關條約、對臺灣殖民、廿一條款、九一八瀋陽事變、佔領動三省、成立偽滿洲政府、七七盧溝橋事變、全面侵華、南京大屠殺等等,期間大量把國民移民占領地,實施殖民主義。


【維基百科】Human colonization is a narrower category than the related concept of colonialism, because whereas colonization refers to the establishment of settler colonies, trading posts, and plantations, colonialism deals with this and the ruling of new territories' existing peoples.

Colonialism is the building and maintaining of colonies in one territory by people from another territory. Colonialism is a process whereby sovereignty over the colony is claimed by the metropole and social structure, government and economics within the territory of the colony are changed by the colonists. Colonialism is a certain set of unequal relationships, between metropole and colony and between colonists and the indigenous population.

Colonialism normally refers to a period of history from the 15th to the 20th century when people from Europe built colonies on other continents. The reasons for the practice of colonialism at this time include:

■ The profits to be made.
■ To expand the power of the metropole.
■ To escape persecution in the metropole.
■ To convert the indigenous population to the colonists' religion.

Some colonists also felt they were helping the indigenous population by bringing them Christianity and civilization. However, the reality was often subjugation, displacement or death.

Historians often distinguish between two forms of colonialism, chiefly based on the number of people from the colonising country who settle in the colony:

Settler colonialism involved a large number of colonists, typically seeking fertile land to farm.

Exploitation colonialism involved fewer colonists, typically interested in extracting resources to export to the metropole. This category includes trading posts but it also includes much larger colonies where the colonists would provide much of the administration and own much of the land and other capital but rely on indigenous people for labour.

There is a certain amount of overlap between these models of colonialism. In both cases people moved to the colony and goods were exported to the metropole.

A plantation colony is normally considered to fit the model of exploitation colonialism. However, in this case there may be other immigrants to the colony - slaves to grow the cash crop for export.

In some cases, settler colonialism took place in substantially pre-populated areas and the result was either an ethnically mixed population (such as the mestizos of the Americas), or a racially divided population, such as in French Algeria or Southern Rhodesia.



歐洲殖民主義一直到了,第二次世界大戰之後,才稍為竭止,舊有殖民地也紛紛獨立,但 新殖民主義 Neocolonialism 卻興起了。


縱觀現今的北美洲,印地安土著被安置在保留區內生活,加拿大是說英法語系的政府,美國是純說英語系的政府,印地安土語不是合法語言,更沒有印第安文字。美加是由歐洲裔白人主導,雖然美國奧巴馬總統有黑人血統,但他是黑皮白心的。


墨西哥、中美洲和加勒比海國家,是西班牙語系的政府。在南美洲,除了巴西是葡萄牙語系的政府,整個南美洲是西班牙語系政府。南美洲土語不是合法語言,更沒有自己的土文字,是南歐的西班牙人和葡萄牙人後裔主導國家。


非洲除了阿拉伯人地區,獨立後的非洲人已經失去了土語,成立的政府有英語系、法語系、荷蘭語系等等的細小國家。澳洲的土著所餘無幾,澳洲是個英語系國家。


全球第一個反抗殖民統治,而又成功的地區是,北美洲現今叫“新英格蘭”地區,在馬殺豬殺州的波士頓市,Boston Tea Party 展開了序幕。現時稱為:阿美利堅合眾國 The United States of America,初時祇有東北部的十三個州份。


之後不斷向西殖民,繼續殺戮印第安土著,持續擴張版圖,又向南和西班牙人戰爭,爭奪北美洲土地的主權。也曾和擁護英國皇室的鄰國加拿大,發生衝突甚至戰爭,還向俄國人購買了阿拉斯加地區,成為一個美國州。


【維基百科】美洲原住民在這塊土地上居住了15,000餘年。歐洲從15世紀末開始殖民美洲。1607年,第一個英格蘭人殖民區成功地在維吉尼亞建立。接下來二十年裡,一些荷蘭殖民區也陸續建立,包括位於新阿姆斯特丹(今紐約市)和新澤西的殖民區。

在17世紀和18世紀裡,英國逐漸佔領荷蘭人和其他歐洲殖民者的地區,並在美國東岸廣泛開墾殖民,建立更多的殖民地區。除今天的加拿大外,英國在北美洲共建立了13個殖民地。

13個殖民地分別為馬薩諸塞、新罕布殊爾、羅得島、康涅狄格、紐約、賓夕法尼亞、紐澤西、特拉華、馬利蘭、弗吉尼亞、北卡羅來納、南卡羅來納和佐治亞。

在1760年代和1770年代,13個美洲殖民地與英國之間的緊張關係,最終引發了革命戰爭,殖民地的代表們在1776年7月4日簽下了《美國獨立宣言》。在獨立戰爭(1775年-1783年)中,喬治·華盛頓領導13個殖民地組成的大陸軍團對抗英軍。

殖民地在1776年的大會中創立了大陸軍團,但未授權他們徵收稅賦和制定聯邦法律。1777年,獨立的殖民地正式採納邦聯條例,建立了一個聯邦的主權國家、以及行使管理權的聯邦政府。經歷艱苦的獨立戰爭後,大陸軍團終於擊敗英軍,英國於1783年簽下了《巴黎條約》,正式承認美國的獨立。

從1803年至1848年,成立的美國的面積幾乎擴大了三倍,殖民者們胸懷新的共和國「註定擴展至整個大陸」的理想,朝廣闊無際的原野拓展,甚至在「路易西安納購地」之前便已深入內陸。這種擴展在1812年戰爭時遭到了短暫的阻撓,但很快隨着戰爭的勝利而繼續進行。1848年美國贏得了美墨戰爭,更增強了殖民者們擴展國土的理想。



但由白人發起的反英國殖民地統治,初生的美國雖然成功獨立,但卻沒有惠及北美洲的土著印第安人,他們繼續受到新成立的美國,進行美國人式的『殖民主義』,印第安人持續大規模受到殺戮,強行搶走北美洲的土地資源。


【維基百科】16世紀後來到美洲的歐洲殖民者,帶給當地印第安人是毀滅性的災難。據統計,殖民時期,西班牙所屬的領地有1300萬印第安人被殺,巴西地區有大約1000萬被殺,美國西進運動中又有1000萬左右印第安人被殺。

目前大約有3000萬印第安人,大量印第安人被奴役甚至屠殺。拉丁美洲的男性印第安人,基本上沒有純男性系列的後代,其混血後代麥士蒂索人,大多為男性殖民者與當地女性的後代。而北美的情況更糟,印第安人被趕入印第安保留地,其在當地人口所佔比例小於5%。在美國,印第安人僅占總人口的1%左右。



有人說:『人是自私』的,為了爭奪生存資源,不擇手段無可厚非,讓它合理化。又有人說:『物競天擇、適者生存!』


如今,暫時沒見有『種族清洗 Ethnic Cleansing/ Genocide』,也竭止了『Colonialism 殖民主義』,但人類卻攪出全球暖化,面對破環境的生態危機。哥本哈根的氣候峰會,最後祇是美國和中國、印度、巴西、南非,達成沒約束力的所謂大方向,會議結束而參予國都沒有簽訂,任何具法律約束力的全球廢氣減排協議。


以美國為首的發達國家,其實在第二次世界大戰之後,對全球進行了『新殖民主義 Neocolonialism』,由殖民主義時代開始,先以低價掠奪第三世界的資源,製造成貨物後,除了供應本國市場,並用高價賣到世界各地,賣回第三世界國家,進行多一次的剝削。廢氣的排放始于歐洲人的工業革命,他們才是始作俑者。


二戰之後以美國為首的發達國家,陸續把高排放廢氣的工業,搬到第三世界發展中國家,又當美國為首的發達國家的勞動人工過高時,便把勞工密集的工序,搬到第三世界發展中國家。利用廉價工資,壓低生產成本,製造成貨物後,運返供應本國市場,享受廉價貨物,壓低通漲,保持繁榮景氣。


但須知如今第三世界和發展中國家,排放大量廢氣的工業,絕大部份是由歐美國家搬過來的,絕大部份投資都是來自歐美國家的資本,絕大部份是由歐美國家企業所控制的,都是為歐美國家生產或是加工的,更更須知到絕大大大部份製成品是供應歐美國家消費者的。


據維基百科:『新殖民主義 Neocolonialism』指當代的殖民主義,已經發生了變化,以強佔土地為形式的殖民主義,已經轉變為強佔市場的經濟殖民主義。

A term used by post-colonial critics of developed countries' involvement in the developing world. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue that existing or past international economic arrangements created by former colonial powers were or are used to maintain control of their former colonies and dependencies after the colonial independence movements of the post World War II period.



伸延閱覽:
Colonialism 維基百科
Neocolonialism 維基百科
Ethnic Cleansing 維基百科
Genocide 維基百科
波士頓茶葉事件 維基百科
美國 維基百科
印第安人 維基百科
新殖民主義 維基百科
美國欠缺誠意騎劫峰會轉移視線 雅虎新聞網



Monday, December 21, 2009

倫理的悲劇

倫理的悲劇



一提起”倫理“真是皺眉頭,在英文翻譯,它卻包含了 ethics 和 moral ,兩個 intersection 重疊的地帶。有人研究說舊中國,以“倫理”治國,是比較低成本,但始終是靠人治,被很多抬舉“法治精神”的高等人唾棄,但法律不礙於人情,單以法治,卻較容易產生了:“倫理的悲劇”。


蛇竇又有人提出,讓大家一齊吹水,今次談及一單美國和巴西的爭子案:


《CNN》 An American father said he hopes to be bringing his 9-year-old son home from Brazil on Thursday after a long international custody battle that has involved U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and many Brazilian courtrooms.

A Brazilian court on Wednesday ordered that the boy, Sean Goldman, be returned to the custody of his father in the United States. The father, David Goldman, spoke to CNN's "American Morning" on Thursday shortly after his plane touched down in Brazil.

"I hope that this is the last trip I'll have to come down here," Goldman said.

In an earlier conversation with CNN's Anderson Cooper, Goldman said, "I hope this time I will be able to go down to Brazil and come back home with my son. Hopefully the rule of law, god, nature, human decency will be followed, and Sean will come home to reunite with me, his only parent."

The Federal Regional Tribunal's 3-0 ruling in Rio de Janeiro upheld a decision in June by the 16th Federal Court in Rio, which ordered Sean returned to his home with his father in New Jersey in accordance with the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

But a Brazilian official with knowledge of the case predicted Wednesday's order would be appealed. So far, the boy's Brazilian family has filed 40 appeals, most of them procedural but one substantive.

The Brazilian high court is to take up any appeal on Thursday, said U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, who has been pressing the case for his constituent. "Frankly, every possible nuance has been appealed by the other side," he said.

The Supreme Court could still allow Sean to be returned to his father in the United States while it decides any appeal.

Goldman, a former model, said he had last spoken with his son in June, but they did not discuss the custody battle.

The well-publicized custody battle began in 2004 when his wife, Bruna Bianchi, took their 4-year-old son from their New Jersey home to Rio de Janeiro for what was to have been a two-week vacation. She never returned, instead divorcing Goldman, remarrying there and retaining custody of their son. She died last year in childbirth.

Goldman has argued that, as the sole surviving parent, he should be granted custody. But the boy's stepfather and other Brazilian relatives have argued that it would be traumatizing to Sean to remove him from what has been his home for most of his life.

The case has drawn high-profile input, including pressure for his return from Clinton. In a statement Wednesday, she said she was pleased to hear about the decision.

"We appreciate the assistance and cooperation of the government of Brazil in upholding its obligations under the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction," Clinton said. "And it is my hope that this long legal process is now complete and that the Goldman family will be reunited quickly."



Bruna Bianchi 這位始作俑者,已經去世,她是 Sean Goldman 的生母,在 Sean 祇有四歲時,母親直口回巴西渡假,帶同 Sean 返回巴西,就不再返回美國,並且開始辦理離婚手續,後來再出嫁給巴西丈夫,但卻因為難產,不幸去世,留下兒子 Jean 給第二任丈夫(繼父)和家人。


如今有血緣的生父,雖然得到法律的認同,可以得回兒子的撫養權,並要求帶 Sean 回到美國,但巴西的繼父,和母系方面的家人,共同提出上訴,希望可以保留 Jean 的撫養權,理由是 Sean 已經和他們一起生活有五年,他對生父的印像模糊。


祇得九歲的 Sean 固然沒能為自己,作出自主選擇,誰能真正可以說,甚麼是最佳 BEST for Sean 呢?“法律”?



後記:
臨發文前見到,“法律”就剝奪了一位先生的三十五年青春,他被枉判終身監禁。
《CNN》After 35 years in prison, a Florida man was freed today after DNA showed he did not kidnap and rape a boy in 1974. FULL STORY



伸延閱覽:
U.S. dad hopes to bring son home CNN
Father fights international custody battle CNN
Brazilian judge suspends order to reunite boy, American father CNN
American father still hopes for custody of son in Brazil CNN
U.S. dad's custody case returns to Brazilian appeals court CNN
Brazilian judge rules U.S. dad can visit son -- in Brazil CNN
Brazilian court orders son be returned to U.S. dad CNN
Sean Goldman Latina.com



Saturday, December 19, 2009

驚人的五個零

驚人的五個零



「五個零」的良好紀錄,即無泄漏、無污染、無傷亡、無被媒體炒作和無出現恐慌。


【明報社評】位於番禺的廣州輻照技術研究開發中心發生的鈷—60輻射事故,當局在歷時48日之後,才低調地宣布險情已被排除,但是從《南方都市報》(以下簡稱《南都》)披露當局在事故48日的處理過程,顯示事態十分嚴重,廣東當局目前僅以語焉不詳寥寥數語交代,肯定未能取信於民。我們認為,當局應該公開詳細交代事故和處理經過,讓居民了解真相,才有可能釋除疑慮,令相關官員也有所警惕。

危機48日被蒙在鼓裏 難怪居民情緒不安
在國際間,凡是與輻射有關的事故,都屬於重大事件,因為輻射無色、無味、無臭,但人體若過分暴露其間,會嚴重損害健康。今次事故的主角鈷—60,放射性極強,它能使人患上血癌,人若站在距離鈷源5米,5分鐘即可死亡。

發生事故的廣州輻照技術研究開發中心,毗鄰有大學校園,與約有10萬居民的番禺祈福新邨則是約300米的一街之遙。事故曝光後,由於居民認為被蒙在鼓裏,特別是接受訪問的港人居民更大表不滿,要求當局公開數據和專家報告,並派專家組到場詳細檢查輻射,以平息居民的不安情緒。

根據《南都》的報道,事故在10月12日發生,因為輻照中心工作人員操作不當,造成鈷—60放射源未能放回儲源水井,出現卡源輻射事故,即放射源不能回到儲存裝置內。不過,據報道,輻照中心並未即時向相關部門報告,而是兩日之後,即10月14日,廣東核與輻射安全監督站接到市民舉報,並向環保部核安全管理司報告,才確認該中心發生卡源事故。

輻照中心發生卡源事故,並未第一時間報告相關部門,是否涉及違規,當局宜應查明,因為若此乃輻照中心行事慣例,則過去有否隱瞞同類事故,自是啟人疑竇。

另外,從《南都》的報道,鈷—60放射源暴露之處的輻照室,因為高溫使得貨物燃燒起來,引起大火,其後雖然撲救熄滅,但是輻照室牆壁因為驟熱驟冷,內牆混凝土大面積脫落,原來2.2米厚的牆壁只剩下2米左右。在民居毗鄰,發生放射源導致可燒掉約半米厚牆壁的大火,而廣東當局決定不驚動居民,其「處變不驚」的定力,使人「佩服」。

危機過去仍三緘其口 被質疑有不可告人之處?
據《南都》報道,事故發生後第三日,副總理李克強曾批示「嚴防出現環境污染」,廣東省委書記汪洋則批示「盡快披露信息,防止誤傳造成不良影響」。

據《南都》報道,在事故48日之內,廣東當局曾4次發布事故的消息,都是寥寥數語,讀者不可能領略事故的嚴重,廣東報紙在報道當局的通稿時,首先是並非每家報紙都報道,有報道的則刊載在不顯眼之處。當局的低調,明顯要居民不能領會正處於「輻射危機」之中。

廣東當局的處理有黑箱作業之嫌,事後檢視,危機延宕了48日,居民被蒙在鼓裏,難怪在總結此事的經驗教訓時,當地環保局肯定這次處理,認為創下「五個零」的良好紀錄,即無泄漏、無污染、無傷亡、無被媒體炒作和無出現恐慌。不過,當局的沾沾自喜,對於曾經厠身危機的居民,被剝奪了涉及自身健康、安危的「知的權利」,對於居民是否公平,值得商榷。

事態還有耐人尋味之處。首先,是3日前(即15日)《南都》根據記者採訪所得資料,在頭版較詳細地報道事件經過,卻隨即接到報道禁令,要換版;其次,是12月11日,即廣東省應急辦公室在網站發布消息,說「被卡放射源安全降入儲源井內」之後的14日,輻照中心主任與省環保廳都以「不方便」為由,婉拒《南都》記者的採訪要求。既然宣告事件已經告一段落,當局卻不肯公開交代,難免使人質疑是否有不可告人之處。

經此周折之後,居民知道曾發生重大輻射事故,他們卻一無所知。事實上,當局在寥寥數語的發布中,只說「並無泄漏輻射、並無造成環境污染」,卻未提出可信數據和專家報告,難怪事故曝光之後,居民對當局的說法存疑。

我們認為,如此一宗重大輻射事故,廣東當局的處理未能取信於民,應該盡快完整、如實地向居民交代,公布相關數據和專家報告,以取得居民信任。官員在閉門會議總結經驗教訓,搬出所謂「五個零」來表功,只是自欺欺人的說法;只有當局公開如實交代真相,才能消除居民的疑慮。

與民居毗鄰實屬不妥 廣州輻照中心應搬走
另外,廣州輻照技術研究開發中心與民居為鄰,這樣的城市規劃是否恰當,也值得斟酌。我們認為,無論是輻照中心先存在,抑或祈福新邨等民居和大學校園先興建,總之,兩者那麼近距離並存,肯定不妥。

據知,廣州輻照技術研究開發中心的卡輻射源事故,近期在河南也曾發生兩宗,可見這類事故發生頻率不低,今次未發生泄漏、環境污染或導致重大傷亡,難保下次可以平安渡過。因此,這類高危設施理所當然遠離民居。現在廣州輻照技術研究開發中心座落人口密集之處,肯定是一個潛在「定時炸彈」,廣東當局應該盡快要它搬走。



沒有忘記香港多年前,有人擴議在大亞灣興建『核電站』,雖然多年之後,港人沒有知道,有沒有發生過泄漏輻射,還是泄漏了沒有通告。


不過我記起有部美國電影,由 珍方達 和 積林蒙 主演,叫做『The China Syndrome』,忘記了中文譯名,講的就是核電廠的核反應堆,發生事故,反應堆不能返回冷卻器,核反應堆因高溫溶掉,而溶掉的反應堆,勘入地殼,貫穿過地心後,就在中國某省市破土而出,為中國帶來核輻射災難,顧此稱之為『The China Syndrome』中國并發症。


【維基百科 the concept】The title refers to the concept that if an American nuclear plant melts down, the core will melt through the Earth until it reaches China.

The China Syndrome is a hypothesis, or rather a metaphor, of a possible extreme result of a nuclear meltdown in which molten reactor core products breach the barriers below them and flow downwards through the floor of the containment building. The origin of the phrase is the concept that molten material from an American reactor would melt through the crust of the Earth and reach China.

China is a metaphor, as the opposite side of the globe from the USA is actually the Indian Ocean.



而電影就是講述,隱瞞核電廠核泄漏的真相。

【維基百科 電影】TV news reporter Kimberly Wells (Fonda) and her cameraman Richard Adams (Douglas) visit the Ventana nuclear power plant outside Los Angeles as part of a series of news reports on energy production. While viewing the control room from an observation room, the plant goes through a reactor SCRAM (emergency shutdown).

Shift supervisor Jack Godell (Lemmon) notices what he believes to be an unusual vibration during the SCRAM. Checking their gauges, the control room staff finds that water levels in the reactor core have risen to high levels; they begin opening relief valves in an effort to prevent too much water from damaging the plant.

However, the needle in one water level gauge turns out to have been stuck, and when Godell taps the glass cover on the gauge, the needle rapidly drops to indicate that the water level is dangerously low, and the core has almost been uncovered.

The staff begin restoring coolant systems, but for several agonizing minutes, the crew doesn't know whether the core is undergoing a meltdown or not. Eventually, backup systems are able to raise the water levels, and the reactor is brought under control.

In the observation room looking out over the control room, Adams began filming the activity below; when told he was not permitted to film the control room for security reasons, he surreptitiously tucks the camera under his arm and begins filming anyway. Because the glass is soundproof, the visitors can only guess as to what is happening.

When they return to the television station, the station's news director refuses to air the footage, fearing criminal prosecution. Adams, believing that there is more to the story than is indicated in the plant's official statement (which referred to the near-meltdown as an "unexpected transient"), steals the film from the station and shows it to a pair of experts, who are able to fill him in on what actually happened.

They determine, from the actions of the control room crew, that the plant came very close to the "China syndrome" where the core, at extreme temperature, would have melted down into the plant, hitting ground water and exploding into the atmosphere, contaminating the surrounding area.

Meanwhile, Godell, suspecting there to be more to the strange vibration he felt at the beginning of the SCRAM, does some investigating of his own and uncovers evidence that the plant is unsafe.

Specifically, he finds evidence to suggest that another reactor SCRAM at full power could cause the cooling system to be severely damaged. Godell asks the plant foreman to delay restarting the reactor until the main water pump can be disassembled and inspected.

The foreman flatly refuses, under pressure from the plant's owners, who wish to avoid paying a hefty sum for the work and would have to close the plant down for several weeks. Godell contacts Wells, asking her to help get his concerns heard. Wells and Adams agree to help get Godell's evidence entered at safety hearings for a new plant being built, which would be administered by the owners of Ventana.

Godell asks to remain anonymous, but when the original messenger (Wells' sound engineer) is run off the road by hit men (presumably hired by the plant's owners), he decides he must appear at the safety hearings himself. On the way there he is chased by more hit men, and finds safe harbor at the Ventana power plant.

When Godell arrives, he finds the plant has been brought up to full power. Now convinced of the danger, he grabs a gun from the control room's security guard and forces everyone out. Once alone and secured inside the control room, he brings the power down to a safer level.

He also tells the plant's managers that if anyone attempts to take control of the reactor from the outside or break in, he'll open valves and flood the containment building with radiation, essentially ruining the plant. He then demands to be interviewed live on television by Wells.

While Wells and Adams set up their equipment, plant technicians find a way to cause a reactor SCRAM. In the middle of the live interview, the SCRAM is started, the camera's cables are physically cut, and a SWAT team forces its way into the control room and shoots Godell several times, killing him.

Proving Godell's fears true, however, the SCRAM causes significant damage to the plant, as portions of the cooling system physically collapse. The reactor is eventually brought under control by the plant's automatic systems, but the collapse leaves the cooling system balanced precariously on a thin pipe.

Outside the plant, a phalanx of reporters and television crews are awaiting word on the events inside. When the plant spokesman suggests that Godell was "emotionally disturbed" and that he "had been drinking", Wells confronts the spokesman in front of the other reporters, and eventually persuades one of Godell's co-workers (Brimley) to admit that Godell was not a "loony" and would not have taken such drastic steps had there not been something to his belief in problems with the plant.

The film ends when the reporters' live signal abruptly cuts to color bars and the credits roll in silence.



電影中企圖爆料的核電廠“科民”,他慘被槍殺了,整個事件完全變了質,民眾不得到真實真相的報導,事件不了了之,令人無奈!相信今次,番禺的輻照技術研究開發中心發生的鈷—60輻射事故,不久就會噤聲,而漸漸淡忘了。


丹麥哥本哈根氣候峰會的議題:『環球廢氣減排』,有線電視新聞 CNN 討論,美國為了減排廢氣,有可能考慮在美國的核電站,重置機組發電,增加核能的比重,云云。這證明美國人已經淡忘記得 Three Mile Island Accident『三哩島事件』,和烏克蘭 Chernobyl Disaster『切爾諾貝爾核電廠災難』。


而中國的能源需求緊張,為了減排燒煤炭發電產生的廢氣,核電的開發變得急不容緩,以中國一向方針,辦事效率之高,很可能加快至極速,增建核能發電設施。 若中美加快核能建設,令全世界各國都會仿效,紛紛增加核能開發,核輻射泄漏的或然率,必順延增加。


丹麥峰會的『廢氣減排』議題,不論是否有了協議,人類可能祇是顧得『廢氣』的頭來,而把腳暴露了入『核泄漏』,為地球、人類、環保,帶來更多更大的災難危機!


後記:
【明報專訊】法國《回聲報》報道,法國總理菲永訪華期間,法國可能與中國簽署價值15億歐元的核電合作合同。

法國電力公司與法國核電公司~阿海琺集團將與廣東核能集團簽署合同,確認他們的合資公司在廣東臺山建造兩個EPR第三代壓水堆核電站。為此,法國電力公司與阿海琺集團的兩位總裁這次也將隨菲永訪華。

法國還打算推動其他兩個項目:建造一家核廢料處理廠,以及在廣東建造一所中法核研究學院。

法國《論壇報》此前報道,中國已作出決定,由法國航空集團賽峰和美國通用電氣為其合作企業,為中國首型國產大客機C919提供發動機。正式合同將在菲永訪華之際簽署。



【明報社評】事前大張旗鼓、浸浸然有「末日救地球」况味的聯合國哥本哈根氣候峰會,開了兩星期,也吵了足足兩星期,到了結束之日,192個與會國家中的28國就《哥本哈根協定》達成共識,會前各國期望甚殷的具約束力減排指標在《協定》裏未見提及,以發展中國家為主體的G77集團不滿溢於言表,批評《協定》是歷史上最差的氣候協議。我們認為,從達致減排目標這一會前期許而言,這次氣候峰會無疑是失敗透頂的一次,然而,人們若能從失敗之中汲取教訓,仍有希望在2012年舊氣候協議失效前,制定下一階段的減排框架。

盼汲取教訓 助制定減排框架
人們不一定知道各國在峰會達至減排目的決心有多大,但最低限度,從會議舉行期間及會後的言行,與會一些國家沒有誠意的態勢倒是很明顯。這一點,美國是責無旁貸,美國是世界最主要發達國家,也是主要的排放國之一,但美國的誠意令人懷疑——從上周四到埗的國務卿希拉里到周五抵達的總統奧巴馬,甫抵哥本哈根之後,他們放出了「國際監察中國減排努力的透明度」的話語,不再提及美國的減排承諾。誠然,中國作為全球溫室氣體最大排放國,面對監察壓力是極為正常,但美國轉移視線的做法,卻在很大程度上騎劫了峰會,作為峰會核心的減排目標——眾所周知這是美國的要害——在美國一再提出減排數據透明度的爭論中隱沒,因此,儘管峰會在上周五結束後「加時」,依然無法達成減排目標協議。

美國率先成為峰會的「破壞王」有其背景,奧巴馬政府提出的、遠低於歐盟的實質減排目標,即以1990年為基準、實際減排約3.5%(歐盟為20%),只是白宮的立場,主觀上美國國會本來就不傾向支持減排。客觀上,奧巴馬上台這一年來,全副心力都放在內政事務上,金融海嘯足已令他傷神,如今的退巿策略倘若處理欠佳,隨時觸發另一次金融危機;增兵3萬到阿富汗,令致他在國內備受黨內外批評;再下來是醫療改革大計,眾議院剛通過,而今面對的是參議院的投票。美國國內政治這刻根本沒有空間討論減排目標,事實上,從哥本哈根回國後,奧巴馬的重點已不是氣候峰會而是醫療改革。

美國的取態令到中國未有在減排上走前一步,中國的減排底線是﹕氣候變化的主因,是過去150年間發達國家工業化過程所造成的,發達國家理應承擔減排義務,中國的立場是發達國與發展國在減排上「共同而有區別的責任」,易言之,倘若美國不願減排,也就無法採取共同而有區別的責任。溫家寶總理在峰會上的講話,便是這一立場的再度申述,他指出,發達國家必須大幅量化減排,並向發展中國家提供資金和技術支持,而發展中國家應根據國情,在發達國家資金和技術轉讓支持下,盡可能減緩溫室氣體排放。美國既不願在減排目標上作出承諾,如何會令龐大的發展中國家跟隨,至於像日本等的發達國家,也就更有借口放慢減排的步伐了。


世界認清排放 維持壓力防逃避責任
儘管峰會沒有達至全面減排承諾,然而亦毋須悲觀得有如世界末日,對此,我們仍然是樂觀的。千里之行,始於足下,儘管峰會沒有結出果實,卻讓世界由此更加注意溫室氣體排放,更會更清晰明瞭溫室氣體排放大國的盤算和策略。關鍵做法是從今天到下次峰會前,各國對這些大國維持一定壓力,致力令到她們難以從應當承擔的責任中逃逸,同一時間各國則在減排方面進一步有更多認知,為廣闊堅實的減排承諾打下基礎,以時間換取更大的減排空間。

功虧一簣的峰會也不盡是一無是處,折射出的是若隱若現的國際政治版圖,可以為下次峰會擘劃大方向時作為註腳。雖然G77集團批評《哥本哈根協定》是史上最差的氣候協議,世人卻從中在另一個側面看到當今的世界新秩序﹕28個就《協定》達成協議的國家,佔了全球排放量超逾八成,是不折不扣的發達國家或發展中國家俱樂部——有傳統富國的G7集團和歐盟,值得注意的是巴西、南非、印度和中國這4個發展中國家大國或所謂準發達國家的冒起,扭轉了過往由傳統富國說了才算的遊戲規則。中國多年來是亞非拉國家的友邦,更是G77集團的主要伙伴,會前被視為發展中國家利益的主要代言人,如今成為《協定》的其中一個協議國,未來中國能否繼續代表一眾較貧窮落後的發展中國家的利益?

一些發展中國家對此存疑,顯然北京也注意到這一潛在擔憂,官方新華社昨晚8時許罕有發出新聞稿引述外交部發言人秦剛說,峰會上,中國同其他發展中國家的溝通是「充分、透明和順暢的」。這段僅42字的新聞稿,應可視為未來中國在氣候峰會上,仍然代表發展中國家的利益的確認,同時起著對中國在減排方面的督促。面對發展中國家的柔性壓力,中國必須身體力行,實踐讓地球更清新美好的歷史承諾。



伸延閱覽:
番禺輻射事故 明報社評
番禺輻射事故 谷歌新聞
大亞灣核電站 維基百科
The China Syndrome (Movie) 維基百科
China Syndrome Concept 維基百科
Three Mile Island Accident 維基百科
Chernobyl Disaster 維基百科
Nuclear power an option? CNN
中法將簽核電合約 雅虎新聞網
美國欠缺誠意騎劫峰會轉移視線 雅虎新聞網


Friday, December 18, 2009

談雪

談雪



在別人網誌提起“鵝毛大雪”,顧重點是談與”雪“有關的舊事。


雖然這兩天返冷!但香港是沒有下雪天的。想當年初見到的雪,是家用電器“冰箱”(香港粵語:雪櫃)內見到的,舊款的冰箱在頂部,是設有雪格的裝置,這個雪格要時不時溶雪,就是要把冰箱的東西,全部拿出來,把冰箱電源切斷,讓霜雪溶掉後,清理妥當後再放回東西。現在的冰箱,則多分成上下格,叫作無霜冰箱(香港粵語:無霜雪櫃),方便得多了。


直到有次去韓國公幹,才第一次見到真正的雪,當年的“首爾”仍然叫做“漢城”。但沒有見到下雪,祇是早上上班時,由酒店步行返分公司路上(約十分鐘步行),見到昨夜下的雪,已經被掃到行人路的兩旁堆了起來,我已經樂得不理雪的清潔與否,就拿在手中把玩,一班同事不理旁邊本地路人,在互擲雪球胡鬧一番。


第一次見到真正的下雪,要等到去東京公幹,是一個星期日的早上,顧此不用上班,我睡到過了九時,醒來由酒店的窗戶往外望,另一邊正在下著“鵝毛大雪”,急不及待,連早餐都未吃,就把自己包裹著厚衣,歡欣地跑出室外,就酒店所在港區:赤坂、溜池、虎ノ門、神谷町一帶,行了一個大圈才返回酒店用早餐。


這場東京罕有的大雪,到了中午還未有停,我和同事們吃完午餐,就相約到外面走走,坐的士去到銀座,最後行到日比谷公園,根本就祇有我們幾個香港人。我不幸誤踏入一個雪氹,雙腳沒入積雪,足足過了腳脛,雪走進了我的波鞋,雪溶掉後就弄濕了襪子,凍得我雙腳僵了,初次嘗到冰雪的恐怖,急急召的士返回酒店。


再一次面對雪的可怕,就是一次東京公幹完畢,拿著日本國鐵火車證,北上作日本東北流浪遊,週遊了仙臺市松島海岸後的下下午(未到黃昏日落),很想去北海道的扎幌看“雪祭”,YES,why not? 就趕乘新幹線去盛岡市,再轉乘特急到青森市,剛剛趕得上由青森發車,去北海道扎幌市的夜車。


原訂晚上十一時許出發的列車,但在車上呆等到凌晨十二時多才開車,夜車開得比平常慢,窗外已經開始有飄雪,過了“津輕海底隧道”後,即是在北海道那一方,窗外的雪已經下得很大,過了函館和室蘭後,列車卒之停了下來,已經是清晨時份,但外邊還是黑黑的,而且車外雪還是下得很大很大,兼且又不通言語,很有孤立無援的感覺,查看時刻表,這列車因為是夜車不設餐卡,也沒有食物飲料售賣機。


幸好我帶有些乾糧和飲品,就在火車上開餐,未至饑寒交逼(其他的乘客也是一樣),如此在車上等候苦候,本來清晨六時許抵達扎幌的列車,到了天光後七時許,就卒之緩緩重新慢駛,而且是行行停停,停停行行。唉!總算不用困死在這個鐵棺材裡,不過雪雖然細了些,外面白濛濛一遍,甚麼也見不到,到下午二時多才終於抵達扎幌市。不是第一次來扎幌,下車後把手拉車小行履,安放好入儲物櫃後,就孭著背囊先去找吃的。


這次在大雪後的扎幌遊,因為由扎幌車站起,有一條很長的地下街,沒有帶來不方便。除了參觀了扎幌的雪祭,吃過北海道式的巨型魚生刺身,還有“蟹”宴,即是供應幾種蟹,各樣不同生吃熟吃的做法。並且順道去了小樽和支笏湖,但幸好都沒有再下大雪,勾留了三天就返回本州,繼續我的日本東北流浪遊。


另一次遇上下大風雪,是在加拿大魁北克滿地可市 Montreal or Mont Real,在風雪中步行到 St. Patrick's Basilica 和 Notre Dame Basilica 大教堂,再上在山上的 Saint Joseph's Oratory 大雪中的大教堂,遠看很是凄美。


之後幾年還有數次上到雪山之巔,經歷一下冰川的雄偉,前後到過“瑞士的阿爾卑斯山”山登上《少女峰》,日本的“日本阿爾卑斯山”山登上《立山大觀峰》,還有紐西蘭的“南阿爾卑斯山” 乘搭直升機上《franz josef 冰川》上漫步,幸好幾次在山巔上都沒遇到下大雪。


反而有一次在洛杉磯探親,老表帶我去西面的大山上的 Big Bear Lake,附近有滑雪場,並且嘗試我的第一次滑雪經驗,兩天一夜的滑雪之旅,第二天整個上午下着“鵝毛大雪”,滑雪完畢積雪經已蓋過汽車頂,沒法找到車子,這種徬徨至今難忘。



後記:
雪是潔白的代表,女孩子女士們的名字有個“雪”字,給人很多的先入為主,若是位膚色略黑的女孩子,就會被人背後取笑,真衰!伶人“白雪仙”女士,藝術造詣不用多提,她的徒兒“謝雪心”近來就很有人氣,但有位名氣界仁姐叫作“盧覓雪”,未見其人有很多幻想,原來是位大肥婆,有些失望!陶才子曾經利用“冰肌雪膚”來形容林才女,卻嘢來無數的批評,一笑!


幾十年人生,都遇過幾位名字有個“雪”字的女孩子女性,男性朋友有用這“雪”字,做名字的沒記起,但電影界有位”林雪“的男演員。女性朋友有叫:“雪芬”、“雪卿”、“慕雪”、“若雪”幾位阿姐,都真的是白白凈凈,是否她們父母待她們出生後,才改用“雪”字做名呢?還是幾位阿姐,後天不斷護膚,保養得宜,修成正果,不負雪名?最後不得不提一位女性朋友,名字叫作“傲雪”,她真是一位很有獨立自主,又有拼搏精神的阿姐,她有位姐妹名字喚作“傲霜”!


後後記:
突然又記起,一位認識的女生名字,她叫”雪影“,她的臉很美,綸槨又分明,永遠含春的微笑,身材窈窕適中,啊!怎麼會先前,忘記掉她呢?不解!還有日籍的美女,阿”雪“ Yuki,還有還有,美籍的 Snowy,其實中外的女子,都愛用”雪“來作名字的。




我的舊文:
冰河期
我的日本 - "背囊遊"s ---(上)
我的日本 - "背囊遊"s ---(下)
Krispy Kreme 甜餅圈



Wednesday, December 16, 2009

李易安居士

李易安居士



『尋尋覓覓,冷冷清清,淒淒慘慘戚戚。』

~~~ 聲聲慢


『莫道不消魂,簾捲西風,人比黃花瘦。』

~~~ 醉花陰


都是繪炙人口的名句,很多朋友,囊囊上口,唸得出來。


【維基百科】李清照(1084年-1156年),中國南宋著名女詞人,自號易安居士,1084年李清照誕生於齊州章丘(今山東濟南章丘)明水鎮。

父親李格非進士出身,官至禮部員外郎,是當時極有名氣的作家,深受當日文壇宗匠蘇軾所賞識,常以文章相往來。母親王氏系出名門,高祖王景圖、曾祖王贊,都榮登進士,祖父王準受封為漢國公,父親王珪在宋神宗熙寧時為中書省平章事,元豐時為尚書左僕射,都是執掌國家樞要的丞相,受封為歧國公,善文學。

1101年李清照18歲,與長她三歲的太學生諸城趙明誠結婚。趙是金石家。前期生活安定優裕,詞作多寫閨閣之怨或是對出行丈夫的思念;1107年移居青州。1127年金兵攻陷青州,李清照與丈夫南渡江寧,行至鎮江時,張遇陷鎮江府,鎮江守臣錢伯言棄城逃去。建炎二年(1128年)春,始抵江寧府。

南渡後,詞人的生活困頓。1129年丈夫於八月十八日卒於建康,李清照為文祭之:「白日正中,嘆龐翁之機捷;堅城自墮,憐杞婦之悲深。」紹興元年(1131年)三月,赴越(今浙江紹興),在土民鍾氏之家,一夕書畫被盜。

當年與丈夫收集的金石古卷,全部散佚,令她飽受打擊,其寫作轉為對現實的憂患。紹興二年(1132年),至杭州,再嫁張汝舟,婚姻並不幸福。後來張汝舟因營私舞弊被除名編管柳州。

據說她有《易安居士文集》七卷、《易安詞》八卷,但已經遺失。現有《漱玉詞》輯本,現存約五十首左右。




除了以上的,個人還喜歡讀,李清照易安居士所填的
詞牌《浣紗溪》共七闕詞。


其一、
莫許杯深琥珀濃,未成沈醉意先融,疏鐘已應晚來風。

瑞腦香消魂夢斷,辟寒金小髻鬟松,醒時空對燭花紅!


其二、
小院閉窗春己深,重簾未捲影沈沈,倚樓無語理瑤琴。

遠岫出山催薄暮,細風吹雨弄輕陰,梨花欲謝恐難禁!


其三、
淡蕩春光寒食天,玉爐沈水裊殘煙,夢回山枕隱花鈿。

海燕未來人鬥草,江梅已過柳生綿,黃昏疏雨濕秋千。


其四、
髻子傷春慵更梳,晚風庭院落梅初,淡雲來往月疏疏。

玉鴨薰鑪閒瑞腦,朱櫻斗帳掩流蘇,通犀還解辟寒無?


其五、
繡幕芙蓉一笑開,斜偎寶鴨襯香腮,眼波才動被人猜。

一面風情深有韻,半箋嬌恨寄幽懷,月移花影約重來。


其六、
樓上晴天碧四垂,樓前芳草接天涯,勸君莫上最高梯。

新筍已成堂下竹,落花都入燕巢泥,忍聽林表杜鵑啼。


其七、
紅日已高三丈透,金爐次第添香獸,紅錦地衣隨步皺。

佳人舞點金釵溜,酒惡時拈花蕊嗅,別殿遙聞簫鼓奏。



【百度百科】 《浣紗溪》或《浣溪沙》唐玄宗時教坊名,後用為詞調 。 沙,一作“紗”。 有雜言、齊言二體。 五代人詞中,見於敦煌曲子詞者,均為雜言;見於《花間》、《尊前》兩集,多為齊言,亦有雜言。 至北宋,雜言稱為《攤破浣溪沙》破七字為十字,成為七言、三言兩句;齊言仍稱為《浣溪沙》或《減字浣溪沙》 。


據維基百科說:她有《易安居士文集》七卷、《易安詞》八卷,但已經遺失。現有《漱玉詞》輯本,現存約五十首左右。故此,翻查幾個版本的《李清照全集》,有關詞牌『浣紗溪』或『浣溪沙』,有些記載有五闕詞,有些輯集了六闕,最後我還找到第七闕,但是否後人所作,還是李清照真存呢?


歷代中國人不重視『文化財產』,對保存古建築、古跡、古籍、古文物,歷代都沒有正視。 民間傳說華佗的醫書,祇殘留下『針灸篇』,但已經足令中國古代醫術,acupuncture 聞名全世界。秦朝的『阿房宮』,一把火就被項羽燒掉了,現在所見的『黃鶴樓』、『岳陽樓』、 『滕王閣』、『蓬萊閣』、『鸛雀樓』、『大觀樓』、『閱江樓』、『天心閣』等,都是改革開放後,重建或重新修輯。


紀念北魏《花木蘭》的『木蘭故居』,就鬧雙胞胎、三胞胎。三國的《赤壁》,都有分『文赤壁』和『武赤壁』。但其意卻並不是保存文物,而是著眼經濟效益,最甚者是隨意增刪,把舊的拆去增其舊制,為了增加遊客遊趣,哀哉!


古代的文學作品呢?因為很多流失凋掉,是單靠人的記憶,再默寫出來,這就更加因其真偽的爭拗。連近代查良鏞先生用筆名《金庸》,所寫的『新派武俠小說』,在國內都有新書出版,假的金庸作品,在改革開放初期,充斥神州大地,可見一斑。




伸延閱覽:
李清照 維基百科
李清照 百度百科
李清照詞全集(共四十九首) Novelscape.net
李清照詞全集 content.edu.tw
《漱玉詞》 互動百科
《漱玉詞》 百度百科
詞牌:浣紗溪 又或 浣溪沙 百度百科


我的舊文:
《木蘭辭》和《木蘭祠》
《赤壁》與《赤壁懷古》
《滕王閣》與《滕王閣序》
《岳陽樓》與《岳陽樓記》
《大觀樓》~《長聯》




Monday, December 14, 2009

童安格的三首歌

童安格的三首歌



週日又是打掃打掃的日子,掃掃一下 CD 架上的塵埃,拿起一張《童安格》的專輯。以下是當年在臺北,初買到時,最愛聽的三首歌。本來想分三次登出,並寫下一些當年在臺北的往事,不過不打算寫了。


童安格《國語真經典》專輯,連續播出這 三首歌

其實你不懂我的心




明天你是否依然愛我




把根留住




過去的,就讓它過去罷,有些回憶,
不用也不需要把它忘記掉,
祇需要藏在心中,已經足夠!



伸延悅耳:
童安格《國語真經典~環球》 520muisc.com



Sunday, December 13, 2009

青春不再

青春不再



Rock 味十足,羅大佑唱的《青春舞曲》。




太陽下山明朝依舊爬上來
花兒謝了明年還是一樣的開
我的青春一去無影蹤
我的青春小鳥一去不回來
我的青春小鳥一去不回來
別的那樣喲 別的那樣喲
我的青春小鳥一去不回來

這首歌我們祖先唱了千萬次
現在輪到他們的子孫來唱
日月輪迴依舊
花開花謝依然
多少青春繼續不回
地下埋藏的 為自由付出的代價
是否我們已經忘記
黃花崗的靈魂 他們地下有知
能否原諒我們


據聞原裝的《青春舞曲》是內地的王洛賓,根據維吾爾民歌改編成。

【維基百科】王洛賓(1913年12月28日-1996年3月14日),北京出生,原名王榮庭,曾用名艾依尼丁,中國作曲家和民族音樂學家。

王洛賓出生於一個油漆匠家庭,他於1931年考入北平藝術專科學校音樂系,1934年因家貧無力支撐而輟學,去作一名中學音樂教師,1937年參加八路軍西北戰地服務團,1938年赴新疆,參加蘭州抗戰劇團,1941年因被懷疑是「共黨分子」被捕入獄,受嚴刑拷打,1944年出獄,在青海任中學教員。

1949年,王洛賓在西安參加了中國人民解放軍,隨部隊進入新疆,任職於新疆軍區政治部歌舞團。因蘭州抗戰劇團當時是從屬於國軍的,被指控為馬步芳的音樂教官,1960年被捕入獄,長達15年,1975年出獄,到處流浪打工,1979年平反。任職於蘭州軍區戰鬥歌舞團創作組,1988年獲勝利功勛榮譽章,晚年寓居烏魯木齊,1996年病逝於烏魯木齊。

王洛賓自1937年就開始搜集、整理、編寫、出版中國西北地區的民歌,一直沒有署名,以新疆民歌的名義被許多中國人傳唱,影響廣泛,直到1983年才由甘肅人民出版社正式出版《洛賓歌曲集》,被譽為「西部歌王」,晚年和台灣作家三毛交往甚深。




而特別為香港回歸而寫的《青春舞曲~2000》
是唱片《皇后大道東》其中歌曲




羅大佑 《青春舞曲2000》 作詞:林夕 作曲:羅大佑

香港如何飄香 鄉里歡聚異鄉
東與西聯營開張 新市民舊土壤
家國應如何稱呼 黑眼睛黃皮膚
一畝梯田容萬千住戶 關帝遙望天父
怎麼城市需要青春不老的仙藥
高速的遊戲令人老化但仍舊活著
怎麼高樓似一片樹林建在荒山上
因這裡風聲風嚮風霜變幻無常
拋開銅鐵刀劍為何以銀彈較量
不管叫躍進衝刺升級總要分強弱
千千種路線主義是誰最大方漂亮
只須有金光普照不管太陽或月亮
不同心 同用良心思想
為何高聲各自叫嚷卻不能再原諒
不同聲 來自同一家鄉 為同一心 
願同樣不自覺地流淚或拍掌
怎麼城市需要文明去換不老藥
只因美夢要堆砌軀體都要生存著
怎麼高樓似一片樹林建在荒山上
因這裡風聲風嚮風霜變幻無常
拋開銅鐵刀劍為何以銀彈較量
不管叫躍進衝刺升級總要分強弱
千千種路線主義是誰最大方漂亮
只須有金光普照不管太陽或月亮
不同心 同用良心思想
為何高聲各自叫嚷卻不能再原諒
不同聲 來自同一家鄉 為同一心 
願同樣不自覺地流淚或拍掌
太陽下山明朝依舊爬上來
花兒謝了明年還是一樣的開
我的青春一去無影蹤
我的青春小鳥一去不回來
我的青春小鳥一去不回來
別的那樣喲 別的那樣喲
我的青春小鳥一去不回來
荊花謝了菊花照舊年年開
西風弱了東風繼續時時來
繁盛文明是否以後尚在
黑錢白眼金咭赤字何時更改
青春綠印碧海鐵幕何時回來
別的那樣喲 別的那樣喲
但我祇得膚色染盡萬萬年代
香港如何飄香 鄉里歡聚異鄉
東與西聯營開張 新市民舊土壤
家國應如何稱呼 黑眼睛黃皮膚
一畝梯田容萬千住戶 關帝遙望天父



香港的民主于港英時代誕生,那時祇是因為六七年的示威暴動,港英政府需要華人支持,到了中英談判九七回歸,才算是開始滋長。中英簽處中英聯合聲明,就加快它的成長,八九年的六四事件,才廣泛喚醒大多數港人的民主心,再經由肥彭的三違反方案,來拔苗助長,這就是我們見到的『港式民主』。


如今眼見泛民內,被第二個政改方案分化,因攪唔到百萬人上街,而推出『五區總辭』,卻引起泛民內訌。司徒華和陶君行在電臺上互相對罵,華叔和毓民隔著大氣,互爆互指不是。與當初團結一起,為香港建立民主而努力,背道而馳,未就政改達成泛民方案,先來個內部路線闘爭,這與理想愈走愈遠。


立法會這個唯一在香港,體驗民主的殿堂,內務會議中要為『甘乃威示愛』鞭屍,建制派把握機會,祭出“誠信”道德大招牌,要成立調查委員會,誓要把政敵掃除議會。雖然這祇好怪民主黨,當初誤信甘乃威,讓他上位。立法會成立委員會,花費公帑納稅人金錢,浪費開會議員寶貴時間,而祇是建制派要掃走甘乃威,保皇黨要一挫泛民為樂,但又有幾多香港市民真心願意又再補選,當前有更多急的要務,要辦,要做,要完成。


八九民運是我的民主初階,到九七回歸令我支持民主派, 但回歸十二年半以來,看到的、聽到的、和所見到的, 唉唉唉 。。。。我要說:『青春不再,我倦了!』


伸延閱覽:
王洛賓維基百科


我的舊文:
其他羅大佑的歌
不一樣的童年 ~《童年》
李木匠說的紫砂茶壺 ~《皇后大道東》
「東方之珠」香港 Hong Kong ~《東方之珠》


Saturday, December 12, 2009

弔古戰場文

弔古戰場文



【維基百科】李華(715年-766年),字遐叔,唐朝趙州贊皇(今河北元氏)人。唐玄宗開元二十三年(735年)進士,唐玄宗天寶二年(743年)報考博學宏詞科被錄取,歷官秘書省校書郎。

唐玄宗天寶十一年(752年)調任監察御史,改右補闕。安史之亂爆發,李華被叛軍挾持,被迫擔任鳳閣舍人。安史之亂被平定後,因曾在安史之亂期間擔任偽政權官職(也就是鳳閣舍人),被貶為杭州司戶參軍,不久辭官。

唐肅宗上元年間,召為左補闕、司封員外郎,稱病而未赴任。廣德二年(764年),宰相梁國公李峴領選江淮,聘李華加入幕僚,任命李華為檢校吏部員外郎;次年,因風痺(因風濕侵襲而引起的關節疼痛或麻木)辭官返家。傳世作品有《弔古戰場文》。



李華經歷過,親眼見到,多場戰爭,給百姓帶來極大的災難和痛苦。於調任到今寧夏回族自治區靈武縣附近,經過北方的古戰場,感慨良多,便寫出這篇情文並茂,扣人心弦的佳作。


《弔古戰場文》 李華

浩浩乎!

平沙無垠,敻不見人,河水縈帶,群山糾紛。

黯兮慘悴,風悲日曛。蓬斷草枯,凜若霜晨。

鳥飛不下,獸鋌亡群。

亭長告予曰:

「此古戰場也,嘗覆三軍。 往往鬼哭,天陰則聞。」

傷心哉!秦歟?漢歟?將近代歟?


吾聞夫齊魏徭戌,荊韓召募。萬里奔走,連年暴露。

沙草晨牧,河冰夜渡;地闊天長,不知歸路。

寄身鋒刃,腷臆誰愬?秦漢而還,多事四夷;

中州耗斁,無世無之。古稱戎夏,不抗王師。

文教失宣,武臣用奇。奇兵有異於仁義,

王道迂闊而莫為。


嗚呼噫嘻!吾想夫北風振漠,胡兵伺便。

主將驕敵,期門受戰。野豎旄旗,川迴組練。

法重心駭,威尊命賤。利鏃穿骨,驚沙入面。

主客相搏,山川震眩。聲析江河,勢崩雷電。

至若窮陰凝閉,凜冽海隅;積雪沒脛,堅冰在鬚。

鷙鳥休巢,征馬踟躕,繒纊無溫,墮指裂膚。

當此苦寒,天假強胡,憑陵殺氣,以相剪屠。

徑截輜重,橫攻士卒;都尉新降,將軍覆沒。

屍填巨港之岸,血滿長城之窟。

無貴無賤,同為枯骨,可勝言哉!

鼓衰兮力竭,矢盡兮弦絕。

白刃交兮寶刀折,兩軍蹙兮生死決。

降矣哉!終身夷狄;戰矣哉!骨暴沙礫。

鳥無聲兮山寂寂,夜正長兮風淅淅。

魂魄結兮天沉沉,鬼神聚兮雲冪冪。

日光寒兮草短,月色苦兮霜白。

傷心慘目,有如是耶!


吾聞之:牧用趙卒,大破林胡。開地千里,遁逃匈奴。

漢傾天下,財殫力痡。任人而已,其在多乎?周逐玁狁,

北至太原,既城朔方,全師而還。飲至策勳,和樂且閒。

穆穆棣棣,君臣之間。秦起長城,竟海為關,荼毒生靈,

萬里朱殷。漢擊匈奴,雖得陰山。枕骸遍野,功不補患。


蒼蒼蒸民,誰無父母?提攜捧負,畏其不壽。

誰無兄弟?如足如手。誰無夫婦?如賓如友。

生也何恩?殺之何咎?其存其歿,家莫聞知。

人或有言,將信將疑。悁悁心目,寤寐見之。

布奠傾觴,哭望天涯。天地為愁,草木悽悲。

弔祭不至,精魂何依?

必有凶年,人其流離。

鳴呼噫嘻!時耶?命耶?

從古如斯,為之奈何,守在四夷。



昨天重讀了,奧巴馬的諾貝爾和平獎演辭,指出戰爭在人類歷史中,在沒法解決分歧,要以戰爭來換取和平,感概萬分。我加註了:羅馬不是靠談判來創建帝國,他們祇是殺掉所有擋路者。"Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings, they did it by killing all those who opposed them."


舊時男兒打仗,是保家衛國,保護婦孺,戰場上屍橫遍野。如今打仗,是決戰千里,講的是 preemptive strike,在別人的地方打仗,自己的家園仍然一遍聲平,沒見到一件死屍。


晚上拿出《古文觀止》,找出『李華』的《弔古戰場文》,再三重讀,人類的歷史,確實是用鮮血寫成的。



伸延閱覽
古文觀止---弔古戰場文 含白話文譯文
李華 維基百科



Friday, December 11, 2009

2009年度的諾貝爾和平獎

2009年度的諾貝爾和平獎



【Nobelprize.org】The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a committee of five, appointed by the Storting (the Norwegain parliament). According to the rules laid down by the Storting, election to the committee is for a six-year term, and members can be re-elected. The committee's composition reflects the relative strengths of the political parties in the Storting. Although this is not a requirement, all committee members have been Norwegian nationals.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee 2009

Thorbjørn Jagland (Chairman)President of the Storting
Geir Lundestad (Secretary)Professor, Director of the Nobel Institute
Kaci Kullmann Five (Deputy Chairman)Adviser Public Affairs
Sissel Rønbeck (Member)Deputy Director, Directorate for Cultural Heritage
Inger-Marie Ytterhorn (Member)Senior political adviser to the Progress Party's Parliamentary Group
Ågot Valle (Member)Member of Parliament



本年度的委員會,把一年一度的諾貝爾和平獎頒予:Barack Obama

委員會的 《註語》是:"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"


Time for Hope

【Nobelprize.org】Incumbent Presidents have quite frequently been recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize. US Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were Laureates while in office, as for instance, were Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev of the USSR and Kim Dae-jung of South Korea.

There have also been current Prime Ministers (Yitzhak Rabin of Israel) and Chancellors (Willy Brandt of the Federal Republic of Germany), but never before has anyone been made a Peace Laureate so early into their term of office.

Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a little under 10 months after he took up residence in the White House. Nominations for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize closed just 11 days after he took office.

Barack Obama is the fourth US President to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the last being Jimmy Carter in 2002. In selecting him, the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which consists of five people appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, or Storting, appear to be endorsing Obama's appeal for greater multilateral cooperation aimed at tackling the thorniest global problems; conflict, nuclear weapons, climate change.

They highlight his efforts to strengthen international diplomacy, and the new climate of dialogue and negotiation that Obama is promoting. Emphasis is also placed on renewed US commitment to international organizations, in particular the United Nations.

The section of Alfred Nobel's will detailing the creation of the Peace Prize states that it should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

In answer to questions during the announcement press conference about how early in Obama's Presidency the award was being made, Thorbjørn Jagland replied that the Committee wanted to demonstrate its support for the approaches he is taking towards global problems.



頒獎禮定于十二月十日在挪威奧斯陸舉行,登文之時應該是當地時間的黃昏,頒獎禮尚還未完成。奧巴馬將會發表講話,但不知會否成為演說,他的說話/演說《文字稿》講在較後時間補登。


要注意:諾貝爾和平獎的頒獎禮和宴會,是和其他的獎項頒獎不同地點的,高錕教授所得的物理學獎,是在瑞典斯德哥爾摩領獎的,而奧巴馬和平獎,是在挪威奧斯陸領獎的。


【Nobelprize.org】The Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine and Literature as well as the Economics Prize are awarded on 10 December at the Stockholm Concert Hall in Sweden.

In early December, the Nobel Laureates and the Laureates in Economics arrive in Stockholm, Sweden, to present their Nobel Lectures and to prepare for the Nobel Prize Award Ceremony, traditionally held on 10 December, the anniversary of Alfred Nobel's death.

On the same day, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates deliver their Nobel Lectures during the Nobel Peace Prize Award Ceremony at the Oslo City Hall in Norway.



就在領獎前的一週,奧巴馬發表的增兵三萬,進駐阿庫汗演說,和建議二零一一年即是十八個月後,開始撤兵,但究竟撤兵的進度是一刀切全撤,還是續小續少撤呢?卻被大選時的對手麥凱恩,在翌日的參議院聽證會中,向國防部長先生和國務卿女士,作出提問,兩人推推拉拉,沒有說清楚。


跟著國防部長先生去到阿庫汗見傀儡總統,一番會談之後,傀儡總統在記者會上,提出最快十五年,才有能力支付防衛費用之說,令到國防部長先生,要出口術補鑊。究竟阿庫汗打敗當年的蘇聯,間接把蘇聯拖垮的塔里班,今次能否把大美國照版煮碗呢?

很想聽聽,奧巴馬在奧斯陸頒獎禮上的演說,他又怎樣自圓其說呢?


後記:報章摘要
【明報即時新問】美國總統周四領取諾貝和平獎後發表演說,他對於得獎佷是感謝,同時亦抱著很謙卑的心情去領獎。

他說,雖然他得到和平獎,但戰爭有時是必須和合理的。他承認,許多人認為他做得不夠,不值得領取和平獎;他也知道自己最近下令增兵三萬人到阿富汗。但人們必須承認,暴力不能根除,國家必須打仗去保衛國民,對付邪惡的政權或恐怖主義組織。

奧巴馬認為,非暴力行動不能阻止希特勒的軍隊;談判不能說服蓋達組織放下武器。他說,承認這點並非等於鼓吹犬儒主義,但必須承認人類並不完美。

美國總統奧巴馬領取諾貝爾和平獎後發表演說,他呼籲要強硬對付像朝鮮和伊朗等違反國際法的國家。

奧巴馬承認,作為一個戰時總統獲得和平獎備受爭議,但他表示,有時必須運用權力,採取行動保衛美國。

他指出,在某種情況下使用武力是必須的和合理的,特別是基於人道的原因。他又提到蓋達組織,他認為談判不能使他們放下武器。

奧巴馬又呼籲採取強硬行動對付違反國際法的國家。以朝鮮和伊朗為例,兩國在核問題與西方對抗,不能再容忍它們玩弄制度。



奧巴馬祇是在內政上,與共和黨血拼,卻沒有 "Change" 美國在外交、政治、軍事,根本政策,祇是重新包裝『大美國主義』,合理化以暴易暴,利用軍事優勢,去欺壓不服從美國國策的國家。就如我在答覆網友的留言所說的,在讀完奧巴馬的領獎演說後,我也沒有需要更改。

Quoting:
『美國總統祇是美國國內不同利益集團的代理人,在初選大選中的競選經費籌款,錢從何來呢?登其大寶之後,主要是拼內政,得益者就是有份輔選,有份捐款的利益集團。

至于外交政治軍事行動,兩黨的總統大同少異。民主共和兩黨背後的利益集團,都是大美國主義,祇是包裝手法不同,都是為美國利益,而威嚇冷戰熱戰,維護美國在全球利益。』


記得曾讀過這一句子,出處我不知道,但想在這裡與各位分享:

"Rome did not create a great empire

by having meetings, they did it by killing

all those who opposed them."



幾千年來的人類歷史是用鮮血寫成的,哀哉!


New York Daily News ~ Barack Obama Nobel Peace Prize speech: Full transcript

【The speech】Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:

I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations — that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.

And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize — Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela — my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women — some known, some obscure to all but those they help — to be far more deserving of this honor than I.

But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43 other countries — including Norway — in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict — filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.

Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations — total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations — an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize — America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide and restrict the most dangerous weapons.

In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.

A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts, the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies and failed states have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today’s wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children scarred.

I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King’s life’s work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower.

Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions — not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other people's children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another — that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier’s courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.

So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths — that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human feelings. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions."

What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?

To begin with, I believe that all nations — strong and weak alike — must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I — like any head of state — reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards strengthens those who do, and isolates — and weakens — those who don’t.

The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait — a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.

Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don’t, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the legitimacy of future intervention — no matter how justified.

This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

America’s commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.

The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries — and other friends and allies — demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali — we honor them not as makers of war, but as wagers of peace.

Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant — the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.

Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America’s commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.

I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.

First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior — for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure — and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.

One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia’s nuclear stockpiles.

But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.

The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo or repression in Burma — there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.

This brings me to a second point — the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.

It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.

And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation’s development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists — a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.

I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please, choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America’s interests — nor the world’s — are served by the denial of human aspirations.

So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope and history are on their side.

Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.

In light of the Cultural Revolution’s horrors, Nixon’s meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable — and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul’s engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan’s efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.

Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights — it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.

It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.

And that is why helping farmers feed their own people — or nations educate their children and care for the sick — is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action — it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.

Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying power, to complete this work without something more — and that is the continued expansion of our moral imagination, an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.

As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.

And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities — their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of one's own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.

For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.

Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago: "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man’s present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."

So let us reach for the world that ought to be — that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he's outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.





伸延閱覽:
The Nobel Peace Prize Committee 2009 Nobelprize.org
Barack Obama Nobelprize.org
Time for Hope Nobelprize.org
Nobel Week 2009 Nobelprize.org
The Nobel Prize Award Ceremonies and Banquets Nobelprize.org
Obama sending 30 thousands more troops into Afghanistan 谷歌新聞搜尋
President Hamid Karzai tells US security aid needed for 15-20 years 谷歌新聞搜尋
太太「演活」 高錕如臨諾獎台上 雅虎新聞網
太太代高錕發表的諾貝爾演說:Sand from centuries past; Send future voices fast.(英文原文) 明報網頁
奧巴馬:戰爭有時是必須 雅虎新聞網
奧巴馬促強硬對付朝鮮伊朗 雅虎新聞網
Barack Obama Nobel Peace Prize speech: Full transcript NYdailynews.com
Barack Obama Nobel Peace Prize speech 谷歌新聞搜尋
奧巴馬領和平獎:「戰爭為了公義」 雅虎新聞網
奧巴馬領和平奬﹕ 「義戰」有理 新浪新聞網
阿富汗戰爭 難符義戰條件 雅虎新聞網