The best people give you memories my friend 我的朋友, 最好的人給你無限的回憶 1/2 a century of friendship, casual lunch with Rosaryhill School HK classmates from Toronto Canada at our home in San Francisco on 5-23-23

Cathay Pacific Airways has a large number of racists anti-Chinese & China flight attendants 国泰三名作恶乘务员被开除后，国泰乘务员工会要造反了，香港卫视和明报都报道了更多内情，事件比想象要严重
https://youtu.be/oseBYIlihVc
1、国泰空乘歧视内地旅客之后，那三个始作俑者已经被开除了，现在开始主动给毛毯了，还挨个问，而且使用英语，粤语普通话三声进行播报。
但是香港卫视报道了一个消息，是一个前国泰空姐说的 图 ”她又爆料称，国泰从不在内地招聘乘务员。该网民表示，自己是国泰航空唯一一批内地空姐。大学毕业后，因其就读的中国民航大学与国泰航空有合作项目，可以送毕业生去国泰实习工作一年，所以她在2008至2009年间入职国泰成为一名空服员。她并在帖文上载多张自己身着国泰空姐制服的照片，证明自己的确曾在国泰航空就职。

该网民爆料说：“我之前飞过的每一班，只要有内地人。厨房里必有嘲笑的言语。已经成为常态。”她又表示，国泰在入职培训时，没有提过对内地乘客的歧视问题，但几乎有内地乘客的航班上，都会收获空服员背后或鄙视或者阴阳怪气，学舌嘲笑内地人英语不行的话语，“每一班都有，哪怕他们知道我就是内地人。”

作为为数不多的内地空姐，该网民指，她在飞行途中会被乘务长要求去专门回复内地乘客需求，“因为他们觉得内地人很麻烦。事情多、不懂讲英语。他们说的最多的就是：哎。快去，你的朋友们又在call light（按呼唤铃）了，然后就是嘲笑。”
该网民又指出，国泰是不从内地招聘乘务员的。

她称，作为国际航空公司，为了便于服务目的地国家语言旅客，国泰会在菲律宾、马来西亚、日本、印尼、韩国各个国家进行乘务员招聘，却唯独不会在内地招聘空乘。而自己作为实习员工，也只能做满一年就必须离开。她又提到，虽然不招聘内地空乘，但为了服务说普通话的旅客，国泰却会从台湾地区进行招聘，十分讽刺。

2、聊
A、国泰作为香港最大航空公司，不能成为反华，反国家的窝点，柔性反华也不行。所以本期我有几个观点 B、国泰需要改组，根据现有股权占比： 英国太古集团 45%，中国国际航空 30%，卡塔尔航空 9.99%，香港特别行政区政府 (以Aviation 2020 Limited名义持有[53]) 6.08%，剩下是其他。 中国国航，香港政府，卡塔尔航空共计45%，已经和太古集团相当，然后再想办法进行操作，必须让国航或者香港政府成为最大股东，最好能够控股； 然后在公司层面进行反思，防止被别有居心的人夹带私货。 C、开除所有的反国家的人士，香港有很多爱国爱港的人，从这里面进行招聘，肯定能招聘满，实在不行从内地招聘也可以。 我们必须让那些坏人生计都面临威胁才行，否则根本不足以震慑住她 D、现在还传出，被开除的人满不在乎，那有什么用，在其他的岗位上继续做了危害香港的事情。 现在根据香港明报的报道，国泰工会要造反，国泰空中服务员工会今日（24日）向成员发出的内部电邮称： “工会对国泰空中服务员现时需面对众多不实指控及网上传言感痛心；根据「机舱服务指引」，如空中服务员在未经同意下被乘客拍摄及录影，可向乘客提出删除有关内容，如遭拒绝可通知机长及机舱服务经理，公司政策表明对不守规乘客采取「零容忍」态度，会采取一切可行措施确保员工处理相关事件时得到全面支持。本期望国泰会支持员工保护自己及提供相关指引，遗憾最终得到令人伤感的消息。” E、所以国泰的问题很大，这个毛毯根本无用，解决不了问题

Sichuan Newspaper Video: Cathay Pacific Airlines flight attendants tried to shame Chinese passengers not able to say blanket in English got fired. 川報視頻：國泰航空空姐試圖羞辱不會說英語的中國乘客被解雇了
https://rumble.com/v2ps00w-cathay-pacific-airways-flight-attendants-got-fired.html
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRE47roA/?t=1

Cathay Pacific sacks flight crew for making fun of passengers for their English. “If you cannot say blanket in English, you cannot have it. Carpet is on the floor. Feel free if you want to lie on it,” 國泰航空解僱機組人員取笑乘客的英語. “如果你不能用英語說毯子, 你就不能擁有它。地毯在地板上. 如果你想躺在上面，請隨意.”

The War in Ukraine Was Provoked. The Biden administration’s insistence on NATO enlargement has made Ukraine a victim of misconceived and unachievable U.S. military aspirations, writes Jeffrey D. Sachs. 烏克蘭戰爭被挑起. 薩克斯寫道，拜登政府堅持北約擴大使烏克蘭成為美國軍事抱負的錯誤設想和無法實現的犧牲品。

George Orwell wrote in 1984 that “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

Governments work relentlessly to distort public perceptions of the past. Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022.

In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations.

Recognizing that the war was provoked helps us to understand how to stop it. It doesn’t justify Russia’s invasion. A far better approach for Russia might have been to step up diplomacy with Europe and with the non-Western world to explain and oppose U.S. militarism and unilateralism.

In fact, the relentless U.S. push to expand NATO is widely opposed throughout the world, so Russian diplomacy rather than war would likely have been effective.

Two Main Provocations

The Biden team uses the word “unprovoked” incessantly, most recently in Biden’s major speech on the first-year anniversary of the war, in a recent NATO statement, and in the most recent G7 statement.

Mainstream media friendly to Biden simply parrot the White House. The New York Times is the lead culprit, describing the invasion as “unprovoked” no fewer than 26 times, in five editorials, 14 opinion columns by NYT writers, and seven guest op-eds.

[Related: Caitlin Johnstone: Unprovoked!]

There were in fact two main U.S. provocations.

The first was the U.S. intention to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia in order to surround Russia in the Black Sea region by NATO countries (Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria Turkey, and Georgia, in counterclockwise order).

The second was the U.S. role in installing a Russophobic regime in Ukraine by the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014. The shooting war in Ukraine began with Yanukovych’s overthrow nine years ago, not in February 2022 as the U.S. government, NATO, and the G7 leaders would have us believe.

Biden and his foreign policy team refuse to discuss these roots of the war. To recognize them would undermine the administration in three ways.

First, it would expose how the war could have been avoided, or stopped early, sparing Ukraine its current devastation and the U.S. more than $100 billion in outlays to date.

Second, it would expose Biden’s personal role in the war as a participant in the overthrow of Yanukovych, and before that as a staunch backer of the military-industrial complex and very early advocate of NATO enlargement.

Third, it would push Biden to the negotiating table, undermining the administration’s continued push for NATO expansion.

Check the Archives

George Kennan in 1966. (Warren Leffler, Library of Congress)
The archives show irrefutably that the U.S. and German governments repeatedly promised to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not move “one inch eastward” when the Soviet Union disbanded the Warsaw Pact military alliance.

Nonetheless, U.S. planning for NATO expansion began early in the 1990s, well before Vladimir Putin was Russia’s president. In 1997, national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski spelled out the NATO expansion timeline with remarkable precision.

U.S. diplomats and Ukraine’s own leaders knew well that NATO enlargement could lead to war. The U.S. scholar-statesman George Kennan called NATO enlargement a “fateful error,” writing in The New York Times that,

“Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”

President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Perry considered resigning in protest against NATO enlargement. In reminiscing about this crucial moment in the mid-1990s, Perry said the following in 2016:

“Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia. At that time, we were working closely with Russia and they were beginning to get used to the idea that NATO could be a friend rather than an enemy … but they were very uncomfortable about having NATO right up on their border and they made a strong appeal for us not to go ahead with that.”

In 1998, William Burns, then the U.S. ambassador to Russia and now the C.I.A. director, sent a cable to Washington warning at length of grave risks of NATO enlargement:

“Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”

Ukraine’s leaders knew clearly that pressing for NATO enlargement to Ukraine would mean war. Former Zelensky adviser Oleksiy Arestovych declared in a 2019 interview “that our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”

During 2010-2013, Yanukovych pushed neutrality, in line with Ukrainian public opinion. The U.S. worked covertly to overthrow Yanukovych, as captured vividly in the tape of then U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt planning the post-Yanukovych government weeks before the violent overthrow of Yanukovych.

Nuland makes clear on the call that she was coordinating closely with then Vice President Biden and his national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, the same Biden-Nuland-Sullivan team now at the center of U.S. policy vis-à-vis Ukraine.

After Yanukovych’s overthrow, the war broke out in the Donbass, while Russia claimed Crimea. The new Ukrainian government appealed for NATO membership, and the U.S. armed and helped restructure the Ukrainian army to make it interoperable with NATO. In 2021, NATO and the Biden administration strongly recommitted to Ukraine’s future in NATO.

In the immediate lead-up to Russia’s invasion, NATO enlargement was center stage. Putin’s draft NATO-Russia Treaty (Dec. 17, 2021) called for a halt to NATO enlargement.

Russia’s leaders put NATO enlargement as the cause of war in Russia’s National Security Council meeting on Feb. 21, 2022. In his address to the nation that day, Putin declared NATO enlargement to be a central reason for the invasion.

Historian Geoffrey Roberts recently wrote:

“Could war have been prevented by a Russian-Western deal that halted NATO expansion and neutralised Ukraine in return for solid guarantees of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty? Quite possibly.”

In March 2022, Russia and Ukraine reported progress towards a quick negotiated end to the war based on Ukraine’s neutrality. According to Naftali Bennett, former prime minister of Israel, who was a mediator, an agreement was close to being reached before the U.S., U.K. and France blocked it.

While the Biden administration declares Russia’s invasion to be unprovoked, Russia pursued diplomatic options in 2021 to avoid war, while Biden rejected diplomacy, insisting that Russia had no say whatsoever on the question of NATO enlargement. And Russia pushed diplomacy in March 2022, while the Biden team again blocked a diplomatic end to the war.

By recognizing that the question of NATO enlargement is at the center of this war, we understand why U.S. weaponry will not end this war. Russia will escalate as necessary to prevent NATO enlargement to Ukraine. The key to peace in Ukraine is through negotiations based on Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO non-enlargement.

The Biden administration’s insistence on NATO enlargement to Ukraine has made Ukraine a victim of misconceived and unachievable U.S. military aspirations. It’s time for the provocations to stop, and for negotiations to restore peace to Ukraine.

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the U.N. Broadband Commission for Development. He has been adviser to three United Nations secretaries-general, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Sachs is the author, most recently, of A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism (2020). Other books include: Building the New American Economy: Smart, Fair, and Sustainable (2017) and The Age of Sustainable Development, (2015) with Ban Ki-moon.

喬治·奧威爾在 1984 年 寫道：“誰控制了過去，誰就控制了未來；誰控制了現在，誰就控制了過去。”

政府不遺餘力地扭曲公眾對過去的看法。關於烏克蘭戰爭，拜登政府多次謊稱烏克蘭戰爭始於2022年2月24日俄羅斯對烏克蘭的無端進攻。

事實上，這場戰爭是由美國挑起的，美國主要外交官在戰爭爆發前幾十年都預料到了，這意味著戰爭本可以避免，現在應該通過談判來製止。

認識到戰爭已被挑起有助於我們了解如何制止它。這並不能證明俄羅斯的入侵是正當的。對俄羅斯來說，更好的方法可能是加強與歐洲和非西方世界的外交，以解釋和反對美國的軍國主義和單邊主義。

事實上，美國無情地推動擴大北約在全世界遭到廣泛反對，因此俄羅斯的外交手段而非戰爭可能更有效。

兩大挑釁

拜登團隊不斷使用“無端”一詞，最近一次是在拜登 在戰爭一周年的 重要講話中，在最近的北約聲明中，以及最近的 七國集團聲明中。

對拜登友好的主流媒體簡直是在白宮鸚鵡學舌。《 紐約時報》 是罪魁禍首，在 5 篇社論、14 篇紐約時報作家的觀點專欄和 7 篇客座專欄文章中，將入侵描述為“無端”的次數不少於 26 次。

[相關： 凱特琳約翰斯通：無端！]

事實上，美國的挑釁主要有兩個。

首先是美國有意將北約擴大到烏克蘭和格魯吉亞，以北約國家（烏克蘭、羅馬尼亞、保加利亞、土耳其和格魯吉亞，按逆時針順序）在黑海地區包圍俄羅斯。

第二個是美國在 2014 年 2 月暴力推翻烏克蘭親俄總統維克托·亞努科維奇 (Viktor Yanukovych) 後在烏克蘭建立了一個反俄政權。烏克蘭的槍戰始於九年前亞努科維奇被推翻，而不是在 2022 年 2 月，因為美國政府、北約和 G7 領導人會讓我們相信。

拜登和他的外交政策團隊拒絕討論這些戰爭根源。承認他們會在三個方面破壞政府。

首先，它將揭露戰爭本可以如何避免或提前停止，從而使烏克蘭免於目前的破壞，並使美國免於迄今超過 1000 億美元的支出。

其次，這將暴露拜登作為推翻亞努科維奇的參與者在戰爭中的個人角色，在此之前作為軍工聯合體的堅定支持者和北約東擴的早期倡導者。

第三，它將把拜登推上談判桌，破壞政府繼續推動北約擴張的努力。

檢查檔案

1966 年的喬治·凱南。（沃倫·萊弗勒，國會圖書館）檔案 無可辯駁地表明，在蘇聯解散華約軍事同盟時，美國和德國政府多次向蘇聯總統米哈伊爾·戈爾巴喬夫承諾，北約不會“東移一英寸” 。

儘管如此，美國的北約擴張計劃早在 1990 年代就開始了，遠早於弗拉基米爾·普京 (Vladimir Putin) 成為俄羅斯總統。1997 年，國家安全專家茲比格涅夫·布熱津斯基 (Zbigniew Brzezinski) 非常精確地闡明了 北約擴張的時間表。

美國外交官和烏克蘭本國領導人深知北約東擴可能導致戰爭。美國學者兼政治家喬治·凱南稱北約東擴是一個“致命錯誤”，他在 《紐約時報》上寫道 ，

“這樣的決定可能會激起俄羅斯輿論中的民族主義、反西方和軍國主義傾向；對俄羅斯民主的發展產生不利影響；恢復東西方關係的冷戰氣氛，將俄羅斯的外交政策推向我們所不喜歡的方向。”

比爾克林頓總統的國防部長威廉佩里考慮辭職以抗議北約東擴。在回憶 2016 年 90 年代中期的這個關鍵時刻時，佩里 在 2016 年說道：

“真正讓我們誤入歧途的第一個行動是北約開始擴張，將東歐國家納入其中，其中一些與俄羅斯接壤。當時，我們正與俄羅斯密切合作，他們開始習慣北約可以成為朋友而不是敵人的想法……但他們對北約就在他們的邊界上感到非常不舒服，他們強烈呼籲讓我們不要繼續這樣做。”

1998 年，時任美國駐俄羅斯大使、現任中央情報局局長的威廉·伯恩斯 (William Burns)向華盛頓發送了一封電報， 詳細警告北約東擴的嚴重風險：

“烏克蘭和格魯吉亞加入北約的願望不僅觸動了俄羅斯的神經，還引發了對該地區穩定後果的嚴重擔憂。俄羅斯不僅意識到包圍圈和削弱俄羅斯在該地區影響力的努力，而且擔心不可預測和無法控制的後果將嚴重影響俄羅斯的安全利益。專家告訴我們，俄羅斯特別擔心烏克蘭在加入北約問題上的強烈分歧，以及許多俄羅斯族裔社區反對加入北約，這可能會導致重大分裂，引發暴力或最壞的情況是引發內戰。在這種情況下，俄羅斯將不得不決定是否進行干預；俄羅斯不想不得不面對的決定。”

烏克蘭領導人清楚地知道，向烏克蘭施壓北約東擴將意味著戰爭。澤倫斯基前顧問奧列克西·阿雷斯托維奇在2019 年的一次採訪中宣稱， “我們加入北約的代價是與俄羅斯開一場大戰。”

在 2010-2013 年期間，亞努科維奇推動中立，以符合烏克蘭輿論。美國暗中推翻亞努科維奇，正如 時任美國助理國務卿 維多利亞紐蘭 和美國大使杰弗裡派亞特在暴力推翻亞努科維奇前幾周策劃後亞努科維奇政府的錄音帶中所生動地記錄的那樣。

努蘭德在電話中明確表示，她正在與當時的副總統拜登和他的國家安全顧問傑克沙利文密切協調，同一個拜登-努蘭德-沙利文團隊現在處於美國對烏克蘭政策的中心。

亞努科維奇被推翻後，頓巴斯爆發戰爭，俄羅斯宣稱擁有克里米亞。烏克蘭新政府呼籲加入北約，美國武裝並幫助重組烏克蘭軍隊，使其能夠與北約協同作戰。2021 年， 北約 和 拜登政府 再次強烈承諾烏克蘭在北約的未來。

在俄羅斯入侵的直接導火線中，北約東擴成為焦點。普京的 北約-俄羅斯條約草案 （2021 年 12 月 17 日）呼籲停止北約東擴。

俄羅斯領導人在 2022 年 2 月 21 日的俄羅斯國家安全委員會會議上將北約擴大列為戰爭原因 。普京當天在 向全國發表講話時 宣布，北約擴大是入侵的主要原因。

歷史學家杰弗里羅伯茨 最近寫道：

“俄羅斯與西方達成協議，阻止北約擴張並使烏克蘭中立，以換取對烏克蘭獨立和主權的堅實保障，是否可以阻止戰爭？很有可能。”

2022 年 3 月，俄羅斯和烏克蘭報告稱，在烏克蘭保持中立的基礎上通過談判迅速結束戰爭方面取得了進展。 據擔任調解人的以色列前總理納夫塔利·貝內特稱，在美國、英國和法國阻止之前，協議已接近達成。

雖然拜登政府宣布俄羅斯的入侵是無端的，但俄羅斯在 2021 年尋求外交選擇以避免戰爭，而拜登拒絕外交，堅稱俄羅斯在北約東擴問題上沒有任何發言權。俄羅斯在2022年3月推動外交，而拜登團隊再次阻止外交結束戰爭。

通過認識到北約東擴問題是這場戰爭的核心，我們理解了為什麼美國的武器裝備不會結束這場戰爭。俄羅斯將在必要時升級，以防止北約擴大到烏克蘭。烏克蘭和平的關鍵是通過基於烏克蘭中立和北約不擴大的談判。

拜登政府堅持北約東擴至烏克蘭，使烏克蘭成為美國軍事野心的錯誤設想和無法實現的犧牲品。現在是停止挑釁、談判恢復烏克蘭和平的時候了。

杰弗裡·D·薩克斯 (Jeffrey D. Sachs) 是哥倫比亞大學的大學教授和可持續發展中心主任，他於 2002 年至 2016 年在該中心領導 地球研究所 。他還是聯合國可持續發展解決方案網絡的主席和聯合國寬帶委員會的委員發展。他曾擔任三位聯合國秘書長的顧問，目前擔任聯合國秘書長安東尼奧·古特雷斯手下的可持續發展目標倡導者。薩克斯最近著有新外交政策：超越美國例外主義(2020)。其他書籍包括：建設新美國經濟：智能、公平和可持續（2017 年）和 可持續發展時代， (2015) 與潘基文。

G7 are the same nations that robbed China in 1900 have the same wet dreams to rob China again. They are commission salesmen for Military Industrial Complex, the war machines G7 是那些在 1900 年搶劫中國的國家，它們同樣夢想著再次搶劫中國。他們是軍工園區、戰爭機器的佣金推銷員

New Chinese Ambassador to the United States Xie Feng: I Have Come Here to Safeguard the Interests of China and to Promote China-U.S. Exchanges and Cooperation

Cathay Pacific sacks flight crew for making fun of passengers for their English. “If you cannot say blanket in English, you cannot have it. Carpet is on the floor. Feel free if you want to lie on it,” 國泰航空解僱機組人員取笑乘客的英語。 “如果你不能用英語說毯子，你就不能擁有它。地毯在地板上。如果你想躺在上面，請隨意，”

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/cathay-pacific-apologises-sacks-flight-crew-for-making-fun-of-passengers-for-their-english

The airline fired three flight attendants involved after an internal investigation, CEO Ronald Lam said.

In Hong Kong, the trend of worshipping English (Western Moon Worshippers) and looking down on Mandarin is bound to disappear

Cathay Pacific can’t just apologise every time, but should rectify heavily, establish rules and regulations, and stop the unhealthy trend from the root

The words and deeds of the flight attendants hurt the feelings of compatriots in Hong Kong and the mainland and destroyed Hong Kong’s traditional culture and values of respect and courtesy

国泰航空作为一家国内航空公司，在成都到香港这样的国内航班上，空乘不仅不提供普通话服务，还歧视不说英语、粤语的乘客，简直匪夷所思。在这趟航班上针对不说英语不说粤语的人，那基本就是针对内地乘客。原因可能在于，国泰航空工作人员对于内地的不友好态度，多年来并未根除。

黑暴期间，瘫痪机场运行、禁锢内地记者、殴打内地游客、烧伤员警……在暴力乱港行动中，国泰航空纵容员工、阳奉阴违。其公司员工不但直接参与暴力乱港，更在航班上宣扬个人激进的政治主张，泄露乘客资讯，暴露出极大的安全隐患。黑暴期间，国泰航空被曝有3000多名员工参与反中乱港的游行活动。该公司员工在网络上泄露香港警队人员的航班行程资讯，妄图让他人去骚扰警方。

香港大公报2019年11月11日发文，指控国泰继续纵容旗下空姐参加非法机场集会。报道称，10日下午，有多名身穿国泰制服的空姐，到接机大堂B区混杂在“激进分子”当中。其中有部分国泰空姐似乎与“乱港分子”十分熟稔，不时高声交谈，极力支持。报道称，有空姐向示威者说：“不瘫痪机场，那些人怎么会怕，你们要坐足3天，玩到饱！”“一定要搞衰旅游业，让旅客都不敢再来香港。”

​

No country could never repay old debts by keeps printing more money like a Ponzi scheme except US, when will it collapse? 沒有哪個國家像龐氏騙局那樣不停地印鈔票是永遠無法還清舊債的，除了美國，什麼時候崩潰?

More States in US are re-introducing the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Acts to stop the Yellow Perils from coming to America 美國更多州正在重新引入 1882 年的排華法案，以阻止黃禍進入美國