标题: '钓鱼岛是中国的' [打印本页] 作者: choi 时间: 9-28-2012 08:26 标题: '钓鱼岛是中国的' Today China Daily has a two-page advertisement (a common occurrence) in the print edition of New York Times, that under the byline of "China Watch and ends with “For more information about Diaoyu Islands, please visit: www.chinadaily.com.cn," reprints
My comment:
(a) The differences between the NYT and China Daily versions are:
(i) Five paragraphs in NYT are bold-faced, which serve as section headings. They starts with
“Diaoyu Islands, which * * *” (paragraph 1);
“Diaoyu Islands have long been * * *“;
“Chinese and foreign maps * * *”;
“Japan grabbed Diaoyu Island from China”;
“Diaoyu Island was returned to China after the Second World War.”
(ii) The publications in NYT are italicized.
(iii) The photo (as opposed to the map) in NYT does not carry a caption.
(iii) John Cary, A New Map of China from the Latest Authorities. London: John Cary (1811).
Historical Maps of Asia, 1801-1825. University of Alabama, undated. http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/histor ... asia2_1801-1825.htm
(iv) Joseph Hutchins Colton, Colton's China. New York: J.H. Colton and Company (1859).
Historical Maps of Asia, 1851-1860. http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/histor ... asia2_1851-1860.htm
(v) I can not find
A Map of China's East Coast: Hongkong to Gulf of Liao-Tung compiled by the British Navy in(1877).
(d) I am familiar with Taiwan. The advertisement lies in two key points:
(i) Under the heading “Japan grabbed Diaoyu Island from China” is this paragraph: “On April 17, 1895, the Qing court was defeated in the Sino-Japanese War and forced to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki and cede to Japan Taiwan along with Diaoyu Island.
Diaoyu Island was not mentioned in the treaty--plain and simple.
(ii) The heading “Diaoyu Island was returned to China after the Second World War” is simply wrong. Nowhere was the island(s) mentioned in that period of time, for there were many pressing matters.