訊息原文

1 人回報・1 年前
Why does the president support abortion when his own Catholic faith teaches abortion as morally wrong?
He believes that it's a woman's right, it's a woman's body, and it's her choice.
Why does the president, who does he believe then, should look out for the unborn child?
He believes that it's up to a woman to make those decisions, and up to a woman to make those decisions with her doctor.
I know you've never faced those choices, nor have you ever been pregnant.

現有回應

目前尚無回應

增加新回應

  • 撰寫回應
  • 使用相關回應 5
  • 搜尋

你可能也會對這些類似文章有興趣

  • We are here today in painful recognition that our government does not have the capacity to heal the divisions in this nation or the willingness to use sincere diplomacy to avoid violent conflict and is, in fact, unwilling to end conflict peacefully. Its greatest talent is to craft misinformation and disinformation to subvert the media and misuse it as an instrument to incite fear and hatred among our people, exciting partisan divisions at home through crass politics, and stirring ancient hatreds abroad through lies, deceit. In blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline, this government has deliberately circumvented Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the authority of Congress to make war. It has violated international criminal law by conspiring to commit acts of sabotage and violence on the high seas. It has used illegal and unconstitutional means to destroy the energy resources needed to protect millions of people in Europe during the winter and then to profit from its illegal actions by selling energy to Europe at a four to six times markup. It has done so blatantly, cynically, simultaneously, taking credit for the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline and then denying any role in it. I speak directly to those responsible, thanks to a courageous journalist, Seymour Hersh. We know what each of you did at the Nord Stream pipeline, Mr. President, Mr. Secretary of State, Mr. National Security Advisor, and Madam Undersecretary of State. And we will not rest until you are held accountable by Congress, by the International Criminal Court, and by the American people at the next election for your reprehensible conduct, which has debased our Constitution, undermined the rule of law, in our name, committed an act of war which threatened the peace of the world and the stability of our own nation. No amount of balloon militarism will distract us from your profoundly lawless, reckless conduct and have lost trust in your ability to defend America, to affirm that we are a nation of laws, not of men or women, to hold those in high office to the highest of standards of national and international law. If we fail to do this, we have only ourselves to blame, while our government descends into depravity and tries to frogmarch us directly into nuclear war. Under the pretense of the pursuit of national security, our government's aggressive nature has alienated nations of the world and caused them to withdraw from commerce. It has ceded our national sovereignty in matters of peace to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which prefers military escalation to peace and is content, together with this administration, to use the good, courageous people of Ukraine as pawns in a vicious and deadly geopolitical chess game, which began well before the illegal Russian invasion. And it is now planning to do for the people of Taiwan what it has done for the people of Ukraine, portraying China the aggressor while surrounding China with about 200 military bases. At home, our government has supported devastating gain of function research, which loosed the pandemic across our land. It has perverted social media to suppress legitimate debate over COVID policy to the detriment of the health, welfare, and the will of Americans. And it has enabled the federal government law enforcement to be weaponized against political opponents and has injected itself into social media organizations to impose political and ideological censorship in attacking the patriotism of those Americans who dare ask questions. Such a government is neither deserving of the trust of the American people nor worthy of our tacit consent to make decisions in our own interests. We must change this government before it destroys our nation. We must change the way we are governed, insisting upon a government dedicated to peace. As a congressman, I warned America about going to war after 9-11. I led the effort against the Iraq war, together with Ron Paul, and saw the lies that took the lives of our people.
    2 人回報・1 則回應・2 年前
  • 不要以為官大、學問大？ 下面是漂亮國的政客嘴臉！ Tales of Washington DC Airport ticket agent 一名華府機場票務員的傳奇 A DC 'airport ticket agent' offers some examples of why the US is in so much trouble! I love this as the ticket agent actually names real names! 一名華府機場的票務員提供了一些為什麼美國現在有那麼多麻煩的例子。對於票務員能指名道姓，我愛死了！ 1. I had a New Hampshire Congresswoman (Carol Shea-Porter) ask for an aisle seat so that her hair wouldn't get messed up by being near the window. (On an airplane!) 新罕不什爾州的女眾議員波特要求要坐靠走道的位子，這樣她的頭髮才不會因為坐在窗邊而被吹亂（這是搭飛機耶！） 2. I got a call from a Kansas Congressman's (Moore) staffer (Howard Bauleke), who wanted to go to CapeTown. I started to explain the length of the flight and the passport information, and then he interrupted me with, ''I'm not trying to make you look stupid, but Cape Town is in Massachusetts.” Without trying to make him look stupid, I calmly explained, ''Cape Cod is in Massachusetts, Cape Town is in South Africa .'' 堪薩斯眾議員莫爾的幕僚鮑雷克要飛往開普頓，我跟他解釋飛行時間和護照的資訊。他打斷了我說「我不是想讓你聽上去笨笨的，開普頓是在麻薩諸塞州耶。」在不顯得是他很笨的情況下，我平靜的解釋說「鱈魚角在麻州，開普頓在南非。」 His response -- click.. 他的反應是~~喀哩，掛斷了電話。 3. A senior Vermont Congressman (Bernie Sanders) called, furious about a Florida package we did. I asked what was wrong with the vacation in Orlando. He said he was expecting an ocean-view room. I tried to explain that's not possible, since Orlando is in the middle of the state. 資深的維蒙州眾議員桑德斯打電話來，憤怒的問我們所辦理的他去佛羅里達渡假的事情。我問他他在奧蘭多的假期有什麼問題嗎？他說他要求的是一間能看到大海的房間。我解釋說奧蘭多位於佛羅里達州的中間，是不可能看到大海的。 He replied, 'Don't lie to me!, I looked on the map, and Florida is a very THIN state!!'' (OMG ) 他回答「別撒謊！我看了地圖了，佛羅里達是一個很狹長的州！」（我的天！） 4. I got a call from a lawmaker's wife (Landra Reid) who asked, ''Is it possible to see England from Canada?'' 眾議員雷得的太太打電話來問「可能不可能從加拿大看到英國？」 I said, ''No.'' She said, ''But they look so close on the map'' (OMG, again!) 我說「不可能」。 她說「但是地圖上很近啊！」（再一次，我的天哪！） 5. An aide for a cabinet member (Janet Napolitano) once called and asked if he could rent a car in Dallas. I pulled up the reservation and noticed he had only a 1-hour layover in Dallas. When I asked him why he wanted to rent a car, he said, ''I heard Dallas was a big airport, and we will need a car to drive between gates to save time.'' 一位內閣閣員拿波里他諾的幕僚打電話來問他能不能在達拉斯租一輛車？我查了一下他的訂位，發現他在達拉斯只轉機停留一個小時，於是問他為什麼要租輛車？他說「我聽說達拉斯機場很大，所以我要租輛車趕去下一個機門以節省時間。」 (Aghhhh) （啊......） 6. An Illinois Congresswoman (Jan Schakowsky) called last week. She needed to know how it was possible that her flight from Detroit left at 8:30 a.m, and got to Chicago at 8:33 a.m. 伊利諾州女眾議員上個禮拜打來電話，她要知道怎麼可能她上午八點半飛離底特律，八點三十三分就抵達芝加哥了？ I explained that Michigan was an hour ahead of Illinois , but she couldn't understand the concept of time zones. Finally, I told her the plane went fast, and she bought that. 我跟她解釋說密西根州比伊利諾州早一個小時，但她就是不懂「時區」是什麼。最後我告訴她飛機飛得很快，這一下她滿意了。 7. A NewYork lawmaker, (Jerrold Nadler) called and asked, ''Do airlines put your physical description on your bag so they know whose luggage belongs to whom?'' 紐約州議員納得勒打電話來問「航空公司把旅客的外型描述貼在行李上，好識別哪件行李是哪一個乘客的？」 I said, 'No, why do you ask?' 我說「不會呀，為什麼問這個問題？」 He replied, ''Well, when I checked in with the airline, they put a tag on my luggage that said (FAT), and I'm overweight. I think that's very rude!'' 他說「當我到機場櫃台報到的時候，他們在我的行李上貼了一張『肥』FAT，而我確實過重，我認為這太不禮貌了。」 After putting him on hold for a minute, while I looked into it. (I was dying laughing). I came back and explained the city code for Fresno , CA is (FAT - Fresno Air Terminal), and the airline was just putting a destination tag on his luggage.. 我讓他稍等一會兒，我查一下。（我快笑死了！）回頭我跟他解釋說加州佛雷斯諾機場的代碼就是FAT（肥），而航空公司貼在他行李上的是他的目的地的標籤。 8. A Senator John Kerry aide (Lindsay Ross) called to inquire about a trip package to Hawaii . 參議員凱利的幕僚詢問去夏威夷旅行的行程。 After going over all the cost info, she asked, ''Would it be cheaper to fly to California and then take the train to Hawaii ?'' 到說到價錢的時候，她問「飛到加州，然後搭火車去夏威夷，會不會比較便宜？」 （夏威夷在海上，搭火車？） 9. I just got off the phone with a freshman Congressman, Bobby Bright from Ala. who asked, ''How do I know which plane to get on?'' 我剛剛放下一個選自阿拉斯加州的國會新進眾議員布萊特，他問「我怎麼知道我該搭上哪班飛機？」 I asked him what exactly he meant, to which he replied, ''I was told my flight number is 823, but none of these planes have numbers on them.'' 我問他說的是什麼意思？他說「我的航班號碼是823，但是沒有任何一架飛機上噴有823號。」 10. Senator Dianne Feinstein called and said, ''I need to fly to Pepsi-Cola , Florida . Do I have to get on one of those little computer planes?'' I asked if she meant fly to Pensacola and fly on a commuter plane. 眾院議長范恩斯坦打電話問「我要飛到佛羅里達州的『百事可樂』市去，是不是要搭那些小小的飛機？」我問她是否要問飛往佛羅里達『潘西可拉』市，而且是搭往來上下班的飛機？ She said, ''Yeah, whatever, smarty!'' 她回答「對啦，不管你怎麼說啦，你個自作聰明的傢伙。」 11. Mary Landrieu, La Senator, called and had a question about the documents she needed in order to fly to China. 洛杉磯參議員藍度問一個她要飛往中國大陸需要什麼文件的問題。 After a lengthy discussion about passports, I reminded her that she needed a visa. 講了很久之後，我提醒她她要簽證(visa)。 "Oh, no I don't. I've been to China many times and never had to have one of those'' 她說「喔，不需要，我去過中國大陸很多次，從來不需要。」 I double checked and sure enough, her stay required a visa. 我再次查證後告訴她，她真的需要簽證。 When I told her this she said, ''Look, I've been to China four times and every time they have accepted my American Express!'' 她說「我去過中國大陸四次，他們那裡收我的『美國運通卡』！」（註：英文的簽證和維沙信用卡是同一個字） 12. A New Jersey Congressman (John Adler) called to make reservations, 'I want to go from Chicago to Rhino, NewYork.'' 紐澤西州眾議員艾德勒要訂機位，「我要從芝加哥到紐約州的『犀牛城』！」 I was at a loss for words. Finally, I said, ''Are you sure that's the name of the town?” 我一下子不知所措，最後我問「你確定那個地點的名字是這個？」 "Yes, what flights do you have?'' replied the man. 「對啦，你們有什麼班機？」 After some searching, I came back with, ''I'm sorry, sir, I've looked up every airport code in the country and can't find a rhino anywhere." 搜索了一會兒後，我回答他「對不起，我查了所有的機場代碼，沒有『犀牛城』的代碼。」 ''The man retorted, ''Oh, don't be silly! Everyone knows where it is. Check your map!'' 他憤怒的反駁「少笨了！大家都知道這個都市在哪裡，查一下你的地圖！」 So I scoured a map of the state of New York and finally offered, ''You don't mean Buffalo, do you?'' 我趕緊在紐約州的地圖上找，最後試著問他「你說的是不是『水牛城』？」 The reply? ''Whatever! I knew it was a big animal.'' 他的答案？「反正就是一個很大的動物的名字啦！」 Now you know why the Government is in the shape it's in! 現在大家知道為什麼我們的政府是這個德性了！ Could ANYONE be this DUMB? 有沒有人像他們這麼笨？ YES, THEY WALK AMONG US, ARE IN POLITICS, AND THEY CONTINUE TO BREED. 有！這些人就在我們之中，還就在政治圈裡，而且他們還繼續的繁衍！
    4 人回報・1 則回應・1 年前
  • 轉分享： 這是中研院生醫所所長郭沛恩院士 (他也是UCSF 教授）寫給前副總統陳健仁及時中部長，関於目前COVID-19 的一些建議，希望政府能夠接納。 Dear VP Chen, Hope that things are going well. I just completed my 9th quarantine after my 9th trip to Taipei during the pandemic and see that the Omicron variant of COVID-19 is now firmly established in Taiwan. While the CECC is moving quickly to address the widening spread of COVID-Omicron and is heading in the right direction, I find that the current policy is unsustainable and the messaging can be much improved. Since I was told that the CECC would welcome my suggestions, I have decided to do so. Please forward this message to the CECC for their consideration. 1. It is now very clear that COVID-Omicron is a very different disease than COVID-ALPHA/BETA/DELTA. Current vaccines are developed from COVID-ALPHA and cannot prevent INFECTION by COVID-Omicron even though they lower significantly the risk of SEVERE DISEASE and DEATH for those who are fully vaccinated and received booster shots recently. In addition, COVID-Omicron is highly contagious and has a very short incubation time; but it causes a milder disease, including shortened disease course and contagious period. 2. Because of the above, contact tracing does not work and avoiding infection is futile except one is in strict isolation or wears a PROPERLY FITTED N95 mask around others (see a very nice article about this in the NYT attached). This means that COVID testing in asymptomatic people is a waste of resources and is justified only in a limited set of situations (such as someone who works closely with vulnerable populations - e.g., nursing home and hospital workers - who has been in close contact with a positive case and needs to test negative to return to work). 3. Although the rate of hospitalization and death due to COVID-Omicron is low, when large populations are infected, the number of severe cases and severe disease is still significant (0.4% of 23 million people hospitalized = 92,000 in the hospital; 0.04% of 23 million people can die = 9,200 deaths) so the key is to keep the vulnerable people from developing severe disease. Medications used for COVID-ALPHA/BETA/DELTA variants such as antibody treatments and Remdesivir, etc., do not work for COVID-Omicron but the oral antivirals from Pfizer and Merck work amazingly well for preventing death (>85% reduction) and hospitalization. Paxlovid has done better in clinical trials to prevent hospitalization but it has many drug-drug interactions so many elderly people cannot use it. Molnupiravir has the theoretical risk of mutagenesis in pregnant women but for the elderly who are past reproductive age, it is a very safe and effective drug to use. I encourage the CECC to contact their counterparts in Japan, Singapore, Israel and the UK to get their experience in using these two oral anti-virals in the recent COVID-Omicron surge. [Full Disclosure: Dr. Dean Li, President of Merck Research Laboratories, is my brother-in-law so I am not pushing the Merck pill for obvious conflict of interest reasons.] Based on the above, my suggestions on messaging are: 1. Tell the country that COVID-Omicron is an entirely different disease than the previous COVID variants so the whole country IS NOT IMMUNE to getting the infection. However, through the sacrifice and cooperation of everyone in Taiwan, the country succeeded in preventing disease and death during the previous waves of infection that caused a lot of problems around the world. This is shared success that the CECC and everyone in Taiwan should take credit, be proud of, and very relieved by. 2. Despite the fact that no one is protected from infection, but because COVID-Omicron is mild, public health policy needs to be adjusted to focus on treating the vulnerable rather than preventing infection of all. 3. Acknowledge that some segments of society have been severely affected by COVID policies so the recovery of these sectors is taken in consideration in updating the public health policy. 4. Acknowledge that some COVID policies were confusing to the public in the past so the new policies will be more consistent and logical. For example, the policy of requiring masking outdoors while people eating at restaurants indoors are not required to mask makes no sense. My suggestions for the new policy are geared towards lowering hospitalization and death rates while avoiding unnecessary disruptions in people's lives: 1. Push vaccination for vulnerable groups (the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions that make them more prone to severe disease). Send vaccination nurses to the nursing homes and neighborhoods with elderly people to get everyone fully vaccinated (including booster shots). Getting the 30% of those 65-75 and 44% of elderly >75 who have not been fully vaccinated and boosted should be a high priority 2. Use the "test positive and treat" strategy for those in vulnerable groups. As I mentioned before, Paxlovid for all but Molnupiravir for those who cannot take Paxlovid. Treat them before their symptoms get worse because it is cheaper to give them the medicine than risk their need for hospitalization. 3. No more putting those with mild disease in special facilities or hospitals so that there are plenty of capacity for those who need hospitalization. 4. Recommend (not mandate with threat of punishment) those who have close contact with COVID-Omicron patients to mask around others for 5 days (no need to do so with household members because they are already given it to them) if they are asymptomatic. 5. No testing of asymptomatic people unless their job requires it (nursing home, hospital, etc.). 6. No more closing schools, factories, or offices because of positive COVID-Omicron cases. 7. No more mandatory masking except for those described in #4 above. People here are so used to masking that many will still do so with the threat of punishment. 8. No more mandatory quarantine, even for those who test positive. Highly recommend those who test positive to wear a mask when around people and not eat with others but not make it a punishable offense. [Treat them like people who have a bad flu, not like criminals.] 9. No more testing or quarantine requirements for visitors from abroad. As the local infection rate is now higher than that many other countries, there is no reason to require new arrivals to do anything different when they are asymptomatic. It's confusing to many that I can go anywhere in the world without quarantine but have to do quarantine plus multiple tests when arriving in Taiwan (and a handful of Asian countries). The benefit of the policies listed above is that the resources of the country are directed toward saving lives rather than collecting lots of infection data. It will reclaim the international travel hub status of Taoyuan International Airport (and not let Singapore and Seoul dominate the air travel sector) and revive the tourism, convention, airline, hotel businesses. It will simplify everyone's life and reduce anxiety. It may be counter intuitive but if you look at the data from the US university campuses and European countries, it is better to get as many young people infected as quickly as possible to shorten the surge while building up herd immunity for COVID-Omicron without a lot of severe cases. The old policy for flattening the curve is to prevent overwhelming the hospitals but with oral antivirals and milder disease, there is no need to flatten the curve. It is better to get the whole surge completed in 2 months like in most countries that pursue a more open policy. I am convinced that when the messaging is clear and based on current understanding of the situation, the people will embrace it and praise the CECC's leadership. Best, Pui -- Pui-Yan Kwok, MD, PhD Director, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Academia Sinica
    11 人回報・1 則回應・2 年前
  • 英國中文僑報最近訪問在英國的習近平前妻柯玲玲，她比習大兩歲，1979-1982年結婚三年，離婚後留學英國，現任醫生和教授。這是有關習早年婚姻狀況的首次披露。1951 年出生，64 歲的柯小明（柯玲玲）是原中國駐英大使柯華的小女兒，她也是習近平的前妻。受過良好教育的柯玲玲，目前她是倫敦一家私立醫院的高級主任，也是倫敦大學亞非醫學院的客座教授。她在近日接受了英國《僑報》的採訪。 1979年柯玲玲與習近平結婚，因為價值觀與性格的不同，1982年，她與結婚三年的習近平離婚，移民英國。而那時的習近平正競選正定縣委書記，習近平毅然放棄了與柯玲玲一同移民英國的機會，並指責柯玲玲貪戀西方繁華。經多次勸說讓習近平移民無效，兩人最終分道揚鑣。與習近平離婚，你覺得後悔嗎？ 柯： 在那個年代，離婚其實是一件非常重要的事情，我和習近平的婚姻很短暫，很重要的一點就是我們幾乎沒有共同點，談不上什麼後悔不後悔的。他以前是一個很執著的人，想幹一番大事業，反正好像我說的話他都聽不進去，所以我才選擇了離婚這條路。距離不可能讓我們產生現實的婚姻和感情。當時我的父親是非常反對的，他總是認為我做事很魯莽。 你們之後有聯繫過嗎？柯：在我去英國的前三年裡，他幾乎每週都打電話給我，你知道那個年代從中國打電話到英國是不方便的，中國還沒有普及電話，條件不比現在，但是我一個電話都沒有接聽過，這讓他非常傷心。我知道他也曾經試圖挽回這段婚姻，我當時是鐵了心了。久而久之，我們也就沒有什麼聯繫了。我知道他心裡還是有這份感情的。 你當時會想到習近平會成為中國的領導人嗎？ 柯：沒有，完全不會這樣去想。他成為中國國家主席，我是非常替他高興的，因為我離開他的時候，他還只是個科級幹部。他是一個很有理想的人，我一直認為他很有潛能，但在當時他的潛能對我而言一無是處。 你覺得在你心裡，習近平是一個怎麼樣的人？ 柯：雖然我和他在一起的時候，大部分時間我們經常發生爭吵，分歧很大，但是我還是認為他是一個正直的人。他不會像其他人一樣，昧著良心去做一些利己的事情，這是我以前非常看重他的一點。以前我認為他太過於固執，也可能是因為我們相處的時間很短暫，我對他不是很瞭解吧。現在回過頭來看，其實他做的很多事情都是對的，只是自己當年太年輕，比較容易衝動。他不是一個理想主義者，他做事是有規劃，有步驟的。我可能會更理想主義一些，畢竟女性都會喜歡懂得浪漫的男人，但是習近平不是，我很多時候覺得他過於刻板，這與我們的成長環境和教育背景有很大關係。 離婚以後的那麼多年，你們都沒有見過面嗎？柯：他還是國家副主席的時候，我們在深圳見過一次。那是我，我姐姐，還有我父親回深圳掃墓，他當時來深圳考察工作，慰問了我父親，我當時也在，他跟我們全家人握了握手，包括我。其實是很尷尬的一次會面，大概一起坐了半個小時，聊了一些東西，我只覺得他看上去老了許多。 習近平會在 10 月訪英，你有什麼期待？ 柯：中國使館那邊已經透過一些管道邀請我作為英國僑界的代表參加一個歡迎宴會，他上任中共總書記三年，第一次來英國訪問，對中英兩國都是有好處的，我作為英國的華人，感到很榮幸，也很高興。 Above message in English from Google translator. British Chinese Overseas Chinese News recently interviewed Ke Lingling, Xi Jinping’s ex-wife in the UK. She was two years older than Xi Jinping, married for three years from 1979 to 1982, and studied in the UK after her divorce. She is now a doctor and professor. This is the first disclosure of Xi's early marital status. Born in 1951, 64-year-old Ke Xiaoming (Ke Lingling) is the youngest daughter of Ke Hua, the former Chinese ambassador to the UK, and Xi Jinping's ex-wife. Ke Lingling, who is well educated, is currently a senior director of a private hospital in London and a visiting professor at the School of Asian and African Medicine, University of London. She recently accepted an interview with the British "Qiao Bao". Ke Lingling married Xi Jinping in 1979. Because of her differences in values ​​and personalities, she divorced Xi Jinping who had been married for three years in 1982 and immigrated to the UK. At that time, Xi Jinping was running for the secretary of the Zhengding County Party Committee. Xi Jinping resolutely gave up the opportunity to immigrate to the UK with Ke Lingling, and accused Ke Lingling of being greedy for Western prosperity. After repeated persuasion to make Xi Jinping's immigration invalid, the two finally parted ways. Do you regret divorcing Xi Jinping? Ke: In those days, divorce was actually a very important matter. My marriage with Xi Jinping was very short. The important point is that we have almost nothing in common, so there is no regret or regret. He used to be a very persistent person and wanted to start a big career. Anyway, he didn't seem to listen to what I said, so I chose the road of divorce. It is impossible for us to have a realistic marriage and relationship with distance. My father was very against it at the time, he always thought I was reckless. Have you been in touch since then? Ke: In the first three years when I went to the UK, he called me almost every week. You know that it was inconvenient to call from China to the UK at that time. China has not yet popularized telephones, and the conditions are not as good as now, but I alone None of the calls were answered, which made him very sad. I know that he also tried to save this marriage, and I was determined at that time. Over time, we lost touch with each other. I know he still has this feeling in his heart. Did you think that Xi Jinping would become the leader of China? Ke: No, I don't think so at all. He became the President of China, and I am very happy for him, because when I left him, he was just a department-level cadre. He was an ideal guy, I always thought he had potential, but at the time his potential meant nothing to me. What kind of person do you think Xi Jinping is in your heart? Ke: Although when I was with him, we often quarreled and had great differences most of the time, but I still think he is an upright person. Like other people, he will not do some selfish things against his conscience. This is what I valued him very much before. In the past, I thought he was too stubborn, maybe it was because the time we spent together was very short, and I didn't know him very well. Looking back now, in fact, many things he did were right, but he was too young and impulsive. He is not an idealist, he does things in a planned and step-by-step manner. I may be more idealistic. After all, women will like men who understand romance, but Xi Jinping is not. I often think that he is too rigid. This has a lot to do with our growth environment and educational background. Haven't you met each other for so many years after the divorce? Ke: We met once in Shenzhen when he was the vice president of the country. That was me, my sister, and my father went back to Shenzhen to visit the grave. He came to Shenzhen to inspect work and condolences to my father. I was there at the time. He shook hands with our whole family, including me. In fact, it was an awkward meeting. We sat together for about half an hour and talked about some things. I just think he looks much older. Xi Jinping will visit the UK in October, what do you expect? Ke: The Chinese embassy has invited me through some channels to attend a welcome banquet as a representative of the British overseas Chinese community. He has been the general secretary of the Communist Party of China for three years, and his first visit to the UK is beneficial to both China and the UK. British Chinese feel very honored and very happy.
    2 人回報・2 則回應・2 年前