2014年3月27日 星期四

Search for Lost Jet Is Complicated by Geopolitics and Rivalries - NYTimes.com by Keith Bradsher

BEIJING — The frantic hunt for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has been, in one way, a nearly miraculous display of international collaboration: 26 nations, many of them rivals, have opened up their territorial waters and airspace or have contributed closely held technology and surveillance data to a search that has riveted the world.

That extraordinary cooperation has been instrumental in narrowing the search to a remote part of the southern Indian Ocean this week. But the effort has also underscored the limits of trust among powers like China, Malaysia, the United States, India and Thailand, all of which bring their own, often competing, strategic interests to bear.

The instruments of the search — advanced radar and satellite arrays, banks of intelligence analysts, surveillance planes and ships — are also the tools of spycraft. And as they have come together, the imperative among participating countries to cloak their technological capacities and weaknesses has proved irresistible, at times hindering the search, military analysts say.

“In Southeast Asia and in the wider region, there is no defense forum that enables the sharing of information and capabilities with regards to something on this scale,” said Jon Grevatt, an Asia-Pacific analyst in Bangkok for IHS Jane’s, a defense industry consultancy. “These countries have tried before to get to a situation in which they are sharing military technologies at a higher level than they are now. They have tried, but it hasn’t really happened. It’s further evidence of the continuing mistrust or lack of confidence in each other.”

For example, Indian officials were reluctant to discuss radar data from the Bay of Bengal, along one of the plane’s possible paths. That turned out to be because there was not much data — the area was a weak spot in the country’s radar coverage. In an interview, a senior Indian military official said India did not keep “heavy surveillance” capabilities there because it was not a tense area, unlike the country’s northern border with Pakistan. It would have been possible to miss the jet at night, he said.

The sharpest tensions have arisen between China and Malaysia. Chinese officials have denounced Malaysia for its reluctance to share information about the search. Most of the 239 people on board the flight were Chinese.

At the same time, China has also been unwilling to show other nations its raw military radar data, even though some investigators wanted to see it to help pin down whether the plane flew north, toward Central Asia. Instead, China, like several other countries, simply told Malaysian officials that its radars had not spotted the plane.

“They won’t share radar data,” said one Western official here who, like others in this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate diplomatic issues. “They’ve told us and everybody else, ‘We didn’t see it, period.’ They’re not willing to share the data.”

One possible explanation is that China wants to hide not only its technological capabilities, but also the limits of that technology, even as it has grown bolder in asserting itself as a military power, analysts say.

Some Chinese officials say there have indeed been tensions during the search, but blame others. Col. Dai Xu of the Chinese Air Force, an author of nationalistic military books, said: “China has made great efforts in this search and rescue operation, showing its maximum sincerity. But unfortunately, not every country is doing that much, because the political trust is not enough.”

Satellite imagery has been among the most guarded and contested information.

A former senior American military officer said images thought to be of plane debris that the Chinese government released early on — and later determined to be of unrelated flotsam east of Malaysia — had been “dumbed down” to obscure the satellites’ true capabilities.

A former American military aviator with business interests in Asia echoed that thought. “I’m confident that the Chinese sat pics early on were deliberately fuzzed up to prevent revealing true resolution,” he said.

On Tuesday, the Malaysian defense minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, brought up the subject of those images after Chinese journalists, at a news conference, asked about delays in the investigation.

“Can I also remind you that we received satellite data from China, regarding sightings in the South China Sea, which made us distract ourselves from the search and rescue to search areas that had already been searched?” the minister said.

The former American military officer said it was virtually certain the Chinese would not share their highest-resolution satellite imagery with anyone, much less the United States or Malaysia, even in a worldwide investigation like this. But he said that the United States, which has the one of the largest collections of spy satellites, would not either.

A Pentagon spokesman, Rear Adm. John Kirby, said at a news conference that although he was leery of discussing American satellite abilities, “we have been, to the degree we have been able to, sharing satellite imagery with the government of Malaysia to help them in the search.”

As for military radar data, it is not just the Chinese and Indians who have been unwilling to share.

One of the biggest questions still haunting the search is why Malaysia did not announce until one week after the plane’s disappearance that its military radar had spotted the jet flying west, away from the patch of South China Sea where the initial international search efforts were concentrated.

The former American military aviator said Malaysian officials generally want to hide the capabilities of their radars at Butterworth, on the west coast. But some analysts say Malaysian leaders might have feared the announcement would reveal ineptitude by the military, since it would appear that crew members watching the radar had failed at their jobs. Malaysian officials said the military was not alarmed by the unidentified plane on its radar because it did not pose a threat.

In another example, Thailand waited 10 days, the most critical stretch of the search, to tell Malaysia that its military radar had picked up the jetliner heading west toward the Strait of Malacca the morning of March 8, when it vanished. A Thai Air Force spokesman has said officials “did not pay any attention to it.”

At times, the search has also brought territorial concerns to the fore.

Indian military officials denied a request by China to allow four warships to enter an Indian maritime zone in the Bay of Bengal to help search for the plane, according to a report by the Press Trust of India, the largest Indian news agency. The report said that the officials had raised objections on the grounds that Indian military assets in the area “are mainly to guard against China, and these could get exposed if the Chinese warships are allowed in.” China was told that the Indian Navy and Air Force were already conducting a search and did not need outside help.

An Indian Navy spokesman, Capt. D. K. Sharma, said in an interview that he had no information about any such request. But he said: “This is our backyard — why would we want anybody else to do our job? We are capable and doing the best possible.”



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/geopolitical-rivalries-jet.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bradsher,%20Keith?ref=keithbradsher&pagewanted=print

China Export Restrictions on Metals Violate Global Trade Law, Panel Finds - NYTimes.com by Keith Bradsher

PARIS — China has broken international trade law by restricting the export of rare earth elements and other metals crucial to modern manufacturing, a World Trade Organization panel said Wednesday. That conclusion opens the possibility that Beijing will face trade sanctions from the United States, which initially brought the case, the European Union and Japan.

Members of a W.T.O. panel considering the case in Geneva found that the export taxes, quotas and bureaucratic delays Beijing imposes on overseas sales of the minerals artificially raise prices and create shortages for foreign buyers. The panel concluded that “China’s export quotas were designed to achieve industrial policy goals” rather than to protect its environment, as Beijing had argued.

China produces more than nine-tenths of the global supply of the strategically important metals, which are essential to many modern applications including smartphones, wind turbines, industrial catalysts and high-tech magnets. Prices soared in 2010 after Beijing cut export quotas by about 40 percent, to just over 30,000 tons, saying the restrictions were necessary because mining rare earths creates many environmental hazards.

United States and European officials hailed the ruling. Michael B. Froman, the United States trade representative, said the restrictions had bolstered Chinese industry at the expense of businesses in other countries, forcing them “to pay as much as three times more than what their Chinese competitors pay for the exact same rare earths.”

Karel De Gucht, the European trade commissioner, said, “China cannot use export restrictions to protect its own industries or give them a helping hand on the global market at the expense of foreign competitors.”

The United States, which is almost totally dependent on China for the metals, filed the case in March 2012, and the European Union and Japan joined on Washington’s side soon after. They challenged the export restrictions on 17 rare earths, as well as two metals used in steel alloys: molybdenum and tungsten. An interim report by the W.T.O. panel last October had indicated that the panel would rule against China.

In a statement Wednesday, the Chinese Commerce Ministry expressed its “regret” at the ruling, saying it believed its regulatory measures “are perfectly consistent with the objective of sustainable development promoted by the W.T.O.”

China has amply demonstrated the damage caused at each step of the production process, from mining and refining the metals to disposing of the waste, and Beijing has been shutting down some of the worst-offending producers, among them criminal enterprises. The soil in parts of China is scarred from the concentrated acids used to leach the ores, making farming impossible, while giant tailing ponds full of toxic — and sometimes radioactive — chemicals attest to the fact that the recovery of every pound of rare earth metals entails the creation of hundreds or thousands of pounds of waste.

China had also argued that the export quotas were justified under trade rules allowing exceptions where such steps “relate to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources.”

But the complainants argued that the restrictions were inconsistent with China’s obligations under the rules of the World Trade Organization, which it joined in 2001, because they were handled “in a manner that is not uniform, impartial, reasonable, or transparent,” distorting the market in favor of China’s domestic industry.

Critics also argued that despite the claims of environmental protection, China was using its monopoly to create a cost advantage for companies operating within its borders; because the price was lower for domestic users, the arrangement induced foreign companies to set up shop in China to be competitive, creating local jobs and transferring technology.

The panel ruled against China’s arguments on all counts. While it did not rule that nations may not impose quotas to protect scarce resources, it argued that once a commodity was extracted from the ground it should be treated in accordance with the global rules.

World trade rules do not prohibit export taxes. But the agreement China signed with other countries when it joined the W.T.O. allowed for only a limited number of such duties and did not include rare earths, the panel noted.

Beijing now has about two months to appeal the case, as do the complainants if they think the outcome is not entirely in their favor. Any challenge would be heard by the Appellate Body, the World Trade Organization’s permanent appeals tribunal.

China’s statement Wednesday said Beijing was “assessing the panel report and will follow the W.T.O. dispute settlement procedures to settle this dispute.” It gave no indication of whether it planned to appeal.

If China does appeal, the Appellate Body would probably make a final ruling by the end of July, said James Bacchus, a former chairman of the tribunal who is not involved in the current case. Mr. Bacchus said it was unlikely that the Appellate Body’s ruling would be significantly different, and that the judges there can rule only on matters of legal principle, not on the panel’s findings of fact.

World Trade Organization rules require that China be given a “reasonable” amount of time to comply with the final ruling and recommendations. If Beijing fails to do so, the United States, Japan and the European Union could begin to impose sanctions about 15 months after the appeals judgment, Mr. Bacchus said, and these would have to be proportional to the economic damage they claim to have suffered.

This is not the first case on export restrictions that China has lost at the world trade body. In 2009, the United States, Mexico and the European Union filed a successful challenge to Beijing’s restrictions on exports of raw materials including bauxite, coke and magnesium. China put the trade organization’s recommendations into effect, and many trade experts expect it to do so in the rare earths case.

Prices of neodymium, a rare earth necessary for products like headphones and hybrid electric cars, soared to nearly $500 a kilogram by the summer of 2011, from less than $50 a kilogram at the start of 2010. In many cases, because rare earths are typically used only in trace quantities, consumers did not notice much difference — perhaps a few dollars added to the overall cost of a smartphone.

One exception is the Toyota Prius hybrid car, whose manufacture uses a kilogram of neodymium. Toyota said it was forced to raise Prius prices as a result of the Chinese quota cutback.

Pierre P. Neatby, vice president for sales and marketing at Avalon Rare Metals in Toronto, said that the current price stability should not be seen as a sign that the market was in balance. Demand for the metals will continue to grow, he said, and China will remain for some time the main supplier of heavy rare earths.

Even with a W.T.O. victory in hand, China’s trading partners are wary about their vulnerability, a weakness highlighted in 2010 by China’s decision to block exports of rare earths to Japan in the middle of a dispute over the ownership of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea.

The 2010 quota shock has led companies to find innovations that reduce their needs, which include recycling electronic parts containing rare earths and finding ways of making products without them.

Higher prices have encouraged companies to begin developing new sources of rare earths elsewhere, including in the United States and Australia, that had been rendered unprofitable by cheaper Chinese supplies.

Kris Rawls, who follows the rare earths market at IHS Pricing and Purchasing in Washington, said that even with new sources being developed, China would probably still be producing 60 percent of the world’s rare earths in 2020.

“But there’s nothing that says China has to have it all to themselves,” he said, noting that rare earths were found across the globe, and that plenty of Western companies had the expertise to obtain them. “There’s no reason they have to dominate this.”



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/business/international/china-export-quotas-on-rare-earths-violate-law-wto-panel-says.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bradsher,%20Keith?ref=keithbradsher&pagewanted=print

Search for Lost Jet Is Complicated by Geopolitics and Rivalries - NYTimes.com by Keith Bradsher

BEIJING — The frantic hunt for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has been, in one way, a nearly miraculous display of international collaboration: 26 nations, many of them rivals, have opened up their territorial waters and airspace or have contributed closely held technology and surveillance data to a search that has riveted the world.

That extraordinary cooperation has been instrumental in narrowing the search to a remote part of the southern Indian Ocean this week. But the effort has also underscored the limits of trust among powers like China, Malaysia, the United States, India and Thailand, all of which bring their own, often competing, strategic interests to bear.

The instruments of the search — advanced radar and satellite arrays, banks of intelligence analysts, surveillance planes and ships — are also the tools of spycraft. And as they have come together, the imperative among participating countries to cloak their technological capacities and weaknesses has proved irresistible, at times hindering the search, military analysts say.

“In Southeast Asia and in the wider region, there is no defense forum that enables the sharing of information and capabilities with regards to something on this scale,” said Jon Grevatt, an Asia-Pacific analyst in Bangkok for IHS Jane’s, a defense industry consultancy. “These countries have tried before to get to a situation in which they are sharing military technologies at a higher level than they are now. They have tried, but it hasn’t really happened. It’s further evidence of the continuing mistrust or lack of confidence in each other.”

For example, Indian officials were reluctant to discuss radar data from the Bay of Bengal, along one of the plane’s possible paths. That turned out to be because there was not much data — the area was a weak spot in the country’s radar coverage. In an interview, a senior Indian military official said India did not keep “heavy surveillance” capabilities there because it was not a tense area, unlike the country’s northern border with Pakistan. It would have been possible to miss the jet at night, he said.

The sharpest tensions have arisen between China and Malaysia. Chinese officials have denounced Malaysia for its reluctance to share information about the search. Most of the 239 people on board the flight were Chinese.

At the same time, China has also been unwilling to show other nations its raw military radar data, even though some investigators wanted to see it to help pin down whether the plane flew north, toward Central Asia. Instead, China, like several other countries, simply told Malaysian officials that its radars had not spotted the plane.

“They won’t share radar data,” said one Western official here who, like others in this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate diplomatic issues. “They’ve told us and everybody else, ‘We didn’t see it, period.’ They’re not willing to share the data.”

One possible explanation is that China wants to hide not only its technological capabilities, but also the limits of that technology, even as it has grown bolder in asserting itself as a military power, analysts say.

Some Chinese officials say there have indeed been tensions during the search, but blame others. Col. Dai Xu of the Chinese Air Force, an author of nationalistic military books, said: “China has made great efforts in this search and rescue operation, showing its maximum sincerity. But unfortunately, not every country is doing that much, because the political trust is not enough.”

Satellite imagery has been among the most guarded and contested information.

A former senior American military officer said images thought to be of plane debris that the Chinese government released early on — and later determined to be of unrelated flotsam east of Malaysia — had been “dumbed down” to obscure the satellites’ true capabilities.

A former American military aviator with business interests in Asia echoed that thought. “I’m confident that the Chinese sat pics early on were deliberately fuzzed up to prevent revealing true resolution,” he said.

On Tuesday, the Malaysian defense minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, brought up the subject of those images after Chinese journalists, at a news conference, asked about delays in the investigation.

“Can I also remind you that we received satellite data from China, regarding sightings in the South China Sea, which made us distract ourselves from the search and rescue to search areas that had already been searched?” the minister said.

The former American military officer said it was virtually certain the Chinese would not share their highest-resolution satellite imagery with anyone, much less the United States or Malaysia, even in a worldwide investigation like this. But he said that the United States, which has the one of the largest collections of spy satellites, would not either.

A Pentagon spokesman, Rear Adm. John Kirby, said at a news conference that although he was leery of discussing American satellite abilities, “we have been, to the degree we have been able to, sharing satellite imagery with the government of Malaysia to help them in the search.”

As for military radar data, it is not just the Chinese and Indians who have been unwilling to share.

One of the biggest questions still haunting the search is why Malaysia did not announce until one week after the plane’s disappearance that its military radar had spotted the jet flying west, away from the patch of South China Sea where the initial international search efforts were concentrated.

The former American military aviator said Malaysian officials generally want to hide the capabilities of their radars at Butterworth, on the west coast. But some analysts say Malaysian leaders might have feared the announcement would reveal ineptitude by the military, since it would appear that crew members watching the radar had failed at their jobs. Malaysian officials said the military was not alarmed by the unidentified plane on its radar because it did not pose a threat.

In another example, Thailand waited 10 days, the most critical stretch of the search, to tell Malaysia that its military radar had picked up the jetliner heading west toward the Strait of Malacca the morning of March 8, when it vanished. A Thai Air Force spokesman has said officials “did not pay any attention to it.”

At times, the search has also brought territorial concerns to the fore.

Indian military officials denied a request by China to allow four warships to enter an Indian maritime zone in the Bay of Bengal to help search for the plane, according to a report by the Press Trust of India, the largest Indian news agency. The report said that the officials had raised objections on the grounds that Indian military assets in the area “are mainly to guard against China, and these could get exposed if the Chinese warships are allowed in.” China was told that the Indian Navy and Air Force were already conducting a search and did not need outside help.

An Indian Navy spokesman, Capt. D. K. Sharma, said in an interview that he had no information about any such request. But he said: “This is our backyard — why would we want anybody else to do our job? We are capable and doing the best possible.”



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/geopolitical-rivalries-jet.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bradsher,%20Keith?ref=keithbradsher&pagewanted=print

馬英九進退失據 by 岑逸飛

  最近台灣大學生掀起反《兩岸服務貿易協議》浪潮,認為這是黑箱作業,要求退回協議。2千多名學生於3月18日佔據了立法院,他們幾乎人手一支向日葵,因此被標簽為「太陽花學運」。3 月23日晚學生甚至一度佔領行政院,試圖逼使總統馬英九退回協議,事件最終以水炮車清場。

 

  首先搞清楚這個所謂「兩岸服務貿易協議」,究竟是甚麼一回事?早在2009年,在台灣執政的馬英九政府,為加強台灣經濟發展的重要政策,提出與內地的雙邊經濟協議,並於2010年6月在重慶簽訂「兩岸經濟合作架構協議」(Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement,簡稱ECFA),而現今掀起反對聲音的《兩岸服務協議》,正是ECFA的一個重要組成部分,內容集中在銀行、金融、旅遊、醫療、運輸等服務業有關貿易上,讓兩岸逐步減少此類貿易的障礙。

 

  本來兩岸走向合作是一件好事,但如何推行,需要經過細密的策劃,而如今台灣大學生的發難,顯然是看到有可乘之機。由馬英九統領的國民黨,濫權在先,自恃掌握了行政權,在議會裏佔了多數,而沒有取得大部分民意的支持,沒耐性去逐條審議,不作全盤考慮,急不及待地霸王硬上弓,結果被學生一下子衝擊,馬英九已是方寸大亂,進退失據。

 

  根據學者專家對服貿協議所做的影響評估,雖然政府宣稱台灣只對內地開放64項服務業,但這64項卻包含上千種行業,從雜貨店、小吃店、麵包店、文具店、理髮店、廣告設計以至衣食住行等全都包含在開放項目清單裏,影響頗大,難怪有這麼多學生反對。他們的反對理由也不一而足。有些是害怕失去職位;有些是對自己的前途感到恐慌,或是對未來惶惑;有些則認為得益的只是大財團;更有些是惟恐台灣會太倚靠內地,或是對中國大陸政府有憎惡感以至恐懼感。

 

  參與的學生雖然聲稱自動自發,政治中立,動機純潔,但任何運動,總是難免有政治勢力的介入,這次台灣的「太陽花學運」,也難以例外。仔細觀察,這次台灣的學運,從蛛絲馬跡看,台灣的在野黨,即民進黨,都作了頗巧妙的滲透。多個學運領袖,經驗老到,不是初出茅蘆的嫩鳥,都有民進黨的背景,屬於綠營的新生代。

 

  例如「太陽花學運」的總指揮林飛帆,及其「最佳拍檔」陳為廷,都是民進黨的外圍人物,讀書期間已是著名的「街頭運動家」。再如學運中負責通信設備的王雲祥,是前總統李登輝辦公室主任王燕祥的兒子;最出風頭的女生賴品妤,是民進黨前立委賴勁麟的女兒。更值得關注的是,當學生開始大規模罷課,一些教授也跑到現場授課,而他們也都是有民進黨的黨籍。

 

  所有這些有背景的人士,結合其他熱血青年,認為自己代表了民意,是台灣的未來,對公民責任是義不容辭,他們是為民請命,充滿使命感,而事實上,他們也確是得到相當的社會和政治力量的支持,事件難免存在升級的風險,加上街頭政治一向是民進黨的強項,令到整個台灣政治形勢變得十分詭異,馬英九如果繼續優柔寡斷,無法處理好這次風波,弄不好可能要栽筋斗了。

 



Source: http://lifestyle.etnet.com.hk/column/index.php/internationalaffairs/culture/23894

美國牛市到頭了嗎? by 陶冬

 

  美國S&P500屢創新高,科技股龍頭的股價和IT行業IPO勢頭要用「兇猛」來形容。美國股市的狂潮是不是快到頭了?

 

圖1

 

  自從佈雷頓森林協議破滅之後,美國曾經有過四次持續數年的大牛市,其中兩次在第5年開始回落,另外一次起於1982年,在1987年10月19日(也是5年)爆出黑色星期一股災,市場暴跌之後MSCI又維持了3年大致上升的趨勢(圖1)。從這個角度看,美股大幅調整,應該在幾個月內發生。這是市場人士擔憂美股調整的主要依據——升得太多了。


圖2

 


  同一張股市圖表的另一種解讀,則截然不同。2009年開始的股市反彈,應該視作金融恐慌、過度拋售後的反彈,動力來自美聯儲的貨幣政策而非基本面因素。真正由基本面支撐的美國股市牛市,其實從2012年才開始(圖2)。

 

  帶動此輪美股牛市的動力來自三點:一是聯儲QE製造流動性,二是企業盈利持續改善,三是銀行儲蓄流向401k退休基金。聯儲的貨幣政策已見拐點,目前美國貨幣當局逐步減少購買國債的規模,加息只是時間的問題,而且加息時間可能比市場想像的來得更快。貨幣政策以及由此產生的衝擊,對於美股是最大的威脅。

 

  企業的盈利仍在持續改善中。經濟危機後企業大幅降低槓桿、削減開支,盈利反彈遠遠快過銷售反彈,如今消費信心開始恢復,美股的盈利應該可以維持在較高的水平。盈利強勁的時候,很少見到股市大跌的,除非發生特別事件。

 

  低利率,是成就美股迭創新高的重要原因。儲蓄利率3%和0%,對於存款者的感覺大不相同。危機剛剛爆發時,美國人處在世紀末的感受中,儲蓄還不敢輕舉妄動,但是這兩年經濟開始復甦,房價開始復甦,唯獨手頭的儲蓄不見任何收益。於是儲蓄搬家,資金很多流入基金,流入股市。

 

圖3

 

  筆者同事J.  Wilmot所製作的長達160年的美國股市(扣除通脹後)的回報圖顯示,目前美股的估值與回報,不算便宜,也不算貴,大致處在過去160年的中位數上(圖3)。同一張圖也指出,市場鮮有在趨勢中間線上長期維持的,基本上在一個標準差的區間內,不是大起就是大落。

 

  從前面所提到的三個帶動市場上升的動力來看,盈利因素和儲蓄利率因素依然存在,依然是正面的。而且隨著經濟復甦進入正軌,就業情況持續改善,財政緊縮有所紓緩,美國股市在筆者看來未必已到懸崖邊上。

 

  風險來自聯儲的政策。聯儲減少購債,透明度很高,其進度和力度也大致被市場所消化,反映在股價和國債利率上。不過美國何時加息,卻是未知數,取決於經濟的改善進程,聯儲自己也沒有一個明確的路線圖,市場價格對此也難反映。耶倫在她接任聯儲主席後的第一次記者會上,一句脫口而出的「大約6個月左右」,在市場掀起軒然大波。這個凸顯政策失誤或市場誤判可能帶來的風險。

 

  聯儲退出QE,對盈利因素和儲蓄利率也可能構成衝擊。國債利率走高,企業的發債成本自然水漲船高,資金成本連著公司利潤。聯儲加息,也會帶動儲蓄利率向上,到一定程度後零售資金也可能重投銀行。筆者看來,聯儲退出QE是目前美國牛市能否維持的最重要因素。

 

  當然,一切取決於聯儲的加息力度。如果聯儲極其緩慢地推進利率正常化,市場可能逐步適應新的貨幣環境常態,這過程依然可以充滿風險,不過給盈利一個展現的機會,讓資金繼續留在風險資產種類中。這種可能性其實不小。美國經濟的復甦力度實在難言強勁,就業狀況時好時壞,通脹壓力暫時不明顯,貨幣當局既有緩慢推進的意圖,也有這個餘地。同時,將美國現在所有債券的存量按年期和信用評級折成十年期國債,聯儲手頭所擁有的債券已經佔到債市總數量的三成,這就決定了它的退出必須慢,愈慢愈好。

 

  從正常估值走向高估值(甚至泡沫),往往需要一個故事,加以資金和IPO的配合,這在美股的歷史上一次又一次重複。到目前為止,故事是電子化的生活方式,Google、蘋果、Facebook等改變了我們的生活方式,也為市場帶來遐想。電子化生活方式的盈利模式能否持續並不斷壯大,是對股市的另一個考驗。

 

  筆者對美股前景不是特別擔心。美國股市有盈利的支持,有新資金的流入。美國經濟目前的增長前景和風險程度,是各主要發達國家中最好的。聯儲的加息以及可能的政策失誤,乃是牛市能否持續的關鍵和風險所在。電子化生活方式的龍頭企業的盈利勢頭,可以載舟亦可覆舟。

 

  本文原載於新財富,為個人觀點,並非投資建議或勸誘。

 



Source: http://lifestyle.etnet.com.hk/column/index.php/wealth/taodong/23884

為了他們,我堅持做電視 by 王維基

  得不到免費電視牌照,流動電視服務又遇阻滯時,身邊有些人,不知算是朋友或是敵人笑說:「這並不一定是壞事,至少你不用蝕那麼多。」其實,我深知道經營電視業務需要冒一定風險,但何以還要繼續呢?

 

  最近,看到一個盛智文的訪問,他說香港變了。就香港電視牌照的事件來看,憑著能力與努力奮鬥,這種獅子山精神已經不復再,「就算你再有能力,你肯不斷努力,可能都沒有你發展的機會。這是一個very very bad message。」

 

  放棄非常容易,堅持到這一步,我們無悔,也不認為有負於社會;但現在放棄的話,就會給社會帶來一個「沒有希望」的信息。每次到大學分享時,總感覺到部分同學以我們的故事為借鏡。或許在他們成長的階段,網上娛樂、看電視是非常密切的一環,但其他成功人士故事卻可能不太留意。要堅持下去,是為了他們,不希望他們接收到這個無奈、無助、絕望的信息。作為媒體,我們希望把正能量發放給社會,而不是傳送負面情緒。不論我們最後能否成功,這都是我們的責任。

 

轉載自晴報

 



Source: http://lifestyle.etnet.com.hk/column/index.php/internationalaffairs/rickywong/23887

到尖東看西貢地貌 by 石鏡泉

  隱藏於高樓大廈之下,在購物和美食以外,香港擁有獨特又紛繁多姿的地貌,綿長的海岸線中更可以找到海蝕崖、海蝕穴、海蝕拱等地質奇觀,我們這片土地真的得天獨厚。本地著名畫家江啟明走遍全球尋找繪畫靈感,最愛還是香港這塊福地。近年,他主要以香港地質風光為創作主題,破解大自然的數字密碼,重現出一系列演繹香港自然風光的精采作品。

 

 

  先看四張圖,都是香港地質公園的這四張都是畫,不是照片。如果你曾拍下這些景色的照片,請拿出來對比,請看有幾似。

 

  「似」,不是畫作的重點,而是要有其「神」,這些畫都是江老師近年所作,是寫出他對香港山水的情懷。

 

  筆者是唸地質的,對岩石的色彩、質感,有一定認識。有次看見江啟明老師一幅鉛筆畫,是長洲花瓶石,我一看就知他不是寫石,而是寫大嶼山長石斑晶岩,跟大帽山斑晶岩、淺水灣流紋結晶岩,是「神」、「態」各異,一個細心的地質者會知其別。如只把花瓶石的外形寫出來是低手,我也可以做到,但要把石質也寫出來,一如寫運動員,你不寫出其肌肉/骨骼的力,就跟寫塊死豬肉差不多,這叫做寫「神」。

 

  這些有「神」的西貢地質公園畫作,於3月25日至4月7日在尖沙咀美麗華商場的商務印書館展出,同地於3月28日,江老師有本新作《水游自在--江啟明水彩畫選輯》作發布會,屆時筆者會與江老師一齊帶大家作一場香港地質藝術遊,觀山、看水、賞風景。

 

  時間是7時至8時,但請先報名,場地有限,額滿即止。

 

  看本土藝術 領略自然美景

 

 

  江啟明,何許人也?江啟明,1932年出生於香港,是香港土生土長的藝術教育家,五十多年來一直醉心於藝術繪畫創作和美術教育傳承,1996年獲香港浸會大學林思齊東西學術交流研究所授予「榮譽院士」;同年受聘為香港藝術館顧問;2006年10月28日於香港禮賓府獲香港特別行政區頒授銅紫荊星章(BBS, The Bronze Bauhinia Star);2008年獲香港藝術發展局頒發「香港藝術發展獎2007」之「藝術成就獎」,表揚江氏在視覺藝術上的成就。

 

  最新出版的《水游自在----江啟明水彩畫選輯》收錄江啟明老師自1950年至2014年,共60多年超過100幅的水彩畫作品,充分反映畫家各時代的畫作風貌。觀其畫知其人,從作品我們可進入畫家的內心世界,了解他如何透過顏料、技巧、加上對大自然的感悟,建構出自己的藝術空間。除了珍貴畫作,本書還收錄了江老師關於水彩畫的思想性及技術性文章,將一己心得,傾囊相授。透過畫作和文字,相信讀者會更容易捕捉到閃爍於大自然物象中的色、線與肌理間的微光,發現出當中蘊含的靈性呼聲。

 

 

轉載自晴報



Source: http://lifestyle.etnet.com.hk/column/index.php/wealth/arthurshek/23882

New Satellite Images Said to Be ‘Credible Lead’ in Jet Search - NYTimes.com by Keith Bradsher

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — Satellite sightings of 122 objects floating southwest of Australia are “the most credible lead that we have” in the search for Flight 370, the Malaysian defense minister said Wednesday evening, adding that his country had asked Australia to try to recover the objects and see if they were debris from the missing jetliner.

The search for the Malaysia Airlines plane, focused now on a remote stretch of the southern Indian Ocean, resumed on Wednesday after a day’s suspension due to bad weather, and 11 aircraft and 5 ships were scouring the target area on Thursday, officials said, hoping to locate some of the objects before the weather got worse again late in the day, as had been forecast.

The defense minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, said the 122 objects were visible in satellite images forwarded by Airbus Defense and Space, the main European commercial satellite company. Malaysia passed the images to Australia, which is leading the search in the area.

In the satellite photos, which were taken on Sunday, the objects are visible through gaps in clouds over an area of 154 square miles, or 400 square kilometers, of ocean, Mr. Hishammuddin said. The largest was about 75 feet, or 23 meters, in length, and some were bright, he noted without elaboration. Metal objects that had recently fallen into the ocean might be reflective.

Airbus said that five of its Earth observation satellites — some equipped with high-resolution cameras, others with radar — were assisting in the search for Flight 370, and would do so as long as needed. Images and data from the satellites were being submitted to the Malaysian and Australian authorities for analysis, the company said.

The floating objects were about 1,589 miles, or 2,557 kilometers, southwest of Perth, the authorities said. If they are found to be from the missing plane, a Boeing 777 that took off March 8 bound for Beijing with 239 people aboard, the next steps would be to figure out how far and in which direction the debris might have drifted since the aircraft came down, and then to begin an undersea search, Mr. Hishammuddin said.

The United States Navy has sent an undersea listening device and a sonar device to the area. But each needs to be towed far underwater behind a ship traveling scarcely faster than a person walking on land, so they cannot search large areas quickly.

The listening device could pick up signals from the missing plane’s cockpit data recorders, or black boxes, before the recorders’ batteries are exhausted and they stop emitting pings, which is expected to happen in two to three weeks at the latest. But to detect the pings reliably, the device must be within about a mile of the black boxes. The sonar device will continue to work after the data recorders go silent, but it needs to be even closer to detect wreckage on the seabed.

Recovering floating debris from the plane could provide resolution for the families and friends of the passengers and crew, who have expressed anguish that the plane was declared lost based on satellite data and not on any tangible evidence. But floating debris may be of only limited help in locating the data recorders, oceanographers said, because the debris could have drifted hundreds of miles, driven by currents, winds and wave action.

“If it has been floating for two and a half weeks, it’s not going to have much relation to the wreckage” on the seabed, said Jason Ali, an earth sciences professor at Hong Kong University who has studied currents in the Indian Ocean.

Mike Purcell, a senior engineer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, who led two underwater search expeditions for the wreck of Air France Flight 447 in the Atlantic in 2010 and 2011, said that the current search zone for Flight 370 was far more remote, with rougher seas and higher winds. “That can slow down your progress considerably, because it makes it more difficult to operate, to get the vehicles in and out of the water,” he said. On the positive side, he noted, the sea floor in the southern Indian Ocean is relatively flat.

Military submarines can do little to help. Their sophisticated equipment for detecting signs of surface ships or other submarines is meant to be used mainly within a few hundred feet of the surface, and has only a limited ability to detect pings from the ocean floor far below, transmitted through water of varying densities and temperatures. Towed submersible devices, on the other hand, can operate at depths of 14,000 feet or more.

Even if the plane’s black boxes are recovered, they may not tell investigators enough to explain what happened to Flight 370, which stopped communicating with ground controllers and veered radically off course about 40 minutes after takeoff. The plane flew on for at least seven more hours, but its cockpit voice recorder would have stored only the two last hours of sound in the cockpit. The separate data recorder would have technical information from throughout the flight, but that data may not reveal the intentions of whoever was in the cockpit.

For now, aircraft from Australia and other countries have been scouring an area the size of the western and southwestern United States where the plane is believed to have flown after it sent its last automated signals to a satellite. Because the search area is so far from land, planes are able to spend only a few hours searching at a time before they must turn back to base. So far, none of the handful of floating objects spotted by air crews in the search zone have been found again by other aircraft sent to the same area.



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-370.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bradsher,%20Keith?ref=keithbradsher&pagewanted=print

七 天 天 氣 預 報@香 港 天 文 台 於 2014 年 03 月 27 日 01 時 45 分 發 出 之 天 氣 報 告 by HKO

七 天 天 氣 預 報

天 氣 概 況 :
一 股 溫 暖 及 潮 濕 的 海 洋 氣 流 會 在 未 來 一 兩 天 影 響 廣 
東 沿 岸 。 預 料 一 道 低 壓 槽 會 在 週 末 及 下 週 初 為 華 南 
帶 來 雷 雨 。 

三 月 二 十 七 日 ( 星 期 四 )
風   : 東 至 東 南 風 2 至 3 級 。 
天 氣 : 早 晚 潮 濕 有 霧 , 部 分 時 間 多 雲 。 日 間 大 致 天 晴 。 
氣 溫 : 21 至 26 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 75 至 100 。

三 月 二 十 八 日 ( 星 期 五 )
風   : 東 南 風 2 至 3 級 。 
天 氣 : 短 暫 時 間 有 陽 光 。 早 晚 沿 岸 有 霧 。 稍 後 有 一 兩 陣 驟 雨 。 
氣 溫 : 21 至 26 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 75 至 100 。

三 月 二 十 九 日 ( 星 期 六 )
風   : 南 至 東 南 風 2 至 3 級 。 
天 氣 : 大 致 多 雲 , 有 一 兩 陣 驟 雨 。 早 上 沿 岸 有 霧 。 
氣 溫 : 22 至 27 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 80 至 100 。

三 月 三 十 日 ( 星 期 日 )
風   : 南 風 3 至 4 級 。 
天 氣 : 大 致 多 雲 , 有 幾 陣 驟 雨 , 局 部 地 區 有 雷 暴 。 
氣 溫 : 22 至 26 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 80 至 95 。

三 月 三 十 一 日 ( 星 期 一 )
風   : 南 風 3 級 。 
天 氣 : 多 雲 , 有 驟 雨 及 幾 陣 狂 風 雷 暴 。 
氣 溫 : 22 至 25 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 80 至 95 。

四 月 一 日 ( 星 期 二 )
風   : 微 風 2 級 , 後 轉 東 北 風 3 級 。 
天 氣 : 多 雲 , 有 驟 雨 及 狂 風 雷 暴 。 
氣 溫 : 20 至 23 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 80 至 95 。

四 月 二 日 ( 星 期 三 )
風   : 東 至 東 北 風 3 至 4 級 。 
天 氣 : 多 雲 , 有 幾 陣 驟 雨 及 雷 暴 。 
氣 溫 : 19 至 22 度 。
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 80 至 95 。

3 月 26 日 下 午 二 時 北 角  錄 得 之 海 水 溫 度 為 18 度 。
3 月 26 日 上 午 七 時 天 文 台  錄 得 之 土 壤 溫 度 為 :
0.5 米 21.9 度 ;
1.0 米 21.4 度 。

七 天 天 氣 預 報 插 圖
第 一 天 插 圖 編 號 51 - 間 有 陽 光 
第 二 天 插 圖 編 號 83 - 霧 
第 三 天 插 圖 編 號 60 - 多 雲 
第 四 天 插 圖 編 號 62 - 微 雨 
第 五 天 插 圖 編 號 63 - 雨 
第 六 天 插 圖 編 號 63 - 雨 
第 七 天 插 圖 編 號 62 - 微 雨 

天氣報告@香 港 天 文 台 於 2014 年 03 月 27 日 7 時 02 分 發 出 之 天 氣 報 告 by HKO

上 午 7 時 天 文 台 錄 得:
氣 溫 : 21 度
相 對 濕 度 : 百 分 之 93 
天 氣 插 圖: 編 號 83 - 霧 

  
本 港 其 他 地 區 的 氣 溫 :

京 士 柏              21 度 ,
黃 竹 坑              20 度 ,
打 鼓 嶺              19 度 ,
流 浮 山              19 度 ,
大 埔                 20 度 ,
沙 田                 20 度 ,
屯 門                 21 度 ,
將 軍 澳              20 度 ,
西 貢                 20 度 ,
長 洲                 21 度 ,
赤 鱲 角              21 度 ,
青 衣                 21 度 ,
石 崗                 18 度 ,
荃 灣 可 觀           20 度 ,
荃 灣 城 門 谷        21 度 ,
香 港 公 園           21 度 ,
筲 箕 灣              21 度 ,
九 龍 城              21 度 ,
跑 馬 地              21 度 ,
黃 大 仙              22 度 ,
赤 柱                 20 度 ,
觀 塘                 21 度 ,
深 水 埗              21 度 。


New Satellite Images Said to Be ‘Credible Lead’ in Jet Search - NYTimes.com by Keith Bradsher

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — Satellite sightings of 122 objects floating southwest of Australia are “the most credible lead that we have” in the search for Flight 370, the Malaysian defense minister said Wednesday evening, adding that his country had asked Australia to try to recover the objects and see if they were debris from the missing jetliner.

The search for the Malaysia Airlines plane, focused now on a remote stretch of the southern Indian Ocean, resumed on Wednesday after a day’s suspension due to bad weather, and 11 aircraft and 5 ships were scouring the target area on Thursday, officials said, hoping to locate some of the objects before the weather got worse again late in the day, as had been forecast.

The defense minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, said the 122 objects were visible in satellite images forwarded by Airbus Defense and Space, the main European commercial satellite company. Malaysia passed the images to Australia, which is leading the search in the area.

In the satellite photos, which were taken on Sunday, the objects are visible through gaps in clouds over an area of 154 square miles, or 400 square kilometers, of ocean, Mr. Hishammuddin said. The largest was about 75 feet, or 23 meters, in length, and some were bright, he noted without elaboration. Metal objects that had recently fallen into the ocean might be reflective.

Airbus said that five of its Earth observation satellites — some equipped with high-resolution cameras, others with radar — were assisting in the search for Flight 370, and would do so as long as needed. Images and data from the satellites were being submitted to the Malaysian and Australian authorities for analysis, the company said.

The floating objects were about 1,589 miles, or 2,557 kilometers, southwest of Perth, the authorities said. If they are found to be from the missing plane, a Boeing 777 that took off March 8 bound for Beijing with 239 people aboard, the next steps would be to figure out how far and in which direction the debris might have drifted since the aircraft came down, and then to begin an undersea search, Mr. Hishammuddin said.

The United States Navy has sent an undersea listening device and a sonar device to the area. But each needs to be towed far underwater behind a ship traveling scarcely faster than a person walking on land, so they cannot search large areas quickly.

The listening device could pick up signals from the missing plane’s cockpit data recorders, or black boxes, before the recorders’ batteries are exhausted and they stop emitting pings, which is expected to happen in two to three weeks at the latest. But to detect the pings reliably, the device must be within about a mile of the black boxes. The sonar device will continue to work after the data recorders go silent, but it needs to be even closer to detect wreckage on the seabed.

Recovering floating debris from the plane could provide resolution for the families and friends of the passengers and crew, who have expressed anguish that the plane was declared lost based on satellite data and not on any tangible evidence. But floating debris may be of only limited help in locating the data recorders, oceanographers said, because the debris could have drifted hundreds of miles, driven by currents, winds and wave action.

“If it has been floating for two and a half weeks, it’s not going to have much relation to the wreckage” on the seabed, said Jason Ali, an earth sciences professor at Hong Kong University who has studied currents in the Indian Ocean.

Mike Purcell, a senior engineer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, who led two underwater search expeditions for the wreck of Air France Flight 447 in the Atlantic in 2010 and 2011, said that the current search zone for Flight 370 was far more remote, with rougher seas and higher winds. “That can slow down your progress considerably, because it makes it more difficult to operate, to get the vehicles in and out of the water,” he said. On the positive side, he noted, the sea floor in the southern Indian Ocean is relatively flat.

Military submarines can do little to help. Their sophisticated equipment for detecting signs of surface ships or other submarines is meant to be used mainly within a few hundred feet of the surface, and has only a limited ability to detect pings from the ocean floor far below, transmitted through water of varying densities and temperatures. Towed submersible devices, on the other hand, can operate at depths of 14,000 feet or more.

Even if the plane’s black boxes are recovered, they may not tell investigators enough to explain what happened to Flight 370, which stopped communicating with ground controllers and veered radically off course about 40 minutes after takeoff. The plane flew on for at least seven more hours, but its cockpit voice recorder would have stored only the two last hours of sound in the cockpit. The separate data recorder would have technical information from throughout the flight, but that data may not reveal the intentions of whoever was in the cockpit.

For now, aircraft from Australia and other countries have been scouring an area the size of the western and southwestern United States where the plane is believed to have flown after it sent its last automated signals to a satellite. Because the search area is so far from land, planes are able to spend only a few hours searching at a time before they must turn back to base. So far, none of the handful of floating objects spotted by air crews in the search zone have been found again by other aircraft sent to the same area.



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-370.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bradsher,%20Keith?ref=keithbradsher&pagewanted=print

頭條日報 頭條網 - "Hongkonger" and "Hongkongese" by Michael Chugani

In the past few columns I wrote about Hong Kong people being obsessed with grammar. A consequence (result) of the obsession with grammar is that Hong Kong people are unable to speak everyday (common, ordinary) English. When people cannot speak everyday English properly, they are unable to keep up with the changes in the English language, such as new slang words or expressions. For example, it is very common nowadays to use the word "hot" to describe something or someone that is very popular. Korean TV dramas are hot in Hong Kong nowadays, which means they are very popular. Baggy (very loose-fitting) jeans are no longer hot nowadays. Tight-fitting jeans are hot.

        T he word "cool" means slightly cold but as a slang word it can also mean something or someone that is good or popular. If you say "he's a cool guy", it means he's a nice guy. If you say "that's a cool suit", it means it's a good-looking suit or nice suit. I wonder if a Hong Kong teacher would fail a student for writing in an essay: "Baggy jeans are no longer hot but I like them. I think they look really cool". The teacher would probably tell the student that jeans cannot be hot and only food or summer can be hot. The teacher would probably tell the student that jeans cannot be cool and only things such as autumn days can be cool.

        An example of how the English language is constantly changing can be seen in the latest additions to the Oxford English Dictionary. The words "Hongkonger" and "Hongkongese" have both been added to the dictionary. They both describe Hong Kong people. But would Hong Kong's teachers allow students to use these words, or would they insist that students use "Hong Kong people" instead of Hongkonger or Hongkongese? In the US, it is common to say New Yorkers for people from New York, and Californians for people from California. Teachers would not fail students for using those words, or for saying "tight-fitting jeans are hot." Hong Kong teachers and people must decide if they want to move with the times when teaching or learning English.

        * * *

        在之前幾篇專欄,我寫到香港人糾纏於文法之上。這樣沉溺於文法的後果(consequence),就是香港人未能講好日常(everyday)英語。當人們未能說好日常(everyday)英語,他們就不能跟上英語的轉變,例如新的俚語或習語。譬如,今天用hot形容某件事或某人很受歡迎,是很普遍的。現時韓國電視劇在香港就紅極一時(hot)。鬆身(baggy)的牛仔褲現在已不再流行(hot)了,但緊身褲卻很受歡迎(hot)。

        至於cool這個字,可解作清涼,但也是一個俚語,形容某人很酷或受歡迎。若你說:"he's a cool guy",即是說他是個不錯的人。若你說"that's a cool suit",即是指那件衣服好看或挺不錯。我很好奇,如果一位學生在文中寫道:"Baggy jeans are no longer hot but I like them. I think they look really cool",到底香港老師會不會評為不合格?老師可能會跟學生說,牛仔褲不可能是熱(hot)的,只有食物和夏天才是熱(hot)的;牛仔褲也不可能是涼爽的(cool),只有秋天的事物才是涼涼的(cool)。

        英語持續演變,從牛津英語辭典新增條目就可見一斑。字典加進了Hongkonger和Hongkongese這兩個字,也是指香港人。但香港的教師會否容許學生用這些字,抑或堅持學生只能用Hong Kong people而非Hongkonger或Hongkongese?

        在美國,普遍會稱紐約人為New Yorkers,加州人為Californians,當地的老師不會因為學生用了這些用語或說了 "tight-fitting jeans are hot",而將他們評為不合格。香港老師和香港人得決定,他們教授和學習英語時,是否想與時並進。

        mickchug@gmail.com

        中譯:七刻

        Michael Chugani 褚簡寧

Source: http://news.stheadline.com/dailynews/headline_news_detail_columnist.asp?id=279709§ion_name=wtt&kw=126

無知的愛就是害 by 嚴浩

讀者Larissa Chow:「……有嘗試布緯療法,但兒子不吃,於是讓他吃十穀粥和用十穀粥水開奶再加亞麻籽油,皮膚搽法國某牌子專治皮膚問題的乳霜,約一星期左右已痊癒。之後的冬天因開暖爐關係,濕疹又發,再給他吃十穀粥和用十穀粥水開奶再加亞麻籽油和搽乳霜,三四天左右又痊癒,如是者重複了3次,直到現在濕疹已沒有再出現。今年冬天,在開暖爐的日子,兩邊面頰只是因乾燥而顯得紅紅而已。


我子每次飲用牛奶奶粉都長濕疹,於是替他轉羊奶,丈夫家人見兒子體重跟其他同齡嬰兒差很多,經常都質疑所選奶粉營養不夠,轉奶粉不下十次,最後自己從美國郵寄『放養』羊奶粉再加自選優質維生素和礦物質,代替Formula milk。


等到兩歲到健康院檢查時,體重和身高已追到同齡的小朋友了。所以最近開始讓他吃零食,薯片一塊起兩塊止,很少吃糖和雪糕。因為是早產兒,在飲食上不能鬆懈,選用非一般食療時遇到的壓力不少,我子現時身高90 cm(磅壞了,不知道多重),家人沒有再說什麼,可是當我阻止丈夫給兒子餵零食時,還是有說話聽的。同意你說的,吃對食物很重要……」


無知的愛就是害,國外學術機構經常針對健康和長壽做調查,甚麼樣的人會比較健康和長壽?其中一個準則就是知識。無知害自己,無知的愛害家人。


(「媽媽大夫」之二.待續)




Source: http://hkm.appledaily.com/detail.php?guid=18669558&category_guid=vice&sup_id=12187389&category=daily&issue=20140327

橙 饌 by 李碧華

古方蒸或燉鹽橙,對紓緩傷風感冒咳嗽有效,是因為鹽。如喝鹹柑桔鹹檸檬鹹竹蜂……沖水,亦可順喉化痰理氣消炎。好些水果加點鹽更加提味,如西瓜、菠蘿、芭樂、蓮霧。梅粉中也含鹽,台灣人愛灑在切片切粒的水果上同吃。


平日吃橙很少加鹽,怕蓋了它的甜。橙含豐富維他命C,增強抵抗力,也治傷風感冒,但偏涼,所以得熱食。


其實古老食譜中也有橙饌,流傳至今自己做並不難。例如「橙中蛋」,是把切開頂蓋挖去一半果肉的橙,加入一隻雞蛋,再蓋好蓋蒸或者烤焗(半生熟蛋需時短些)。吃時蛋中有橙,橙中有蛋,風味獨特。


有史學家鑽研南宋宮廷菜餚:鱉蒸羊、酒香螺、兩熟魚、南炒鱔、水晶膾、蓮房魚包、炙骨頭、荔枝白腰子……其中有道「蟹釀橙」,便是把煮熟的河蟹拆蟹粉以薑末生炒,蟹黃下鍋再和蟹肉和橙肉一起炒,放橙內加蓋上籠蒸十分鐘。


橙子金黃飽滿確是漂亮盛器,橙皮芳香橙肉甘酸甜,奇怪,橙饌都是鹹甜混合體,口感複雜。

Source: http://hkm.appledaily.com/detail.php?guid=18669548&category_guid=vice&sup_id=12187389&category=daily&issue=20140327

經濟大戰 by 陶傑

普京吞併克里米亞,奧巴馬很軟弱,只能發揮「Sound-bite天才」,靠一張嘴「譴責」。


奧巴馬的言論很可笑:「你俄國只是地區強權,我美國才是全世界強權」。奧巴馬又說:「不要以為武力吞併一個地方,就表示你很強大。」


這種Sound-bite,像小學生打架之後的哭訴。一個肥仔給一個很兇的小同學打了一巴掌,肥仔不敢還手,捧着臉,哭喊:「你以為你好叻咩?你以為這樣欺負人,你就是全球的老大了耶?不,我才是真正的老大。」


奧巴馬的服軟,一露無遺。自從叙利亞內戰,奧巴馬初初揚言出兵,普京一聲怒喝,即刻縮手,普京已經看穿了奧巴馬的底牌。鬥嘴皮沒意思。然後,看看「制裁」如何。


俄國不是伊朗。俄國每天向歐洲輸出二百萬桶石油,「制裁」之後,歐洲每天需要的七百萬桶石油入口,少了三分一,汽車燃油即刻漲價。


「金融時報」算帳:歐美一制裁俄國,德國手上跟俄國簽的訂單馬上報廢:汽車和電子用品不准銷出俄國,德國製造業馬上少了三萬個職位。


還有,俄國的大企業,多年向歐洲的銀行貸款。兩年來,俄國借了一千六百億美元。你制裁我,我可以不還錢。借了錢給俄國企業的歐洲銀行:法國最多,五百億美元,英國也是二百億的債主。銀行信貸評級,會下降多少?基金會損失幾多?


俄國人在美國,有七百五十億美元股票證券,奧巴馬宣佈,一個月內必須拋貨,到期全部是廢紙?


俄國也會報復。法國向俄國賣軍火,德國也在傾銷平治和寶馬,英國的金融服務業,全部停下來,歐洲的經濟,準備好另一波衰退了沒有?


唯一可以得益的,是早就「脫亞入歐」,但現在又可以自稱為歐美之外的日本。向歐洲的訂單,如果俄國轉過來,日本能接多少,就接多少好了,日本沒有參加制裁的義務,因為我想造核彈,你美國不讓我擴軍。日本可以乘機談判北方四島主權,中國在一旁,靜悄悄看着。


美國的經濟「全球一體化」,此時弱點都暴露。不錯,所謂Globalization,二十年來下面好多人賺了大錢,但是,最終你的意志沒有了,公義也蒸發了;而且,一時贏得了世界,卻失去了靈魂,你要跟撒旦對決時,你連自己,也失去了。


(訂正:昨日本欄,中國北京大學法學院教授饒戈平誤植為錢戈平。謹此致歉。)

Source: http://hkm.appledaily.com/detail.php?guid=18669547&category_guid=vice&sup_id=12187389&category=daily&issue=20140327

米歇爾好心做蠢事 | 晴報Sky Post by 劉天賜

美國第一夫人米歇爾在北京大學演說時表示:「表達、信仰及資訊自由是普世權利。」她在北大「斯坦福中心」發表演說。北大校長王恩哥致辭時表示:「歡迎美國學生及美國總統奧巴馬的兩個女兒到北大讀書。」
米歇爾非常坦率,可是「普世價值」、「普世權利」很多時在內地是忌諱的。她所說的三樣價值都有條件限制。美國人發明的社交網絡和面書,不可以在神州通行,除了在港澳台外登陸,還有些互聯網通訊亦受到限制,但可以靠翻牆去克服。
中共政權「另有一種宗教信仰自由」的辦法,不致「西方信仰王國」產生大勢力。至於資訊自由,要與西方接軌,程度上還有相當巨大的距離。
此三項普世權利,老百姓聽了怎想?掌權者聽了又會怎樣想?惟有讓米歇爾「自由」表達吧。總統女兒到外國(中國)留學?似乎只有中國領導人的兒女都送到外國浸洋水吧。如果唸哲學、文學、歷史、科學等,哪有吸引力?太客氣了。

Source: http://www.skypost.hk/column/劉天賜/007010001002/%E7%B1%B3%E6%AD%87%E7%88%BE%E5%A5%BD%E5%BF%83%E5%81%9A%E8%A0%A2%E4%BA%8B/133168