Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Nine Afghan Boys Collecting Firewood Killed by Two NATO Helicopters
A tenth boy who managed to survive tells the story:
“We were almost done collecting the wood when suddenly we saw the helicopters come,” said Hemad, who, like many Afghans, has only one name. “There were two of them. The helicopters hovered over us, scanned us and we saw a green flash from the helicopters. Then they flew back high up, and in a second round they hovered over us and started shooting. They fired a rocket which landed on a tree. The tree branches fell over me and shrapnel hit my right hand and my side.”
The tree, Hemad said, saved his life by covering him so that he could not be seen by the helicopters, which, he said, “shot the boys one after another.”
All the families of these children got was a simple excuse by the commander of the NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus.
“We are deeply sorry for this tragedy and apologize to the members of the Afghan government, the people of Afghanistan and, most importantly, the surviving family members of those killed by our actions. These deaths should have never happened.”
An excuse very similar to the one below, in both effectiveness and honesty:
If the 9 children would have been killed in any Western country, everyone would have known their names by now, they’d have streets named after them, songs written in their memory and maybe even a feature film dedicated to them to show what they’ve been through. But they’re just Afghan children and will be forgotten in a few days, with nothing more than a generic excuse offered for their deaths.
Sad.
The worst thing about this, though, is that nothing perpetuates the endless “war on terror” like slaughtering innocent children.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
US Soldiers Killed Three Afghan Civilians
This image shows the body of Gul Mudin, the son of a farmer, who was killed on Jan. 15, 2010. A member of the "kill team" is posing behind him. SPIEGEL published just three photos out of the some 4,000 images and videos it has seen. Court martial proceedings against the soldiers involved in the killings are to begin soon.
In this image, a different soldier poses with the same corpse. The US Army on Monday apologized for the behavior of the soldiers involved in the "kill team."
Court martial proceedings are currently being prepared against 12 suspects. This photo of two dead men comes from the collection of one of the suspects.
Correction: The incident depicted in this image is not part of the court martial proceedings against members of the "kill team". It does nevertheless come from the collection of one of the suspects.
Friday, March 18, 2011
佐藤充先生大灾显大爱 20研修生“一个都没少”
图：来自山东的研修生孙燕芳（中）在日本宫城县南三陆町一避难所内 新华社
【大公报讯】大灾来时有大爱！宫城县女川町20名中国研修生受日本公司员工佐藤充的帮助生还，但佐藤充却被海啸淹没，其妻女也下落不明。佐藤充的哥 哥、佐藤水産社长佐藤仁不顾自己家被冲走的悲伤，一晚上都在找山上的朋友借房子，暂时将研修生们安置进去。灾害发生第二天，佐藤仁的第一句话就是：20个 研修生一个都没少！
据新华网日本宫城县16日报道，「要不是这些当地人的帮助，我们早就没了！」来自中国大连的研修生衣亚男和同伴们在宫城县女川町含泪水感激道。
女川町约一万人口，一半左右至今下落不明，记者在这里看到，城镇一片废墟，海岸边堆放几具被海浪冲上来的遗体。一辆日本国营列车被海啸拆成两截，拍 打在离海岸轨道几十米以外的山边。在这样一座受灾惨烈的小镇，近百名中国研修生无一遇难，而很多人能够逃生，是因为身边有给予帮助的当地人。
先助研修生后寻救妻女
灾难发生时，地动山摇，佐藤水産株式会社的20名中国研修生逃到宿舍附近一处地势较高的地方，不一会儿，公司专务佐藤充跑过来，喊「海啸来了」，随 后带她们跑到更高处的神社避难。安顿好研修生后，佐藤充又冲回宿舍楼，试图找寻妻女。但宿舍楼很快被海啸淹没，佐藤充再也没有跑出来。
「我们看到他被迫得无路，在房顶上左跑右跑，最后还是被卷到水里。一开始还扑腾了两下，很快人就不见了，」衣亚男哽咽説。研修生张军燕用相机拍摄下 了整个过程，视频里，女孩们尖叫、哭喊「快跑啊」，却只能看救命恩人佐藤充被海啸无情吞噬。张军燕説，佐藤充的妻女到现在也下落不明。
20研修生「一个都没少」
灾难发生当晚，大雪严寒，研修生们无处可去。佐藤充的哥哥、佐藤水産社长佐藤仁不顾自己家被冲走的悲伤，一晚上都在找山上的朋友借房子，暂时将研修 生们安置进去。平时负责佐藤水産研修生管理的杜华説：「灾害发生第二天，佐藤仁见到我的第一句话就是：杜华，20个人一个都没少！」
冈青株式会社的社长和部长也没有忘记中国研修生，他们第一时间开车将5名研修生送到附近山上。「当晚，社长给我们找了一间山顶的温泉旅馆避难。那时，他们连自己的孩子都还没找到，」来自大连的曹晶説，等情况稳定后，她们又被转移到当地最大的避难所，和几十名中国同胞团聚。
在避难所，研修生们一日可以保证有两到三餐。随受灾信息被外界更多人知道，赈灾车辆越来越多，补给也逐渐充足。「我实在不敢想像如果没有这些人的帮助我们会怎样，」曹晶説，在这场与时间赛跑的逃生中，这些当地人对每一个生命的同等尊重，将让得到救助的研修生感动一生。
-- 新華社Wednesday, March 16, 2011
What Happens During a Nuclear Meltdown?
| March 15, 2011 | Scientific American Magazine
How does a nuclear reactor work?
Most nuclear reactors, including those at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi generating station, are essentially high-tech kettles that efficiently boil water to produce electricity. They rely on harnessing nuclear fission—the splitting of an atom into two smaller atoms, which also yields heat and sends neutrons flying. If another atom absorbs one of those neutrons, the atom becomes unstable and undergoes fission itself, releasing more heat and more neutrons. The chain reaction becomes self-sustaining, producing a steady supply of heat to boil water, drive steam turbines and thereby generate electricity.
How much electricity does nuclear power provide in Japan and elsewhere?
With 54 nuclear reactors generating 280 billion kilowatt-hours annually, Japan is the world's third-largest producer of nuclear power, after the U.S. and France, according to data from the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Fukushima Daiichi station, which has been hit hard by the March 11 earthquake, houses six of those reactors, all of which came online in the 1970s.
Worldwide, nuclear energy accounts for about 15 percent of electricity generation; Japan gets nearly 30 percent of its electricity from its nuclear plants. The U.S. produces more nuclear power overall, but nuclear constitutes a smaller share of its energy portfolio. About 20 percent of U.S. electricity comes from nuclear power plants, making it the third-largest source of electricity in the country after coal (45 percent) and natural gas (23 percent).
What fuels a nuclear reactor?
Most nuclear reactors use uranium fuel that has been "enriched" in uranium 235, an isotope of uranium that fissions readily. (Isotopes are variants of elements with different atomic masses.) Uranium 238 is much more common in nature than uranium 235 but does not fission well, so fuel manufacturers boost the uranium 235 content to a few percent, which is enough to maintain a continuous fission reaction and generate electricity. Enriched uranium is manufactured into fuel rods that are encased in metal cladding made of alloys such as zirconium.
Reactor No. 3 at the Fukushima Daiichi station runs on so-called mixed oxide (MOX) fuel, in which uranium is mixed with other fissile materials such as plutonium from spent reactor fuel or from decommissioned nuclear weapons.
How do you turn off a nuclear reaction?
Sustained nuclear fission reactions rely on the passing of neutrons from one atom to another—the neutrons released in one atom's fissioning trigger the fissioning of the next atom. The way to cut off a fission chain reaction, then, is to intercept the neutrons. Nuclear reactors utilize control rods made from elements such as cadmium, boron or hafnium, all of which are efficient neutron absorbers. When the reactor malfunctions or when operators need to shut off the reactor for any other reason technicians can remotely plunge control rods into the reactor core to soak up neutrons and shut down the nuclear reaction.
Can a reactor melt down once the nuclear reaction is stopped?
Even after the control rods have done their job and arrested the fission reaction the fuel rods retain a great deal of heat. What is more, the uranium atoms that have already split in two produce radioactive by-products that themselves give off a great deal of heat. So the reactor core continues to produce heat in the absence of fissioning.
If the rest of the reactor is operating normally, pumps will continue to circulate coolant (usually water) to carry away the reactor core's heat. In Japan the March 11 earthquake and tsunami caused blackouts that cut off the externally sourced AC power for the reactors' cooling system. According to published reports, backup diesel generators at the power plant failed shortly thereafter, leaving the reactors uncooled and in serious danger of overheating.
Without a steady coolant supply, a hot reactor core will continuously boil off the water surrounding it until the fuel is no longer immersed. If fuel rods remain uncovered, they may begin to melt, and hot, radioactive fuel can pool at the bottom of the vessel containing the reactor. In a worst-case meltdown scenario the puddle of hot fuel could melt through the steel containment vessel and through subsequent barriers meant to contain the nuclear material, exposing massive quantities of radioactivity to the outside world.
How can a meltdown be averted?
The Japanese plant's operators have made a number of attempts to cool the reactors, including pumping seawater into the reactor core to replenish the dwindling cooling fluid. The Tokyo Electric Power Company has also injected boric acid, an absorber of neutrons, into the reactors.
How does this incident compare with Chernobyl or Three Mile Island?
At present, three of the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi station are seriously crippled. Units 1 and 3 have experienced explosions that destroyed exterior walls, apparently from buildups of hydrogen gas produced by the zirconium in the fuel rods reacting with coolant water at extremely high temperatures—but the interior containment vessels there thus far seem to be intact. A third explosion was reported March 15 at reactor No. 2, and the situation there appears direr. Pressure in the suppression pool—a doughnut-shaped water vessel below the reactor—dropped after the explosion, indicating that the containment vessel had been compromised.
In reactor Nos. 1, 2 and 3 water levels dropped enough to leave the fuel assemblies temporarily uncovered; those fuel rods are presumed to have suffered damage. And a fire at a pool storing spent fuel rods at dormant reactor No. 4 is posing additional hazards to the few workers remaining at the site.
Japanese officials initially rated the incident a level 4, an "accident with local consequences," on the seven-tier International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES), but Princeton University physicist Frank von Hippel told The New York Times that the Fukushima Daiichi situation is "way past Three Mile Island already." Three Mile Island, the highest-profile U.S. nuclear accident, was classified level 5—an "accident with wider consequences".
At that Pennsylvania nuclear station in 1979 a cooling malfunction combined with worker error led to a partial meltdown—about half of the reactor core melted and formed a radioactive puddle at the bottom of the steel pressure vessel. The vessel remained intact, but some radiation did escape from the plant into the surrounding environment.
The 1986 Chernobyl accident was far more devastating; it rates as a 7, or a "major accident," on the INES scale. In Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union, a power surge caused an explosion in one of the plant's reactors, releasing huge doses of radioactive fallout into the air. Two plant workers died within hours, according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 28 more died in the following months from radiation poisoning. The fallout from Chernobyl was widespread, and the health effects of the disaster are difficult to quantify. A report from the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation found that 6,000 individuals who were under the age of 18 in Ukraine, Belarus or Russia at the time of the disaster had by 2006 contracted thyroid cancer, "a substantial fraction" of whom likely contracted the disease due to radiation exposure.
Why It Happened?
Monday, March 14, 2011 | Scientific American Magazine
Around 3 P.M. local time on Friday, there was a massive earthquake about 100 miles off the east coast of northern Honshu Island, Japan. Initially calculated to be a magnitude 8.9, it has since been upgraded to at least a magnitude 9.0, which means that this earthquake released around 8,000 times more energy than the magnitude 6.3 shock that rocked Christchurch last month. Either way, this is the biggest instrumentally recorded earthquake Japan has ever been shaken by in human history, and is one of the biggest ever detected: it's up there with the 2004 Boxing Day earthquake, and like that earthquake it generated a large – and extremely damaging – tsunami. It's difficult to believe some of the pictures from the Honshu coast as the wave hit.
Tectonic Setting
Japan is situated in a complicated plate boundary region where three subduction zones meet. Two of these subduction zones run parallel to the east coast of Japan. To the south, the Philippine plate is being subducted beneath the Eurasian plate, whilst to the north, the Pacific Plate is being subducted beneath the North American plate (yes, really: the not-particularly active boundary between the North American plate and the Eurasian plate appears to run through Siberia, down the western edge of the Sea of Okhotsk and through Japan). With all of these tectonic plates jostling against each other, it is no surprise that Japan has a long history of catastrophic earthquakes.
The Earthquake
Friday's earthquake strongly registered on seismometers around the world, with seismic waves rippling across the North America and maxing out instruments as far away as the United Kingdom. By combining data from the whole global network of seismometers, a picture of how the earth deformed in the earthquake, represented by a beachball-like focal mechanism, can be calculated. The focal mechanism for this earthquake, shown below, indicates compression, along either a shallowly west-dipping or a steeply east-dipping fault.
Focal mechanism for the main shock, and cross-sections of the two possible fault orientations
This is consistent with motion on the subduction interface, or 'megathrust'. Further modelling of the seismometer data has also produced an estimate of both the length of the rupture (at least 300-400 km) and the amount that it moved (10-20 metres or more). GPS stations in Japan - installed to measure the slow build-up of elastic strain in the crust between big earthquakes - show most of Eastern Honshu moving several metres to the east as a few centuries worth of that elastic strain - which pushes the crust in Japan westwards and upwards - was released over the space of a few minutes.
Horizontal movement of the crust in Japan during the March 11 earthquake, recorded by GPS stations (from http://supersites.earthobservations.org/sendai.php)
Even though the initial rupture was 150 km behind the trench where the plate boundary intersects with the seafloor, it seems to have propagated most or all of the way to the surface, producing large, sudden vertical movement of the sea-bed and the overlying water and generating a tsunami.
The rupture appears to have propagated to the sea-floor, generating a tsunami.
If you're wondering why there is some still some confusion over exactly how large this earthquake was, it's because - rather counter-intuitively - measuring the magnitude of large earthquakes is actually more difficult than it is for smaller earthquakes. To estimate earthquake magnitudes, you look at the amplitude of the seismic waves it generates: the larger the amplitude of the waves, the larger the magnitude of the earthquake that produced them. However, in very large earthquakes, this relationship starts to break down, at least for the frequencies of seismic waves that are generally used to produce the quick magnitude estimates: they 'saturate', or stop increasing in amplitude as the earthquake magnitude does. This means that the magnitude estimates for the largest earthquakes will be somewhat underestimated until seismologists look at lower frequency seismic waves, which are less susceptible to this saturation effect.
Friday's earthquake has been followed by a huge swarm of aftershocks (at my last count, there have been more than 250 aftershocks of greater than magnitude 5, and aroun 30 of greater than magnitude 6), as the crust around the rupture zone responds to the large stresses applied by the sudden movement of the subduction thrust. However, there was also some noticeable seismic activity before the main shock: on Wednesday, there was a magnitude 7.2 earthquake in the same region as today's earthquake, followed by a number of smaller magnitude 5 quakes, and three magnitude 6-6.1 events. These were mainly clustered in a region just to the northeast of Friday's larger rupture, and within the much larger cloud of aftershocks In hindsight, these earthquakes were foreshocks of today's main event.
Map showing location of seismicity on 9th and 10th of March (yellow circles) compared to March 11's ~M9 (largest orange circle) and the first 24 hours of aftershocks (other orange and red circles).
However, there was no way of telling this in advance: there is nothing particularly "foreshock-y" about foreshocks beyond the fact that they end up being smaller in magnitude than the main shock they precede. In fact, if you plot the last few days of earthquakes over time, you can see that, on Wednesday and Thursday, seismic activity seemed to be dying down again in the wake of Wednesday's 7.2 quake.
Magnitude of earthquakes (M5-6=small yellow circles, M6-7 orange circles, M7+ large red circles) off the coast of Honshu, 9-14 March.
The Tsunami
Very little of the devastation resulting from this earthquake was from the initial shaking. This is partly because of Japan's stringent building codes. But mainly because any damage from the seismic waves that sent skyscrapers in Tokyo swaying was dwarfed by the impact of the 10 metre tsunami that hit the Japanese coast less than an hour later. Although 40% of Japan's coastline is faced with concrete seawalls designed to fend off tsunamis, they proved ineffective in this case: the wave was just too high, and eventually the seawalls were topped.
The real destructive power of tsunamis lies not in excessive height, but in their wavelength. A normal wave rises, breaks on the beach, and is done within seconds. A tsunami wave rises, breaks, and continues to break for several minutes or more. It is a wave that just keeps on coming…and coming, and if it is higher than beach (or seawall) level, it will encroach inland for kilometres, sweeping all before it.
Satellite view of the coast around Sendai before (left) and after (right) the tsunami of 11 March. Source: NASA Earth Observatory (http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=49630)
As well as travelling east to strike Japan, the tsunami propagated out into the Pacific ocean, triggering tsunami alerts in Hawaii and the whole west coast of the Americas, from Alaska to Patagonia. For Hawaii and the Western US at least, the damage was minor: the passage of the tsunami was obvious, but the impact of wave heights of 1-2 metres was further reduced by the fact that they arrived close to low tide. However there was more serious damage - and some casualties - in northern California and southern Oregon, where the tsunami and the shape of the coast conspired to produce larger waves.
The Warning for Cascadia
Despite decades of preparation for an earthquake like this, Japan was still overwhelmed by the scale and violence of Friday's earthquake, and the tsunami it generated. This may be partly due to the fact that seismologists underestimated the size of the earthquake that this subduction zone could generate: they were preparing for an earthquake of around magnitude 7.5 – more than 150 times less powerful. The prediction of future earthquake risk is based on incomplete and far-too-short records of past earthquake activity, so it is no surprise that the planet can still give us nasty seismic surprises, as faults that have been quiet or inactive over historical time periods show us the full range of their behaviour over geological timescales.
Over the other side of the Pacific there are similar gaps in our knowledge, but we do know enough to understand that the real risk to the western US and Canada is not from tsunamis generated across the other side of the Pacific, but ones generated on this side. North of the San Andreas Fault, the plate boundary that runs along the west coast is a subduction zone very similar to the ones that run along the coast of Japan, and just as capable of generating large earthquakes. The last time the Cascadia subduction zone ruptured in earnest was around 300 years ago, and geological evidence suggests that the quake itself (probably more than a magnitude 8.5) and the tsunami it generated were very similar in scope and scale to what struck Japan last Friday. And, by any measure, western North America is less aware, less prepared and less protected than Japan was. There is no way to predict exactly when an earthquake will occur, but it is a 100% certainty that eventually the Cascadia subduction zone will rupture. The only question is over the willingness of the societies that live on top of it to face this tectonic inevitability.
Keeping Updated
The ever-growing community of geologists writing blogs and sharing information via Twitter are a great source of information for those who want to go beyond the media coverage. For example, if you really want to understand what's going on at the nuclear reactors at Fukushima, take a few minutes to listen to the interviews fellow geology blogger Evelyn recorded with her nuclear engineer father. Callan Bentley's Mountain Beltway blog deserves a special mention for early, in-depth and comprehensive coverage of the geological story – a comprehensive list of other contributions can be found here.
Nuclear Experts Explain Worst-Case Scenario at Fukushima Power Plant
[BOILING-WATER REACTOR SYSTEM: The system's inverted lightbulb primary containment vents below through pipes to a pressure-suppression torus. Once that torus breaches due to overpressure, the secondary containment is all that separates the released radioactive steam from the outside environment.
Image: http://www.nucleartourist.com/]
The type of accident occurring now in Japan derives from a loss of off-site AC power and then a subsequent failure of emergency power on-site. Engineers there are racing to restore AC power to prevent a core meltdown
| March 12, 2011 | Scientific American MagazineFirst came the earthquake, centered just off Japan's east coast, near Honshu. The added horror of the tsunami quickly followed. Now the world waits as emergency crews attempt to stop a core meltdown from occurring at the Fukushima Daichi nuclear reactor, already the site of an explosion of the reactor's housing structure.
At 1:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time on March 12, American nuclear experts gathered for a call-in media briefing. Whereas various participants discussed the policy ramifications of the crisis, physicist Ken Bergeron provided most of the information regarding the actual damage to the reactor.
"Reactor analysts like to categorize potential reactor accidents into groups," said Bergeron, who did research on nuclear reactor accident simulation at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico. "And the type of accident that is occurring in Japan is known as a station blackout. It means loss of off-site AC power—power lines are down—and then a subsequent failure of emergency power on-site—the diesel generators. It is considered to be extremely unlikely, but the station blackout has been one of the great concerns for decades.
"The probability of this occurring is hard to calculate, primarily because of the possibility of what are called common-cause accidents, where the loss of off-site power and of on-site power are caused by the same thing. In this case it was the earthquake and tsunami. So we're in uncharted territory, we're in a land where probability says we shouldn't be. And we're hoping that all of the barriers to release of radioactivity will not fail."
Bergeron explained the basics of overheating at a nuclear fission plant. "The fuel rods are long uranium rods clad in a [zirconium alloy casing]. They're held in a cylindrical-shaped array. And the water covers all of that. If the water descends below the level of the fuel, then the temperature starts going up and the cladding bursts, releasing a lot of fission products. And eventually the core just starts slumping and melting. Quite a bit of this happened in TMI [Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania], but the pressure vessel did not fail."
Former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) member Peter Bradford added, "The other thing that happens is that the cladding, which is just the outside of the tube, at a high enough temperature interacts with the water. It's essentially a high-speed rusting, where the zirconium becomes zirconium oxide and the hydrogen is set free. And hydrogen at the right concentration in an atmosphere is either flammable or explosive."
"Hydrogen combustion would not occur necessarily in the containment building," Bergeron pointed out, "which is inert—it doesn't have any oxygen—but they have had to vent the containment, because this pressure is building up from all this steam. And so the hydrogen is being vented with the steam and it's entering some area, some building, where there is oxygen, and that's where the explosion took place."
Bergeron discussed the specific power plant in question, the General Electric design BWR Mark 1. "This is a boiling-water reactor. It's one of the first designs ever developed for commercial reactors in this country, and it's widely used in Japan as well. Compared to other reactors, if you look at NRC studies, according to calculations, it has a relatively low core-damage frequency. (That means the likelihood that portions of the fuel will melt.) And in part, that's because it has a larger variety of ways to get water into the core. So they have a lot of options, and they're using them now—using these steam-driven turbines, for example. There's no electricity required to run these steam-driven turbines. But they still need battery electricity to operate the valves and the controls.
And just what is that worst-case scenario? "They're venting in order to keep the containment vessel from failing. But if a core melts, it will slump to the bottom of the reactor vessel, probably melt through the reactor vessel onto the containment floor. It's likely to spread as a molten pool—like lava—to the edge of the steel shell and melt through. That would result in a containment failure in a matter of less than a day. It's good that it's got a better containment system than Chernobyl, but it's not as strong as most of the reactors in this country."
Finally, Bergeron summed up the events so far: "Based on what we understand, the reactor has been shut down, in the sense that all of the control rods have been inserted—which means there's no longer a nuclear reaction. But what you have to worry about is the decay heat that's still in the core—that will last for many days.
"And to keep that decay heat of the uranium from melting the core, you have to keep water on it. And the conventional sources of water, the electricity that provides the power for pumps, have failed. So they are using some very unusual methods of getting water into the core, they're using steam-driven turbines—they're operating off of the steam generated by the reactor itself.
"But even that system requires electricity in the form of batteries. And the batteries aren't designed to last this long, so they have failed by now. So we don't know exactly how they're getting water to the core or if they're getting enough water to the core. We believe, because of the release of cesium, that the core has been exposed above the water level, at least for a portion of time, and has overheated. What we really need to know is how long can they keep that water flowing. And it needs to be days to keep the core from melting.
"The containment, I believe, is still intact. But if the core does melt, that insult will probably not be sustained and the containment vessel will fail. All this, if it were to occur, would take a matter of days. What's crucial is restoring AC power. They've got to get AC power back to the plant to be able to control it. And I'm sure they're working on it."
The Big Shake-up & Tsunami in Japan of 11 March 2011
[USGS COMMUNITY INTENSITY MAP: This map shows the intensity of shaking and damage at 14:46 local time near the east coast of Honshu, Japan's main island, on March 11, 2011. Indigo-blue represents weak to light shaking and no damage. Red represents violent to extreme movement with heavy to very heavy damage. Oranges represent very strong to severe shaking causing moderate damage.
Image: USGS]
Below are some more facts and figures relating to the causes and consequences of the world's fifth-largest earthquake since 1900.
Magnitude, according to USGS: 9.0
Speed at which the Pacific Plate is smashing into the Japanese island arc: 8.9 centimeters (3.5 inches) per year
Speed at which the San Andreas Fault in California is slipping: about 4 centimeters per year
Size of the rupture along the boundary between the Pacific and North American plates: 290 kilometers (180 miles) long, 80 kilometers across
Approximate length of Honshu island: 1,300 kilometers
Years since an earthquake of this magnitude has hit the plate boundary of Japan: 1,200
Duration of strong shaking reported from Japan: three to five minutes
Greatest distance from epicenter that visitors to the USGS Web site reported feeling the quake: About 2,000 kilometers
Distance that the island of Honshu appears to have moved after the quake: 2.4 meters
Change in length of a day caused by the earthquake's redistribution of Earth's mass: 1.8 microseconds shorter
Normal seasonal variation in a day's length: 1,000 microseconds
Depth of the quake: 24.4 kilometers
Range of depths at which earthquakes occur in Earth's crust: 0 – 700 kilometers
Top speed of a tsunami over the open ocean: About 800 kilometers per hour Normal cruising speed of a jetliner: 800 kilometers per hour
Length of warning time Sendai residents had before tsunami hit: eight to 10 minutes
Number of confirmed foreshocks to the main shock: four
Magnitudes of the confirmed foreshocks: 6.0, 6.1, 6.1 and 7.2
Number of confirmed aftershocks: 401
Worldwide average annual number of earthquakes over magnitude 6.0: 150
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
香港辅仁文社社长杨衢云烈士
杨衢云（1861年－1901年1月10日），名飞鸿，字肇春，别号衢云，福建海澄（今厦门）人。在广东东莞出生，中国近代革命家，1890年于香港创立最早的革命组织“辅仁文社”，并为“香港兴中会”首任会长，1895年负责策划第一次广州起义。
生平简介
杨衢云年幼即随其父到香港，在香港圣保罗书院接受教育。14岁在香港进入船厂学习机械，因工业意外失去右手三指，于是改习英文。毕业后任教员，之后转任招商局总书记，及沙宣洋行副经理。
1890年（即光绪十六年，另一说法为1892年）与谢缵泰等十余人组织“辅仁文社”（又称“辅仁书报社”，英文名称直译为“中华爱国互助改进会”），由杨衢云任社长，1892年3月13日正式设总部于香港上环百子里一号二楼，由杨衢云、谢缵泰两人共同领导，一共有成员17人，有姓名可考者除杨衢云、谢缵泰外，还有周超岳、黄永商、陈芬、黄国瑜、罗文玉、刘燕宾、温宗尧、胡干芝、陆敬科等。文社的宗旨 是“开通民智”、“尽心爱国”、“进行中国大众的革新”，“驱除满族鞑虏”（一说为“尽忠报国”），提倡学习西方，爱国维新，秘密进行革命活动。文社购买新学书报，讨论中国的发展及改革路向，主张推翻满清，建立合众政府。杨衢云同时亦加入志在反清之洪门。1895年1月孙中山到达香港，经孙的好朋友，即辅仁文社成员尢列撮合；将孙于1894年11月在檀香山设立之“兴中会”与“辅仁文社”合并，并在香港成立兴中会总会。合并后的组织名为“兴中会”，杨衢云被选为首任会长（当时亦称“总办”或“百理玺天德”，即英语 President ），孙中山为秘书，在香港中环成立一商号“乾亨行”作为掩饰。
1895年10月26日，兴中会在广州发动武装起事（即史称第一次广州起义），由杨衢云在香港任总指挥。由于事机不密，为清政府所获悉。陆皓东等七十多人被捕，杨及孙同被通缉。香港政府受清政府压力，迫令二人离境，于五年内不准入境。杨衢云经新加坡，前往南非约翰尼斯堡，之后再转往日本，并辗转在各地发展兴中会。孙中山则于1895年在伦敦为清廷所绑架，事件成为国际新闻，孙亦因而闻名国际。
1900年1月，杨衢云辞去兴中会会长一职，改由孙中山出任。同年杨从日本抵达香港，正值清朝发生义和团运动，孙中山决定乘机发动军事起义。当时孙中山在台北建立起义指挥中心，命郑士良等人于三洲田（今属深圳盐田）发动惠州起义，起义军曾一度发展至2万人，但在清政府的镇压下宣告失败。失败后杨衢云于年底返回香港，于上环结志街五十二号设私塾“辅仁文社”教授英文以养妻儿。1901年1 月10日杨衢云于中环结志街52号2楼寓所（其私塾）内被清廷派出之刺客陈林开枪刺杀并于翌日失救逝世，谢赞泰为 杨衢云安排下葬于跑马地香港坟场，并为杨衢云设计墓碑，碑上没留名字，只刻有编号6348，并以天圆地方概念设计，刻有青天白日图案，追封杨衢云的功迹， 并像征着杨衢云革命的精神。无名碑于 1901年12月23日建成。
杨衢云有三女一子，其子早殁。
无名碑下的英雄
在中国近代史中，最寂寂无闻的，要算是杨衢云（1861-1901）了。去年逝世的历史学家唐德刚如此评价杨衢云：“一部‘中国近代革命史’， 是应该从杨衢云开始写的。”（《晚清七十年》第五册）杨衢云是最早领导革命的香港人，为兴中会首任会长（第二任是孙文），但至今他在跑马地的墓碑上，仍只 刻着编号 “6328”，没有名字。他比孙文大5年，生于广东虎门，幼随父来港定居，任英文教师和招商局书记长多年，绝对称得上是香港人。1890年，他与友人在港成立辅仁文社，并出任会长。名为文社，实为议论大清朝政的基地。1895年初，刚在檀香山成立兴中会的孙文，回港寻找同道，结果二人一拍即合， 辅仁文社和兴中会随即合并，以“兴中会”为会名。
名为兴中会，实质“一切皆是辅仁文社的延续”（唐德刚语）。可以想像，孙氏之所以能在回港短短几个月内，便动员到足够人力物力财力，於同年进行起义，正因有杨的文社在香港打好“基础”。杨氏和辅仁文社於革命之初的重要性显而易见，但相关记载和研究却如凤毛麟角，原因何在？
中港台史家一般认为，近代中国最早组成的革命团体，是在檀香山成立的兴中会。既被捧上“神坛”,排山倒海的学术论文自然以兴中会为研究对象，辅仁文社只能靠边站了。幸好还有唐德刚、韦慕庭（美历史学家）等少数学者，反对以兴中会为革命滥觞。
唐德刚指出，辅仁文社比兴中会更早成立，所提出的“推翻满清、创立合众政府、选举伯理玺天德” 等主张，却跟兴中会几乎一样。而且杨开始搞革命时，孙 文尚未决心推翻帝制 ——1894年，他还亲赴天津，意图上书李鸿章，可见思想仍属温和。虽然进言书有否送达李鸿章是个谜，但如唐德刚的戏言：“如果李鸿 章英雄识英雄而重用了孙文，中山不也就是清政府的‘能臣’了吗？”孙文也说过“予少年主张，谓汉人作皇帝，亦可拥护……杨衢云（因而）与予大斗，几至动 武，谓非民国不可”，正好印证唐的观点。
生平资料错误多
杨衢云不受史家重视，从史书中一些失实记载可见一斑。最离谱的，是说他于“教室”被刺杀，事实上他是在家中被刺杀的。为何连死于何处也弄错？盖不少民 国前史的书籍，在讲述杨衢云生平时，都只是引用相同资料：如冯自由的《革命逸史》（1945年出版）和尤列（四大寇之一）撰写的《杨衢云略史》，而错误正由此起。
冯自由是兴中会知名人物，后成为孙文的机要秘书，所写的民国前革命史被认为详实可靠，常为史家所用。但冯关于杨的记述却是二手资料。他这样写杨的死： “清吏……暗买凶徒陈林，刺杀之于教室”。尤列的说法也差不多：“凶手陈林、突然入校、枪击公于教授室中。”辗转抄传，几乎所有记载都指杨死于教室。 辛亥革命网
其实早在 2001 年，当杨衢云逝世百周年时，其后人杨兴安在《杨衢云纪念特辑》中已指出，结志街52号二楼是杨的寓所，杨被刺时正在家中以私人补 习形式教授英文。杨兴安是杨衢云堂侄（杨衢云堂弟杨拔凡之子），去年致群剧社上演关于杨衢云事迹的话剧《无名碑》，正是由他编剧。纪念特辑更正了不少延续 多时的杨氏生平资料（如杨的本名并非杨飞鸿），并摘录了杨拔凡于1955 年写下的《杨衢云家传》，总算略为填补了这位革命老祖宗的历史空白。
历史论述存偏颇
背景资料有误，改正过来就是了；但若为了维护某人在历史上崇高的形象，而刻意贬低其他人物至“配角”地位，那就不是可以轻易扳过来的、有政治意图的历史论述了。
杨衢云比孙文更早拥抱共和，却一直“妾身未明”，难免教人联想是这种“操作”下的牺牲品。蒋介石前妻陈洁如在她的回忆录提到一则轶事：蒋介石为取得一 张杨衢云坐于中央、孙文站于后排的团体照，愿意付出100万元，原因是“如果给人看见我们堂堂中华民国国父竟居于随从的地位，那才真叫人难堪”。
一张照片犹容不下，何况白纸黑字的史书？冯自由在记述首次起义前，杨、孙两派争拗由谁担任兴中会会长一职时，就有维护和美化孙文之嫌——“总理不欲因 此惹起党内纠纷,表示谦退,衢云由是当选”。在冯的笔下，两派争位，变成“孙总理”为顾全大局而让位给杨；就算冯氏不是刻意贬低杨，但这种说法，却已被不 少史书直接挪用。
杨衢云也许不是个性情沉着的人，而且因为早殁，难以断定他是否一个优秀的革命领袖；但他对革命的付出，岂能被抹杀？期待更多研究香港历史的本地学者牵头，为杨衢云讨回一个“名份”。
影视形象
2009年，香港致群剧社公演话剧《无名碑》讲述杨衢云之事迹。同年12月公映的电影《十月围城》，描写杨衢云被清政府杀手刺杀的历史，并由香港歌星张学友饰演杨衢云。
Friday, March 11, 2011
香港辛亥革命烈士：杨衢云
刊于 2010 年 1 月 11 日《经济日报》阅读版
如果不是《十月围城》，相信没几个香港人知道杨衢云（张学友饰）这个人。去年逝世的史学家唐德刚，曾如此评价这位香港革命烈士：「一部『中国近代革命史』，是应该从杨衢云开始写的。」（《晚清七十年》台版第五册，180页）事实上，假若他和孙文于1895年重阳发起的首场革命成功的话，杨氏作为兴中会 会长，便顺理成章成为新政府的「伯理玺天德」（President）。奇怪的是，如此响当当的革命人物，为何被湮没于历史洪流之中呢？
《十月围城》第一幕，杨衢云在中环遭刺客枪杀身亡。电影赫然提醒了缺乏历史感的香港观众：19世纪末、20世纪初连场推翻满清的革命活动里，香港人曾 经是举足轻重的一分子。除了杨衢云，当时的富商李煜堂、李纪堂（电影里的李玉堂是两者混合体）、律师何启等，无论在财力、政治关系网等方面，都曾为革命作 出贡献。直到百多年后的今天，这些为推翻千年帝制而抛头颅、洒热血（或慷慨解囊）的香港本土革命先驱，仍然几近默默无闻，到底是何因由？
无名碑下被湮没的英雄
杨衢云（1861-1901）是最早领导革命的香港人，又是兴中会第一任会长（第二任为孙文），但至今他在跑马地的墓碑上仍只刻著编号「6328」，没刻上名字。
杨氏比孙文大五年，祖籍福建海澄（今厦门杏林），生于虎门，幼随父在港定居，后任英文教师和招商局书记长多年，绝对称得上是香港人。1890年，他与 谢缵泰等友人在港成立「辅仁文社」，并出任会长。名为文社，实为议论大清朝政基地。五年后，即1895年初，刚在檀香山成立兴中会的孙文，带著由华侨募得 的万多元款项回港，寻找同道，结果跟杨氏一拍即合，兴中会和辅仁文社随即合并，以「兴中会」为会名。
虽名为兴中会，实质除名字外，「一切皆是辅仁文社的延续」（唐德刚语）。可以想像，孙氏之所以能在回港短短几个月后，便动员到足够人力、物力、财力，于同年进行首次起义，正因为有杨的文社在香港打好起义「基础」。
杨衢云和辅仁文社于革命之初的重要性，显而易见，但有关他和文社的记载和研究，却如凤毛麟角，原因何在？也许因为，中港台史家一般认为，近代中国最早 组成的革命团体，是在檀香山成立的兴中会；既被捧上「神枱」，排山倒海的学术论文，自然以兴中会为研究对象，辅仁文社只能靠边站了。
幸好还有唐德刚、李敖、韦慕庭（美历史学家）等少数学者，反对以兴中会为革命「滥觞」。唐德刚曾指出，辅仁文社比兴中会更早成立，所提出的「推翻满清、创立合众政府、选举伯理玺天德」等主张，却跟兴中会几乎一样。（《晚清七十年》第五册）而且杨开始搞革命时，孙文尚未决心推翻帝制──1894年，他还亲赴天津，意图上书李鸿章，可见思想仍属温和。虽然进言书有否送达李鸿章仍是个迷，但如唐德刚的戏言：「如果李鸿章英雄识英雄而重用了孙文，中山不也就是清政府的『能臣』了吗？」。孙文亦说过：「予少年主张，谓汉人作皇帝，亦可拥戴，以倒外族满清为主体。杨衢云与予大闹，几至用武，谓非民国不可。衢云死矣，衢云死矣，予承其志，誓成民国，帝制自为，予必讨之。」，正好印证唐的观察。
错误百出的生平资料
杨氏不受史家重视，从史书中关于他的一些失实记载，亦可见一斑。最失实离谱的错，是说杨氏于「教室」被杀，事实上他是在家中被杀。为何连死于何处也弄 错？盖不少早期历史家者讲述杨氏生平时，都会引用相同资料，如冯自由的《革命逸史》（1945年出版，去年由北京新星出版社再版），和尢列（「四大寇」之 一）于杨殁后撰写的《杨衢云略史》。而错误正源于此。
冯自由是兴中会知名人物，后成为孙中山机要秘书，所写的民国前革命史被认为详实可靠，常为史家所用。但冯关于杨的记述，却是二手资料。他这样写杨的 死：「清吏…暗买凶徒陈林，刺杀之于教室」。尢列的说法也差不多：「凶手陈林、突然入校、枪击公于教授室中。」辗转抄传，几乎所有记载都指杨死于教室。
其实早于2001年，当杨衢云逝世百周年时，其后人杨兴安已在《杨衢云纪念特辑》中指出，结志街52号二楼是杨的寓所，杨被刺时正在家中以私人补习形 式教授英文。杨兴安是杨衢云堂侄（杨衢云堂弟杨拔凡之子），去年致群剧社上演关于杨衢云事迹的话剧《无名碑》，正是由他编剧。纪念特辑更正了不少延续多时 的杨氏生平资料（如杨的本名并非杨飞鸿，杨的父亲名为杨清水），并摘录了杨拔凡于 1955年写下的《杨衢云家传》，总算略为填补了这位香港革命老祖宗的历史空白。
有政治意图的历史论述
背景资料有误，改正过来就是了；但若是为了维护某个历史人物的崇高形象，而刻意贬低其他人物至「配角」地位，那就不是可以轻易扳过来的、有政治意图的历史论述了
杨衢云比孙文更早拥抱共和，却一直「妾身未明」，难免教人联想是这种政治「操作」下的牺牲品。蒋介石前妻陈洁如在回忆录提到一件轶事：蒋介石为取得一 张杨衢云坐于中央、孙中山站于后排的团体照，愿意付出100万元，原因是「如果给人看见我们堂堂中华民国国父竟居于随从的地位，那才真叫人难堪」。（《陈 洁如回忆录》，第31章，照片见下图）
一张照片犹容不下，何况白纸黑字的史书？譬如冯自由在记述首次起义前，杨、孙两派争拗由谁担任兴中会会长一职时，就有维护和美化孙中山之嫌──「总理 不欲因此惹起党内纠纷，表示谦退，衢云由是当选」（《革命逸史》）。在冯的笔下，两派争位，变成「孙总理」为顾全大局，让位给杨；就算冯氏不是刻意贬低 杨，但这种说法，却已被不少史书直接挪用。
杨衢云也许不是个性情沉著的人，而且因为早殁，难以断定他是否一个优秀的革命领袖；但他对革命的付出，岂能被抹杀？期待更多研究香港历史的本地学者牵头，为杨衢云讨回一个「名份」。（图片为《十月围城》剧照）
延伸阅读
《革命逸史》（再版，全三册），冯自由，北京：新星出版社；2009。
《十月围城》，潘丽琼、林喆改编，香港：快乐书局，2009。
《一生难忘──孙中山在香港的求学与革命》，李金强著，香港：孙中山纪念馆，2008。
《青山一发──从孙文崛起看大清日落》，陈舜臣著、许锡庆译，广西师范大学出版社，2007。
《革命先驱──基督徒与晚清中国革命的起源》，梁寿华，香港：宣道出版社，2007。
《杨衢云纪念特辑》，杨拔凡、杨兴安等，杨衢云纪念特辑小组，2001。
《晚清七十年》（全五册），唐德刚著，台北：远流出版社，1998。
《陈洁如回忆录》，陈洁如著，台北：传记文学出版社，1992。
墓碑牌介绍杨衢云烈士革命事迹
这位革命先驱的无字碑位于香港黄泥涌道香港坟场内，康乐及文化事务署计划为墓碑设置说明牌，介绍他的革命事迹。
古物谘询委员会成员丁新豹接受《政府新闻网》访问时说：「革命能够成功，不可能只靠一个人的力量，一定要很多人献出宝贵生命、付出很大努力，革命才可成功；杨衢云就是这样的一个人，他是革命前期非常重要的领导人物。」
成立辅仁文社
丁新豹指出，杨衢云原籍福建，在香港念书和成长，与香港关系密切。
杨衢云在香港圣保罗书院毕业后留校教书，也当过不同职业，包括招商局和沙宣洋行副买办。他与志同道合的朋友眼见中国积弱，希望国家富强，遂于1892年成立辅仁文社，属香港早期的论政团体。他其后与孙中山相识。
1895年孙中山在夏威夷成立兴中会，回港与杨衢云商议后，把辅仁文社与兴中会合并，成为当时重要的革命组织，杨衢云更出任兴中会会长。同年兴中会发起首场革命，即乙未广州起义，可惜革命失败，杨衢云经南洋出走南非，并在当地宣扬革命思想。
印制导览地图
1899年他到日本把会长一职授予孙中山。翌年惠州起义因后援不继失败，革命同志四散，杨衢云坚持留守香港，并以教授英语为生。1901 年他在上环结志街被清廷派人暗杀，成为革命烈士。经好友陈少白、谢缵泰多番奔走，其遗体得以下葬香港坟场，但为免坟墓遭破坏，碑上并未刻上名字。
丁新豹表示，根据资料，孙中山在日本收到杨衢云的死讯非常哀伤，写信给杨衢云好友谢缵泰表示哀悼，并在日本举行哀悼大会。「虽然辛亥革命是10年后的事，但要论它的成功，应把前期革命烈士如杨衢云的努力计算在内。」
古物古迹办事处馆长（教育及宣传）丘刘羣有表示，说明牌介绍杨衢云的革命事迹，目的是让巿民有机会认识这位革命先驱的生平，说明牌可望在本年中装置完成。除了说明牌，康文署亦会印制导览地图，列出香港坟场内杨衢云和其他历史人物墓地的位置，方便公众凭吊。
辛亥革命百周年：杨衢云烈士墓重光
「杜鹃啼碧血，春雨泣黄花。 我到跑马地对面的坟场，以鲜花一束，奠于先烈杨衢云墓下，凭吊唏嘘。怀想当日杨衢云创造革命，推翻清廷之伟举烈迹，不幸壮志未酬，魂销远道；今则荒凉片 石，碣靡残碑，白马素车，路经其地者，又焉知此荒冢垒垒中，有此谋革命之先烈，推翻满清专政，而遭暗杀，牺牲殉国，殁世而寂寞无闻之英雄哉。
……
其后孙中山先生秉其遗志，完成革命，肇造民国，一般高坟垒柯，无大小皆曰先烈。而此箪篓为国牺牲之先烈。独付阙如，忍令此一苍凉片石，仍埋葬于荒冢垒垒中，宁不慨然？」
—— 杨百诚﹕《凭吊先烈杨衢云的无字碑》刊香港《大晚报》民國四十九年（一九六○）三月二十九日
杨百诚先生，该报附介「乃先烈令从第」，即俗说堂弟，先烈与先生同一位祖父；先烈另一位堂弟为近年读者所悉的杨拔凡先生，两位份属同胞，去年其子编就《杨衢云家传》，自行斥资出版，属于世上首册珍贵史书。
诚如引文中一句话晕开无限感慨﹕一般高坟垒柯，无大小皆曰先烈。笔者曾实地访查广州烈士路陵区及兴中会坟场，即使无南京中山陵的气派，有些尚存，有些文革期间破毀，但都灵聚一处，尚飨到来者的心香和崇敬。
百年「荒凉片石」
而百年「荒凉片石」的故事又如何？
多得《十月围城》，一记冷枪倒下了张学友饰演的人，几无多少港人识君的「香港仔」杨衢云，才忽然入驻人们脑海。他现仍矗立黄泥涌道「香港坟场」（食环署管 理）内的小丘上的不名墓，百年风霜雨雾，尚幸无变。但无变并不等于百分百香港人的国士级英烈遗骸，今天还在；历史上起码有三四次迁葬的可能和机会。最早一 次，由谢缵泰一九二七年在报章公开呼吁礼葬回穗的东山黄花岗烈士陵区；继后，有被吴灞陵敬称「革命前辈」的赵超，去信予他一九五○年《华侨日报》上在长写 杨衢云的专栏，说在烈士南路的兴中会坟场「仍馀之地尚广」，迁葬「衢老」，「此地颇适宜」，问「可否就近约冯自由胡毅生诸君相商决定后，弟可去函陈寿田、 黄大汉诸兄也」。然后叹息﹕「惜陀城今若此！……至碑文，则不可不预定耳……」
而在公开呼吁讨论之外，更早的是家人采取了行动，《家传》 上说﹕「武汉起义，孙文由欧返国经港，家姊（即衢云胞姊）遣衢云次女丽霞（时锦霞已出嫁）访孙伯于英皇酒店，道候外，略言家况并及父恤葬事。孙向说云﹕上 头（指南京）之事，尚未知如何，且待看如何，再为办理。」明显是问得早了些许，但世局急变，到出家为尼的幼女秀霞于香港与其时「香港佛学会」的陈静涛居 士，提及「这一事情已经得到政府当局的批准」，却又到日本侵华，太平洋战争爆发，事又搁置。
其实在迁葬之外，还有人提出过补刻碑字（指原物加工）。
在那关头，在报界和文化界均有名声的吴灞陵做了发言﹕
「我认为，无论迁也好，补刻碑字也好，都要维持一个原则，就是要保存『隐名立石』的史迹。为了要使后来者，晓得杨烈士当年为国家民族牺牲的环境如何恶劣。我以 为现在那个无字碑一定要好好的保存，因为这是革命时代的重要史迹，假使把无名碑毀了，改成一座普通人物般的碑石，还有什么意义？后之览者，还有甚么观 感？」（同刊于该报专栏，一九五○年十月卅日）
这合情理的提出，一路被接受到现在。一九六九年十二月廿六日《香港早报》访问杨拔凡，他亦 「反对无字墓碑刻上名字 认为变动失革命历史性」（报题），认为「如必要时可在墓侧，另设碑文记载杨氏生前事迹」。秉承高见，笔者十一年前在本版连接两天发表芜文，亦紧跟认为﹕已 回归祖国怀抱，恢复国土身分的香港，大有理由于杨先烈的墓旁，立下一块不亚于菲律宾爱国志士厘沙路医生（按即菲国国父黎刹，该匾曾镶于德己立街某大厦）的 志念铜匾，安抚百年孤寂英灵。
特首办只回覆：「收到来信」
可十一年匆匆已过，其间最念兹在兹的还数原百年祭小组理事中的 堂侄兴安，我们合作每一次的争取。争取到中西区现任议会副主席的民选议员陈捷贵，受邀往中环大会堂高座常设的海德公园讲座，讲要继「中山史迹径」之后，筹建「杨衢云史迹径」。惜「杨径」未见成事，区会反而将明明是纪念辅仁文社遗址或杨衢云事迹的百子里活化计划，莫名其妙偷换成甚么「百子里纪念园」，为何 「中山纪念公园」不敢名「上环纪念公园」？兴安在心淡之馀，百十祭当天，仍向现场记者派发致古谘会主席陈智思的信，他更在早三天的报章专访中，表示自「一 九九九年开始去信特首董建华、古迹办、湾仔区议会，恳请在碑旁竖立『杨衢云之墓』牌。但除特首办回覆『收到来信』，馀皆没有下文。」他的心淡，是可以理解 的。分别在，他淡出，笔者则认为时机已成熟，现在才是开始。有到来采访的友人和传媒记者常问同一个问题﹕你为何那么热衷干这事？潜台词是「非亲非故，为乜？」笔者朗然答道﹕杨衢云这香港仔了不起，他使人民挺起了腰骨，过问国家的命运；四十岁一生，不冤枉。很值得白发冒现的吃了六十四年米粮的我，为他再奔跑多一回。所以，这回百十祭，定下了策略，决不单止于「拜神」，英魂常寂寂，何劳君揖拜。要乘势做好「墓侧立牌」这桩小事情。
于好年份成事
今年辛亥革命百年，是个好年份。笔者向当局进言，假如两岸四地以至全球华人，普天同庆，薄海欢腾，香港做成此小事，则本地辛亥革命纪念活动，「有个好开始」。这回特首办最着紧，密密书信往返；古迹办也实在拖不下去（注），最近回了信，信题大字标示﹕
烈士墓碑立牌
六个字。接信后一阵晕眩，清醒过来，绕室细思，要怎样感谢大家才是之际，那边厢电话响了，有记者跟进来电，问到这事，向她念了一段﹕
我们为此激动非常，香港终于珍惜她的「大历史」中的高标人物，重视烈士墓存在逾百年，是本地不必他移之罕见文物。英烈国魂，永驻我城。（《就当局决定为杨衢云烈士墓碑立牌 公开感谢信》节录 2011.2.22）
原来，一九六九年黄之栋力保杨衢云墓，不受开路移动之时，报上早已标题：（《明报晚报》 1969.12.26 ）
斯人一去不复回 烈士佳城应永存
2011.2.24 受邀成稿
注：二○○四年十一月廿二日，《南华早报》特访报道古迹办决定翌年（二○○五年）为烈士墓立牌。一拖六、七年。
[ 文：吴萱人 《明報》编辑：黄静 ]
陈伊敏 — 为何同病不相怜？ (明报 2011年3月9日)
最近，苹果集团行政总裁乔布斯抱病出山发布 iPad 2，全球苹果粉丝为之欣喜若狂。但与此同时，苹果在中国供应链的中毒员工们却抱病找医院，求助无门。他们因长期采用有机溶剂「正己烷」拭擦苹果手提电话 iPhone，中毒症状又复发了。
对 于这些中毒工友， 「当地的苏州第五人民医院拒绝给工友提供后续治疗，公司又不同意送他们去外地的医院覆检及治疗。」「大学师生监察无良企业行动」发言人透露，2 月28 日于苏州与中毒工人见面后了解到 09 年入院治疗的工人中，至今有 22 名已重回「联建（中国）科技有限公司」工作，并陆续出现复发的象。最早病发、且病情最严重的 24 岁女工万秋英近月左边手、腿酸痛，另一工人郭瑞强近两个月亦手心出汗、双腿乏力、容易疲累。
工人透露，虽然车间已经安装抽 风系统，但替换正己烷的有机溶剂—— 「丙酮」及「异丙醇」仍具一定刺激性或毒性，可致头痛、晕眩，具过敏甚或致癌等慢性损害，而工厂提供予工人的防护装备明显不足，只有每天一张薄薄的纸质口 罩，不足以过滤溶剂挥发时的气体。工人除向苹果要求承担监管责任外，亦于2 月24 日向联建提出三点诉求，包括公司道歉；第三方医院复检；后续治疗。但至今未得到联建令人满意的回覆。
为苹果代工的苏州台资 电子厂联建 2009 年底因采用有机溶剂「正己烷」拭擦苹果手提电话 iPhone，以致工人集体中毒。沉默一年多，苹果已于今年 2 月15 日发布的《供应商责任进展报告》，承认联建为其供应商，并于2 月22 日派员向中毒工人了解情况，同日，工人向乔布斯撰写公开信，惟苹果至截稿时仍未正面回覆工人的诉求。
「大学师生监察无良企 业行动」从工人口中获悉，联建派遣工问题严重，联建 16,000 至 18,000 名员工中，近半数由劳务公司外派。派遣工并无合同在手，首3 个月亦缺工作岗位津贴。在联建附近的3 家劳务公司亦称，联建已停止直接招工，新员工更需交 50 至 70 元中介费予劳务公司。这种派遣工的劳动关系不但严重损害工人应有权益，中毒工人亦担忧一旦劳动关系完结，其工伤治疗费用即不获承担。
在 中毒工人一个个倒下之前，在富士康惨剧重演之前， 「大学师生监察无良企业行动」发起联署并逐渐引起关注。他们并要求： 联建立即安排中毒工人进行治疗，支付住院工人生活及营养品费用补贴、为车间工人提供有效的劳护用品；苹果需监督联建停止使用派遣工，并为劳务派遣之工人转 正，苹果需提高单价，以使联建得以支付可供工人体面生活的基本工资。目前工人每周强迫加班 18 小时，有违《劳动法》每月不得加班超过 36 小时之规定。
除了大陆，苹果 iPad 触控面板在台湾的供应商胜华科技环中厂有员工过劳死。苹果出色的产品性能，真不该令粉丝们背负道德的枷锁。