例如 :『 Beijing has even invited Western journalists on a tour, guided to be sure, of Tibet in the hope of changing democratic opinion about its shameful imperialist takeover in 1950 of this peace-loving country, a country which threatened no one, least of all China itself. And today, with ethnic Chinese migrants pouring into Tibet by the thousands, the Tibetans will in a generation become a minority in their own country.
』

( 而作為國營新聞機構的中央社, 竟然不採用原文譯搞的付費方式, 卻以幾近全文轉錄的引述「報導」外報內容, 後果是在國際上丟台灣[媒體]的臉 ! )

【中文報導】
http://news.yam.com/cna/international/news/200208/200208142120435.html

華盛頓時報專欄評總統八三演說影響美台同盟
中央社
2002-8-14 21:08

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

(中央社記者郭無患華盛頓十四日專電) 美國胡佛戰爭與和平解決研究中心研究員，同時也是華盛頓時報專欄作家的畢希曼(Arnold Beichman)今天發表評論指出，在美國準備全力對付伊拉克之際，陳水扁總統八月三日的演說中提出「一邊一國」的說法時機不佳，對台灣本身不利，也影響美台同盟關係。


華盛頓時報是立場相對右派的華府媒體，在言論上對台灣一向非常支持，兩岸議題一直是畢希曼研究的重點，過去文章也顯示他對台灣十分友好。

畢希曼在今天刊出的評論文章中指出，台灣有著活躍的自由市場，民主企業經濟體系，台灣兩千三百萬人民不僅享受著自由社會，更擁有全世界最高的生活水準。台灣就是活生生的例證，證明自由並不是西方文明專屬的東西，台灣，就像日本一樣，證明只要有意願和民主領導，不同文化也可以創建人本社會。

尤其，台灣是實施民主制度，尊重人權，和中國大陸形成對比，在台灣歷史中沒有天安門事件，將來也不會有；兩年前，大家都見證了台灣經由民主選舉和平移轉政權，這也是為什麼美國社會大眾都同意國防部副部長沃佛維茨所說的，布希政府會竭盡所能保衛台灣不受中國大陸威脅。

不過，畢希曼語鋒一轉指出，在美國如此保證和台灣經濟成就之下，陳水扁總統在八月三日演說中主張獨立公投，不僅對台灣不利，也影響美台同盟關係；他在演說中的措辭，例如一邊一國、台灣並不屬於誰、台灣不是誰的地方政府、台灣不是誰的一省等，其實是在大聲要求台灣應從中國大陸獨立出去，而大陸已經威脅，如果台灣單方面宣布獨立，就要武力相向。

中國大陸目前有兩百枚飛彈對準台灣，另外兩個新的飛彈基地正在興建中，每一處都有能力發射一百枚飛彈，根據美國國防情報單位的評估，到二○○五年，中國大陸總共將有六百五十枚飛彈對著台灣。

但現在看起來比較重要的是，正在為江澤民之後接班問題進行鬥爭的中國大陸，在獲得二○○八年奧運會主辦權以來，行為舉止還算守規矩，北京甚至還邀請西方記者在有專人導引的前提下，到西藏去參觀。

從一個美國人的角度來看，畢希曼認為，陳水扁八月三日的談話時機不佳，美國總統布希正準備對伊拉克獨裁者沙丹．胡笙採取軍事行動，在美國全副精力放在中東合縱連橫之時，美國會需要陳總統與中國大陸再起口水戰嗎？同時，台灣在中國大陸還有以數十億美元計的鉅額投資。

畢希曼引述哲學家胡克(Sidney Hook)的話說，社會體系是一種歷史現象，誰也不能以邏輯來預測它未來的可能發展，未來問題有著各種可能性。有誰知道半數國內生產毛額都在私人手中的共產中國的未來？有誰預測了一九九一年蘇聯的崩離？一八七零年當法國被普魯士打敗，喪失亞爾薩斯、洛林兩省之後，法國軍隊記下兩句話：始終記著這事，但不要說出來；畢希曼建議陳水扁總統採取法國軍隊當時的作法；在可預見的將來，陳水扁總統也應對海峽對岸閉上一隻眼睛，避免挑戰，避免讓美國在面對全球民主遭受威脅的問題時分心。

【英文原文】
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/beichman.htm

【Turbulence in the Taiwan Straits】 August 14, 2002
Turbulence in the Taiwan Straits

Arnold Beichman

The Republic of Taiwan is a thriving free-market, entrepreneurial democracy whose 23 million people enjoy not only the political benefits of a free society but also one of the highest living standards in the world. Taiwan is vibrant, living testimony to the fact that freedom is not something unique to Western civilization; rather, Taiwan, like Japan, demonstrates that any people of any culture, of any civilization can create a civil society if there is will and democratic leadership.
Above all, Taiwan is the first Chinese democracy in history, one, in contrast to the mainland, with respect for human rights. There is no Tiananmen Square massacre in Taiwans history, nor could there ever be one. Two years ago we witnessed an event again unprecedented in Chinese history — the peaceful transfer of political power and sovereignty by means of a democratic election. That is why the U.S. public would agree with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz when earlier this year he pledged that the Bush administration will do whatever it takes to protect Taiwan from Communist China.
In light of such U.S. assurances and Taiwanese economic achievements, Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bians speech Aug. 3, in which he called for a referendum on independence, has ill-served not only his country but also the U.S.-Taiwan alliance. Among his poorly chosen statements were sentences like these: With Taiwan and China on each side of the [Taiwan] strait, each side is a country . . . Our Taiwan is not something that belongs to someone else. Our Taiwan is not someone elses local government . . . our Taiwan is not someone elses province. Mr. Chens words were really a cry for formal independence from mainland China, which regards Taiwan as a rebel province and which has threatened to go to war if Taiwan were to proceed with a unilateral declaration of independence.
I do not mean to minimize the actual and potential threat of Communist China to Taiwan. The present state of Chinese militarism is alarming — some 200 missiles aimed across the Taiwan Strait and two new missile bases under construction, each capable of firing some 100 additional weapons. By 2005, the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency anticipates Chinas total arsenal aimed at Taiwan will grow to 650 weapons.
But what is important now is that China, grappling with the problem of a successor to President Jiang Zemin, has been on good behavior since it was awarded the 2008 Olympics. Beijing has even invited Western journalists on a tour, guided to be sure, of Tibet in the hope of changing democratic opinion about its shameful imperialist takeover in 1950 of this peace-loving country, a country which threatened no one, least of all China itself. And today, with ethnic Chinese migrants pouring into Tibet by the thousands, the Tibetans will in a generation become a minority in their own country.
From an American standpoint, Mr. Chens speech couldnt have come at a worse time, just when President Bush is preparing a strike against Iraqs tyrant, Saddam Hussein. At a time when the Bush administrations energies are directed at creating an alliance in the Middle East against Saddam, does the United States need Mr. Chen to start a war of words with China? And this mind you at a time when Taiwan with Mr. Chens support is investing multi-billions of dollars in Chinese non-governmental businesses.
Sidney Hook, the philosopher, once wrote: A social system is a historical phenomenon whose possible development cannot be predicted by logic. The question of its future can only be based on a whole web of probabilities. Who knows, who can predict what the future will bring in Communist China, where at least half the GDP is already in private hands? Did anyone predict the sudden 1991 collapse of the Soviet empire?
After the French defeat by Prussia in the war of 1870 and the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, the French Army adopted as its slogan: pensons-y toujours, nen parlons jamais. Always think about it, never talk about it. I would recommend that Mr. Chen follow the same course as the French Army.
Mr. Chen ought to cast a blind eye across the straits of Taiwan for the foreseeable future and avoid challenges that would distract the United States from meeting a global challenge against the democracies, including Taiwan.

Arnold Beichman, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, is a Washington Times columnist.

中央日報的行為就是標準的【選擇性報導】作風。Beichman的確認為阿扁此時提出
此事﹐會讓美國手忙腳亂﹐但同時也痛斥中國的惡霸心態與侵略西藏的殘暴罪行﹐
而同時報導後者才能看出作者的平衡觀點。至於文章開頭即提到﹕

『台灣共和國是一個生氣勃勃的自由市場﹐企業經濟體系的民主國家﹐她的兩千三
百萬人民僅享受著自由社會，更擁有全世界最高的生活水準』

更是明確的認為台灣就是一個獨立的民主國家。

當然﹐台灣有台灣的考量﹐美國的意見會列入參考﹐不必一定採行。這正是獨立的
表徵之一。