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: 毛茂 你曾经说:先生,我觉得你还是有些盲目崇拜国外媒体了,他们如果因为不关心无动于衷又怎么样?我们为什么非要洋人作最终的裁判呢?难道你最大的满足就是他们说一句”桑兰错了,海明欺诈了“?
饭要一口一口吃,路要一步一步走,请拭目以待,但希望你具信心。
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:饭要一口一口吃,路要一步一步走,请拭目以待,但希望你具信心。
你认为这一封信出去,美国所谓”主流媒体“就接纳它为事实真相吗?如果它们要进一步了解,你认为海明会害怕美国电视台来采访事实真相吗?
家门不幸,出此孽种,我们只能关起门来打狗。
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:赞 “家门不幸,出此孽种,我们只能关起门来打狗。”
你认为这一封信出去,美国所谓”主流媒体“就接纳它为事实真相吗?如果它们要进一步了解,你认为海明会害怕美国电视台来采访事实真相吗?
家门不幸,出此孽种,我们只能关起门来打狗。
To: 毛茂 你曾经说:你认为这一封信出去,美国所谓”主流媒体“就接纳它为事实真相吗?如果它们要进一步了解,你认为海明会害怕美国电视台来采访事实真相吗?
必须重申,这封信是给美联社的报道一个回应,不是告洋状,愿意签名的就签,不愿签的可等待下一次。我们在网上已评论了两个多月,有不少议题已有共同答案,但媒体不可能了解,尤其是英文媒体。我们为了应对恶棍的操纵、操作,有必要维护华人的尊严。这封信只是个开端,还应该有后续的给大陆媒体或美国议员写信揭示真相。
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:我觉得也是. 艾艾还有其他富有正义感的网友真的令我钦佩,我其实一直潜水,这两天才注册,你们的这些整理非常好,但是总觉得发给美联社不太妥,我唯一的理由是美国人对华人是整体看的,他们不会区分的看,就像我们对待外国人也是,因为了解少,所以非常可能经常从一个个体的映像推广到他们的群体的印象.
刚从岳博客回来,他起草了一份英文信给AP,言简意赅,就事论事。如果各位一定要寄,建议用他的。
https://www.sinovision.net/blog/index.php?act=details&id=86359&bcode=ydx
艾艾,这不是对你劳动成果的否定。你也知道,我也有input的。没有你的一呼百应,岳博也不会站到网民这边来。
To: SuperGirl2011 你曾经说:反对你的提议。关于岳博士的意见我已给答复。
我总觉得像中国有句老话说的,家丑不外扬,这个全面颠覆桑兰的信,在美国人看来只有一个华人的感觉,他们不太能区分华人个体
刚才岳东晓博士写了个简单的信,https://www.sinovision.net/blog/index.php?act=details&id=86359&bcode=ydx
我觉得不错,诸位是否看一下。。这封英文信建议不要给美国媒体,给保险公司比较好,还有就是弄个中文版本,发给国内媒体。。。
To: 中文网 你曾经说:我总觉得像中国有句老话说的,家丑不外扬,这个全面颠覆桑兰的信,在美国人看来只有一个华人的感觉,他们不太能区分华人个体
应该给美联社答复,因为他们的报道不真实,且美国主流媒体都转载了同样的内容。这一跨国的诈欺案无论得逞还是没得逞,华人的形象是大大受损。连保险公司和美国体操协会都摇头,都认为海明是自打嘴巴。不过他们很自私,因为他们没有任何损失,是海明和桑兰为讨好美国人打击中国人、炒作媒体、逃脱罪孽的把戏。另,签名是自愿的,同意的就签。
To: 中文网 你曾经说:你如果关注美国媒体的话,你也知道他们也就是“他说,你说”,不会下什么结论或fact check的,何况是桑兰这种美国人不关心的事情。美国媒体也很lame的,不要迷信他们。弄不好反而给海明一个发声的平台,进一步损害华人的声誉。
应该给美联社答复,因为他们的报道不真实,且美国主流媒体都转载了同样的内容。这一跨国的诈欺案无论得逞还是没得逞,华人的形象是大大受损。连保险公司和美国体操协会都摇头,都认为海明是自打嘴巴。不过他们很自私,因为他们没有任何损失,是海明和桑兰为讨好美国人打击中国人、炒作媒体、逃脱罪孽的把戏。另,签名是自愿的,同意的就签。
To: 艾艾 你曾经说:ok!
谢谢你和春夏,辛苦了!另,方便的话能否在名字间加逗号分隔开?谢谢!
To: SuperGirl2011 你曾经说:应该给美联社答复,因为他们的报道不真实,且美国主流媒体都转载了同样的内容。这一跨国的诈欺案无论得逞还是没得逞,华人的形象是大大受损。连保险公司和美国体操协会都摇头,都认为海明是自打嘴巴。不过他们很自私,因为他们没有任何损失,是海明和桑兰为讨好美国人打击中国人、炒作媒体、逃脱罪孽的把戏。另,签名是自愿的,同意的就签。
我个人也觉得没有必要跟美国的媒体搞那么多。。美国人不怎么关心桑兰,影响不大,捅出去也只是损我们华人的整体的影响。。我们主要是给保险公司信,然后就国内媒体的公开信,因为桑兰主要是想在国内媒体骗骗,然后搞些支持。。我们想国内媒体,国内人民揭露桑兰的真实面目比较实际的做法
To: kittyzfong 你曾经说:谢谢你和春夏,辛苦了!另,方便的话能否在名字间加逗号分隔开?谢谢!
艾艾,截止时间已到,以下是最新名单:
艾艾 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 大戏如梦
elba wangwang jake 2012不寻常 对岸的
To: kittyzfong 你曾经说:怎么贴到您的上面格式有些不同了,看上去有些零乱,我再E-mail给你一份名单吧!
艾艾,截止时间已到,以下是最新名单:
艾艾 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 大戏如梦
elba wangwang jake 2012不寻常 对岸的
To: 海明是阿Q 你曾经说:我个人也觉得没有必要跟美国的媒体搞那么多。。美国人不怎么关心桑兰,影响不大,捅出去也只是损我们华人的整体的影响。。我们主要是给保险公司信,然后就国内媒体的公开信,因为桑兰主要是想在国内媒体骗骗,然后搞些支持。。我们想国内媒体,国内人民揭露桑兰的真实面目比较实际的做法
艾艾,再读了一遍信,有些保留意见。假如美国电视台报道这件事,对华人社会利多还是弊多?尤其是文中强调“American family“,不知详情的(大多数美国人)只会留下中国人忘恩负义的印象。打击桑兰的目的也很难达到,她其实要骗的还是国内媒体。
华人社会地位已经不高,所以我们要慎重。如果一定要发,明确“Chinese-American family“还是很重要的,这样才说明华人有小人,但更多的是好人。其实我一直在想,如果当年