博客栏目停服公告
因网站改版更新,从9月1日零时起美国中文网将不再保留博客栏目,请各位博主自行做好备份,由此带来的不便我们深感歉意,同时欢迎 广大网友入驻新平台!
美国中文网
2024.8.8
定稿已于7月15日发给美联社。感谢188位网友的联署,包括40位实名网友及148位网名网友。(名单统计截止于7月15日美国西部时间晚八时)
岳博士起草的帖子非常好非常专业,感谢他!前一封信是普通网友的呐喊,而岳博士那篇是专业人士的深刻剖析。这篇是打狗棒,岳博士那篇是夺命剑,呵呵。如果大家决定发岳博士的作为第二封公开信的话,我第一个签名!
注:由于本稿是大家共同努力和讨论的结果,我只是执笔人。而且大家也都签名同意发表。我没有权力为所有人作出撤换稿子的决定。如果您在本稿签名过,但现在认为本稿不妥,不愿署名的,请跟帖告知,或email联系我。
==========================================================================
Dear Sir or Madam,
We are readers of your news article “Lawyer: Deal reached to care for paralyzed gymnast” dated July 12, 2011, written by Mr. Larry Neumeister, Associated Press. Most of us are are from north-america and mainland China, and have been reading the news about Sang Lan’s lawsuit for the past two months.
We write to request your attention to the inaccurate and misleading statements made by the lawyer for the paralyzed gymnast. We also request that you consider publishing a remedial report based on the information stated in the letter, as we believe any reputable and responsible news organization should do.
Below is an incomplete list of misleading or inaccurate statements in the report as well as the facts we discovered to challenge those statements.
1. "The lawyer, Ming Hai, said he could not divulge details of the deal. Still, he said it will provide up to $10 million in cash and health care over the lifetime of the 30-year-old gymnast, Sang Lan." (underlines added)
What we found: the statement of "(TIG) will provide up to $10 million in cash" is misleading, and "(TIG) will provide health care over the lifetime of Sang Lan" is what she already got in 1998. In other words, what is agreed in the settlement is no different from what had been stipulated in the original insurance policy in 1998.
Under the current insurance policy established in 1998, Sang Lan already has a coverage up to $10 million dollars, which of course is not in cash. This information is available at http://www.sinovision.net/blog/ksliu/details/85486.html. Unless there is a a cheque with a substantial dollar amount issued to Sang Lan (which was denied by TIG Insurance Company), Ming Hai’s statement about the "up to $10 million in cash"is evidently incorrect and obviously made to mislead the readers.
We have contacted TIG Insurance Company to verify Ming Hai's statement. The Director of Litigation Richard Fabian denied that TIG paid a fat cheque to Sang Lan. Apparently $10 million is a big dollar amount. Although both parties didn't disclose the amount of the monetary compensation, what Ming Hai said is contrary to TIG’s stated position. (For our investigatory work please refer to https://www.sinovision.net/blog/aiai/details/85691.html)
Also, Mr Fabian stated that TIG denied all the allegations that Sang Lan made in her complaint, since they didn't do anything wrong, nor did TIG make any apology to Sang Lan; TIG has been paying for Sang Lan's medical expense claims in the past 13 years, fully in compliance with the insurance policy. Mr Fabian also stated that Sang Lan's insurance policy has not been revised during the settlement.
Furthermore, some documents from TIG dated 1998 (please refer to http://www.sinovision.net/blog/ksliu/details/85486.html) already explained that what she got is a life-long insurance, and the injury-related medical expenses are eligible for claim. This is in agreement to TIG’s original agreement or insurance policy.
2. "The settlement will provide money to cover Lan's health care in China. Previously, her health care was paid for only in the United States." (underlines added)
What we found: Sang Lan's health care has been paid by three parties: TIG, the national health insurance in China and her employer in China, while most of the Chinese people only have coverage from the national health insurance.
First, as Mr Fabian stated, TIG has been paying her for her health care in compliance with her insurance policy. And that includes her eligible medical expenses in China. Please refer to the explanation to the insurance policy (http://www.sinovision.net/blog/ksliu/details/85486.html)
Second, Sang Lan herself have stated a few times (both in the past and recently), that she has medical expense coverage by the national health insurance in China according to the health plan's policy.
Third, again, Sang Lan stated before that her rehabilitation expenses (which is not an eligible expense for the above-mentioned health insurance in China) have been paid by her employer in China.
For Sang Lan's own statements about her medical expense coverage in China, please refer to her own blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_47420b930100cj4p.html
3. "He said she was staying ... for another month before returning to Beijing, where she will live with her boyfriend and continue to earn about $230 a month at speaking engagements and other public functions." (underlines added)
What we found: the above statement about her income in China is incorrect, and is contrary to what Sang Lan and her boyfriend have been saying in the past. Sang Lan has been living a very good life in China. She is much wealthier than most of the Chinese people, and her monthly income is around $4,500 (in USD), which is much more than the $230 Ming Hai claimed.
According to their statements before (one example would be an interview conducted by a Chinese media; please refer to http://sports.cn.yahoo.com/10-08-/324/2bpa1.html ), following is a list of facts about Sang Lan's financial situation:
- She owns two real estate properties in China, both fully paid. And one of them is in Beijing, one of the cities with the highest real estate price in the world.
- In 1998, She was paid $50,000 (in USD) by TIG Insurance Company. Other than that, she got another $50,000 (in USD) from General Administration of Sports of China.
- She has a good job, and her current monthly employment income is about $4,500 (in USD), which translates to an annual salary of $54,000 (in USD). Please note that the average income for people living in Beijing is about $2,700.
- There was a trust fund set up in 1998, with Sang Lan being the beneficiary. The fund raised $170,000 USD through donations in 1998. From 1998 to 2008, this fund had provided Sang Lan a monthly support in the amount of $500 USD, which translates to $6,000 USD a year. And in 2008, the trustees provided all the remaining fund (over $140,000 USD) to Sang Lan.
- She owns a Van.
- She hires a live-in home personal care attendant who gets paid $540 a month (she also accompanied Sang Lan to US this time).
On another note, according to Ming Hai's blog post, Sang Lan rented a single house with a swimming pool for her temporary place in New York, and paid $4,000 for the two-month stay.
4. ""Thirteen years ago she had a tragic fall that almost killed her," Hai said. "She got her life back again. The American people gave her a second life. She'll always remember that in her mind. She loves this country. She loves whatever this country has done for her."" (underlines added)
This is the most important part, and this is why we wrote to you. “We are not what we say; we are what we do.” Ming Hai stated that Sang Lan thinks that the American people gave her a second life and she'll always remember that in her mind. But what did she do to American people?
Here’s what she did to American people (please refer to her complaint, http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_857060240100siii.html):
- She sued US Gymnastic Federation, which gave her help after her fall in 1998. (the Gymnastic Federation was dismissed now)
- She sued the insurance companies, which have been paying for her medical expenses in 1998 and all the years until today. (the insurance companies were dismissed now)
- She sued an Chinese-American family (Kao Sung Liu, Gina Hiu-Hung Liu and their son Winston Sie).
And here're some facts about the Chinese-American family:
-Who are they? They are the family that voluntarily took care of Sang Lan (who they didn't know at all) for 10 months after her accident in 1998. Although Sang Lan received generous donation and had funds to use for her home care expenses, the family decided to bring her into their own home and provided the most meticulous care, all by themselves, all for free, in order to save the funds for her future living. In fact, they themselves were the biggest donor of the above-mentioned trust fund for Sang Lan.
- What did the American family (the Liu family) do? They can probably write a book about all the effort and help they offered to Sang Lan during that 10 months. Long story short, from a third party's perspective, they didn't do anything obviously wrong. And most importantly, Sang Lan had been expressing her gratitude numerous times towards that American family in the past 13 years until she sued them this year. And in 2008 she even came to US and specifically visited Liu family to thank them.
-What did Sang Lan say about the Liu family? She has written several articles with deep gratitude to the Liu family. In one of the articles she wrote, “At that critical point in 1998, aunt Hiu-hung treated me like her own daughter. Like a mother cares for her child, she helped me in getting through that difficult time.” (please refer to her own blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_47420b93010003f1.html)
- And what has Sang Lan done for this family who took care of her for 10 months after the accident? A billion dollars law suit!
"Don't bite the hands that feed you." Sang Lan stated that she always remembers the American people who helped her. Based on the above things she did, does she really think so? Or suing the American people who helped her is her special way of remembering them in her mind & thanking them for their help?
All of the facts we stated in this note are solid and backed by evidence. And should you have any questions, or need more information, we are more than happy to assist you. We understand that due to the language barrier, not all of the relevant information flows smoothly to the US media, and we will do what we can to let people know the true story.
We urge you to seriously consider our request that you publish a remedial report based on the information we have provided in this letter.
We thank you for your attention on this matter. If you have any further question, please feel free to contact us. We can be reached at aiai.young@gmail.com. We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Aiai Young, on behalf of (注:为隐私故,实名签名筒子们的姓名在此略去):
Bloggers (most of which are from https://www.sinovision.net/blog/):
2011死磕迷, 保姆小杜, 佳佳, folk3, 春夏秋冬, pollyzixin, 不屈仙人,
红男绿女, dodoaush, weijs, loveparadise, 苏岛橘子, GOUP律师, 女猫晒晒,
抛砖引玉, 胡了, maomao1, 大梦如戏, elba, wangwang, jake,
2012不寻常, 对岸的灯, 毛茂, 小迷糊, 中国大鼻子, luren,
lin010, INOFD, mgzww999, dogwood, xiangrikui, lovebirds,
爱娱乐, mingbuping, 红玉, 夏天的驴, oosakajp, 支持艾艾, INOFD,
围观群众, Athene, holly花园, 指间沙, 前直180, 打假大哥大, 染尽胭脂,胆小鼠, Kingsbury, Nathan, kittyzfong, southbank, titanwinter , jamesjie, AA70A , 三难1972, 害人害己又害明, windbell, 看戏党地下党员, nbxxp, 打酱油, obama-2011,
我就是局部地区个别人, 路平, 路平ZH, 春到曼哈顿, xintianyue, xinqus,
yuanye 8848, Salong77, ForJustice, 昆仑一 , pseudososo, jake,
豆子猫 , 布依族, 今宵夜深沉, 缠唐韵轩, 女公子, 看你怎么演到最后, 在家看好戏,
凤毛麟角, 当空彩虹, 初夏雨霏霏, 烂剑两把, 第一健康, 蔑视丧蝗, 包子打狗, 小聪,
看好戏, 桑棍做剑, 定哥, 相信好人, 何必当初, 一帆风顺, 静清雨滴声, chi202, Northstar, CNM_HM, Zoebb88, xml11, CINDY197233, chachacha,
南海渔人, 230美元, tobuto, 第一缕阳光, 磕米粉, oyoyoxy, angelwing,
supergirl2011, 开开心心看戏, yyu8561, 14417335, 薰衣草, 齐人忧天,
磕小粉, 一米阳光2011, 太阳风暴11, Lotus , hicb2011, 海棠馆主,
扭腰过客, jennleng , 懒猴子, xinkaixin, chuanbo2010, 清茶,
bayonet123456, 网络漫步, titawu, cherrylcxc317, 妞妞001122, wzgwz2012,蝴蝶 zoebb88,sunying, west-east, marygeng, 茭白好好吃, 小馋猫, 橡皮擦,梦醉唐朝, 心愿风铃1987, lilaoTAO, 螨婷我信赖, V2倒蛋, 要船票, 工藤美雪77,花儿那么红
To: mingbuping 你曾经说:“原告认可被告同意1998年桑兰受伤不是她自己的错(Plaintiff appreciates that defendants agree that the injury sustained by Sang Lan in 1998 is not her own fault.)。”。
我的看法:
1。丢华人的脸:我觉得这个脸已经保不住了,因为华人和华人的这场法庭的“斗争”随着海桑的坚持已经不可避免了。美国人早晚要知道的。
2。我们是在为“正义”说话,这里没有丢人不丢人的问题。美国人在“凯茜“谋杀亲女”案上多少人站出来,没人说他们丢美国人的脸。
3。説了也没用。不说就更没机会了。我们大家也是在为正义“维权”。为什么海明可以“维”,我们确要犹豫。
4。对将来的案
To: watcher 你曾经说:给这位也指出一个逻辑错误,你既然认为没有持续追踪的网民看不懂,那你怎么又寄希望于从不关心的美国民众呢?你不怕他们被误导吗?
书生造反,十年不成。这么简单的事,为何要这么纠结??
艾艾和岳之文都是不可多得也是互相不可取代的重磅炮弹!
两文绑在一起同时发,向所有中美新闻媒介,保险公司和中美两地同时发,
我们只看它们的实际效果,只看打击桑黄海无耻之辈的效果。
海明丧尽天良,满嘴谎言都毫无顾忌,而我们在这里却是怕这怕那,真是迂腐可笑,
我们代表的是普通网民,人性良知,何需面面俱到?
根本无需
To: watcher 你曾经说:同意,没什么可纠结的。
书生造反,十年不成。这么简单的事,为何要这么纠结??
艾艾和岳之文都是不可多得也是互相不可取代的重磅炮弹!
两文绑在一起同时发,向所有中美新闻媒介,保险公司和中美两地同时发,
我们只看它们的实际效果,只看打击桑黄海无耻之辈的效果。
海明丧尽天良,满嘴谎言都毫无顾忌,而我们在这里却是怕这怕那,真是迂腐可笑,
我们代表的是普通网民,人性良知,何需面面俱到?
根本无需
To: mingbuping 你曾经说:逐条驳斥。
我的看法:
1。丢华人的脸:我觉得这个脸已经保不住了,因为华人和华人的这场法庭的“斗争”随着海桑的坚持已经不可避免了。美国人早晚要知道的。
2。我们是在为“正义”说话,这里没有丢人不丢人的问题。美国人在“凯茜“谋杀亲女”案上多少人站出来,没人说他们丢美国人的脸。
3。説了也没用。不说就更没机会了。我们大家也是在为正义“维权”。为什么海明可以“维”,我们确要犹豫。
4。对将来的案
To: zoebb88 你曾经说:从另一个角度讲,如岳博所说,美联社的报道并没有给桑黄带来什么好处,也没有损害华人的利益(再生父母是恶心了点),你担忧什么呢?
寫了,各路人有機會看。不寫,就一點機會都沒有,桑蘭先挑事,我們也只是回應。
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:我的看法:
既然你问,那就加一句。绝大多数美国人是不看报的,而从电视访谈节目片面!!!地了解时事。如果让桑黄海闹大了,上了电视,华人的脸就给丢大了。各位也都知道,他们不是怕记者采访的主。
现在国内舆论已经偏向正义一边了,我认为我们已经取得阶段性胜利(当然是在艾艾为首的广大群众力量下),就等法院惩罚海明了。不要让他们死灰复燃。
To: SuperGirl2011 你曾经说:這不是唯一的方法,這只是方法之一,不要求全責備,也不要太高要求,怎麼想就怎麼做,沒缺陷才不正常呢!我手寫我心,才真實。
(小声)当然要答复和解释或者质疑了,就是觉得这个质疑的信是岳博士的信比较好一点点
To: mingbuping 你曾经说:既然你问,那就加一句。绝大多数美国人是不看报的,而从电视访谈节目片面!!!地了解时事。如果让桑黄海闹大了,上了电视,华人的脸就给丢大了。各位也都知道,他们不是怕记者采访的主。
why?
To: mingbuping 你曾经说:agree!
艾艾,不知稿子发了没有,下班回来又看看岳的信,还是不错的。不论他的为人,这封信不用还是可惜(他已表示不用)。
我觉得可以两篇一起发,各有好的一方。他的比较简练,我们的有更多的事实。可以用 letter1, letter 2. 互相补充。
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:why?
美国有句话,There is no such thing as bad publicity。 这句话无疑是海明的座右铭。再劝一句,这封信只会给海明带来利益,而无助于广大的在美华人。