p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 1 http://fangzhouzi.blog.hexun.com/83089444_d.html
[原创 2013-2-2 17:47:04]
傅苹今天在其博客上针对我的批评，贴了一篇澄清声明：
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/clarifying-the-facts-in-bend-not-break_b_2603405.html
傅苹声称，虽然我的批评是正确的，但是是根据福布斯不准确的报道，而不是根据
她新出的书，福布斯的报道后来更正了（意思是我的批评成了无的放矢）。
事实上，看过我对她的批评文章的就知道，虽然福布斯的报道引发了我的批评，但
是我的批评并非仅仅针对福布斯的报道，而是针对自2005年以来美国媒体对傅苹的各种
报道、傅苹的电台和视频访谈。我也看了傅苹新书放在google book上供试读的前面两
章。它们的内容都相当的一致。如果说福布斯的报道有错的话，那么此前美国媒体的其
他报道、傅苹接受电台和视频访谈亲口说的话，也全都错了。怪罪到福布斯上面是无济
于事的。
傅苹声称，“我没有说过或写过我是在劳改营；我说的是我在南航校园的一个大学
宿舍里生活了10年。中国儿童不被送去劳改营。我也没有说我是一个工厂工人。我说毛
要我们向农民、战士和工人学习。”（我的翻译）
就在10天前，傅苹接受谷歌的视频访谈时，还说整个文革十年她都生活在隔离区（
ghetto）（http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4vRtvswO8s 大约7分15秒开始）。NPR采访她时，说她十岁时被送到劳改农场（correctional farm）达10年之久，她有声有色地讲述如何从劳改农场带东西回来喂她妹妹的故事（ http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_988_Ping_Fu.mp3 15:50开始）。她好意思怪美国记者理解错了她的意思？
在此前她接受美国英文媒体的所有采访中，她从来说的是从9岁起她被迫在工厂工
作，整个文革期间没有受过教育，何时说过她在工厂的工作指的是“毛要我们向农民、
战士和工人学习”？（只在中文媒体上这么说过）那不就是当时每个中国学生都经历过
的学工、学农、学军吗？那不就是正常教育的一部分吗？怎么就成了她个人的苦难了？
是不是所有经历过文革的中国学生都可以向她学习，声称自己在十年间都在工厂工作，
没有受过学校教育？
傅苹声称，自1972年开始学校复课，她从此不知疲倦地学习。
文革期间的学校复课是从1968年就开始的。我们姑且相信南京学校比较特殊，迟至
1972年才复课吧。但是此前美国媒体的报道全说她整整10年没有上过学，例如《公司》
的报道（http://www.inc.com/magazine/20051201/ping-fu.html ），WeNews的报道（http://womensenews.org/story/women-in-science/100505/geomagics-ping-fu-rises-in-tech-firmament?page=0,1#.UQzHxqVkw1I ），NPR甚至说她十年间没进过教室http://www.npr.org/2006/03/18/5279787/ping-fu-recreating-the-world-in-all-its-dimensions )。《伊利诺校友杂志》则说她被关了10年，18岁时才被释放。（http://www.uiaa.org/illinois/news/illinoisalumni/0707_b.html ）
为什么所有这些采访过她的美国媒体全都搞错了？都认为她和其他中国学生不一样
，没受过任何正常教育？
傅苹声称，到现在她还记得她目睹了教师被红卫兵四马分尸。但是在看了我的分析
后，她承认我的分析比她的记忆靠谱。她说中国对这种虐杀有一种说法，而她为此做了
很多噩梦。
这意思是她承认把噩梦当成了现实。中国的说法是“五马分尸”，而不是四马分尸
。四马分尸是西方的酷刑。她小时候要做噩梦也应该梦的是五马分尸，而不是四马分尸
。更可能的是，她根据西方人的口味来编造四马分尸的故事。
傅苹承认她关于一胎化政策导致溺婴的论文从未发表过，也从未被《人民日报》报
道过。但是她说她记得在1982年读过《人民日报》一篇呼吁男女平等的社论。
此前她在接受美国媒体采访时不是一直在说她的论文一度引起了轰动，《文汇报》
《人民日报》都不点名地报道了其研究结果了吗？（听她亲口在NPR说：http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_988_Ping_Fu.mp3 18:00）既然她的论文从未发表过，报纸怎么知道她的研究成果？就算报纸有秘密通道知道其研究，所谓的报道居然就是一篇呼吁男女平等的社论？当时中国报纸呼吁男女平等那是一点都不奇怪的，她有什么理由相信那和她的论文有关？在其声明中她甚至不敢明确地说《人民日报》的社论与她的论文有关。
傅苹声称，所谓联合国因为其论文而制裁中国的说法是她在等护照时听人说的。
原来这么重大而离奇的事件，最多只是她的道听途说，然后就在美国媒体上到处宣
讲？
傅苹提到美国斯坦福大学学生Steven W. Mosher在1981年发表中国溺婴的研究，在
1984年出版了有关著作，并称那一年她正在等护照。她并提到《洛杉矶时报》曾报道说
Mosher成功游说布什政府不向联合国提供用于中国的资金。她认为这与她在国内的经历
一致。
1984年1月傅苹已经到美国了，为了跟Mosher扯上关系，怎么又改口说成那一年她
还在等护照？布什政府因为反对中国的人口政策而不向联合国人口基金会提供资金，那
是布什政府制裁联合国，和联合国制裁中国有什么关系？而且布什是1989年上台的，那
时候傅苹已在美国生活5年了，和她所谓被迫离开中国，又怎么能扯上关系？
Mosher在1980年左右曾在中国做人口学研究，他关于中国强迫人工流产的文章1981
年在台湾发表后，惹怒了中国政府，斯坦福大学于1983年以其违背研究伦理、从事非法
活动为由将他开除。他起诉斯坦福大学。这个案件在1984年——也就是傅苹到美国那一
年——非常有名，但现在已很少有人知道了。傅苹突然提起她刚到美国时很著名而现在
已鲜为人知的这个案子，让我不得不怀疑她当年正是根据Mosher的案子来捏造她的论文
故事，以此申请政治避难的。
傅苹声称，因为其论文政府要求她离开中国，但政府没有给特定期限。她通过在新
墨西哥大学的一个家庭朋友获得了学生签证。
在此前她接受采访时，全都说是她被中国政府要求在两周内离开中国。直到前天她
还在对福布斯记者这么说。最离谱的是她10天前接受谷歌的采访，这是她亲口说的：她
的论文引起了国际轰动，联合国对中国进行制裁，她被投入监狱关了三天，因为邓小平
问写论文的那个人现在怎么样了，她才被放出来，两周后警方交给她护照要她离开中国
。（http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4vRtvswO8s 从10：30开始）她的案子连邓小平都被惊动了，她两周就得到护照了——没错，这是她十天前对着镜头亲口说的。仅仅过了十天，她就改口说因为办护照极其困难，她被释放后等了一年多才拿到护照。这不是撒谎、骗人，是什么？
傅苹声称，在她上大学时英语是选修课，不是必修课，她从未学过英语，她的英语
水平是零，在抵达美国时只记得几个英语单词。
不再说只懂三个英语单词了？但是这仍是谎言。第一、从恢复高考开始，英语就是
大学的必修课，她不可能没上过英语课。第二、她的大学同班同学滋兰斋主人（傅苹承
认是她的大学同班同学）在批评傅苹的文章中说：“当年我们中文系1978级两个班，这
个人的英语水平算是高的，在快班。”第三、傅苹承认自己考上了南京大学比较文学硕
士专业的研究生，只是因故没有去上。研究生入学考试必考英语。
顺便说一下，傅苹声称其大学同班同学滋兰斋主人的文章是对我的回应，和她的说
法一致，这也是谎言，是欺骗不懂中文的美国读者。事实上，滋兰斋主人的文章是在揭
露她的谎言的：http://zilanzai.i.sohu.com/blog/view/253678027.htm
傅苹声称，她没有申请政治避难。
但是《星岛日报》去年2月份关于她参加美国国土安全部移民局举办的首届移民企
业家峰会，并获得美国移民局授予“杰出归化美国人”称号的报道明确说她是通过政治
避难获得绿卡的：“坐在主讲台上的四位移民企业家都有各自的故事，杰魔公司华裔董
事长傅苹出生在中国大陆，成长于文革时期，1983年来美国后申请了难民庇护得到身分
，之后创立了自己的公司。”（http://oversea.stnn.cc/NY/201202/t20120224_1707578.html ）如果傅苹不是通过政治避难获得美国绿卡，她又是通过什么途径在1987年之前获得绿卡的？其他途径都更不适合她。
傅苹声称批评不是诽谤，而是讲述或寻找真相的方式，她欢迎建设性的批评。
她一直在说假话，讲了很多年，现在发现谎言圆不了了，就用新的谎言掩盖，这如
何建设得起来？揭露一个说谎的人说谎，揭露一个骗人的人骗人，那不叫诽谤，那只是
指出事实真相。
2013.2.2.
和讯博客首发 | S**********b
发帖数: 3142 | 2 文革的性质怎样，但那都是过去的事了
但富婆的欺骗却是在满世界的晃来晃去
我看大家就集中将事实搞清楚最好
首先，她到底有没有phd？
她的公司有没欺骗？
以她一贯的做法，
在美国之后也一定不少烂事
你们成天就着文革来讲，
那些过去的事实，谁讲的清楚？
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: http://fangzhouzi.blog.hexun.com/83089444_d.html
: [原创 2013-2-2 17:47:04]
: 傅苹今天在其博客上针对我的批评，贴了一篇澄清声明：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/clarifying-the-facts-in-bend-not-break_b_2603405.html
: 傅苹声称，虽然我的批评是正确的，但是是根据福布斯不准确的报道，而不是根据
: 她新出的书，福布斯的报道后来更正了（意思是我的批评成了无的放矢）。
: 事实上，看过我对她的批评文章的就知道，虽然福布斯的报道引发了我的批评，但
: 是我的批评并非仅仅针对福布斯的报道，而是针对自2005年以来美国媒体对傅苹的各种
: 报道、傅苹的电台和视频访谈。我也看了傅苹新书放在google book上供试读的前面两
: 章。它们的内容都相当的一致。如果说福布斯的报道有错的话，那么此前美国媒体的其
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 3 保存一段傅苹的回应。这女人开始撒泼打滚了：
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/sad-but-not-broken_b_2603
Sad, But Not Broken
Posted: 02/01/2013 10:41 pm
Read more
Ping Fu , Bend Not Break , Bend Not Break Controversy , Memoirs , Books News
share this story
Submit this story
I am shocked, heartbroken and deeply saddened by the smear campaign that is
taking place against me personally and my book, Bend, Not Break, which was
published on Dec. 31, 2012.
It took six years of personal exploration and encouragement from friends to
summon up the courage to publicly share my life story. It is a story about a
life lived in two worlds: China and America. It tells of one person's
journey from nobody to somebody. It reflects how my past experiences
influenced who I am today and how I make decisions as an entrepreneur. It is
a story about resilience.
Bend, Not Break has received many wonderful reviews. Unfortunately, the book
generated an attack by an influential Chinese blogger, Mr. Fang Zhouzi, who
challenged me primarily based on an article that appeared on Forbes.com.
Fang's piece generated a storm of negative reviews and fierce criticisms. I
reached out to Forbes, asking them to correct a few facts and translation
errors. Since then, many personal attacks have been posted and continue to
appear on Amazon, Barnes and Noble's website, as well as on other articles
and the Wikipedia page about me. Most of these comments appear to be made by
people who copy and paste their remarks from previous postings.
I understand that although many Chinese people lived through the Cultural
Revolution as I did, everyone has their individual experience of what
happened during that decade, just as everyone has their individual
experience of their life today. Their life circumstances may very well be
different from mine; all experiences are equally valid.
Bend, Not Break is not a book about "poor Ping Fu." It is not my attempt at
garnering sympathy. Nor is it an attempt to bash China. I intend the book to
give people hope. I want to show readers who are stuck, facing difficulties
, and feeling obstacles are insurmountable, that there is a way to a better
life. I wrote this book not as a selfish, self-promotional act, but rather
as an act of generosity. I genuinely believe that my story has the potential
to help people -- young people, entrepreneurs, career mothers, and others
who might be struggling to come to terms with their own lives. Also, I wrote
this book for my daughter, who just turned 18 and went to college. I want
her to know the story in my own words.
Finally, I wrote Bend, Not Break because I didn't have a voice when I was
little. I was not free to express my opinions, and even my journals where I
recorded my private thoughts were burned. I was told repeatedly that I was a
nobody. In writing this book, I speak out on behalf of that frightened,
lonely young girl who had the courage to survive.
Ironically, this is exactly what my attackers are making me feel again: that
I am nobody, that I have no right to speak my truth. It carries me back to
my youth and makes me relive the emotional abuse of my childhood. I try to
stay strong. I tell myself that I have a voice now. I live in the United
States of America, where I have a right to share my story freely. This
incident makes me appreciate democracy and freedom of speech even more.
For this I am called a traitor to China? I am no traitor. It was a journey
for me to realize that my childhood experience did not define China, but I
made my peace with that long ago. I understand that China has a long history
and rich culture, and that most Chinese people are kind-hearted.
But this smear campaign reveals the dark side of China. Who is anyone to say
that this is not my life and not my experience? They demonstrate a
willingness to treat other people with anger and abuse, rather than with
love and compassion. I'm so sad to see this.
I don't know what to say. I'm traumatized by this smear campaign because it
is the polar opposite of what Bend, Not Break is about and what I intended
when I wrote it. I wrote it to inspire by illustrating, in some small way,
how resilience, compassion, generosity, trust and love led me to a better
life. In return, I have received mistrust, criticisms, accusations, hatred,
anger and denial. I am deeply hurt, but I will not be broken.
I am human. This is a human story. I have made mistakes in my life, as have
we all. That doesn't make the story untrue.
This is my life. I carry the scars. This is my story. I tell it,
authentically, in the book. | c****t
发帖数: 5452 | 4 这人没有底线的，属于睁着眼睛说瞎话那种，她照片里明明带着红卫兵套子还可以在回
复文章里说你们去zoom in,没有袖章的。也许她老花眼了？ | d*****t
发帖数: 7903 | | s**i
发帖数: 4448 | 6 奸诈又愚蠢。
最怕她不闹。
闹好，这火会越烧越大。
News
is
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 保存一段傅苹的回应。这女人开始撒泼打滚了：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/sad-but-not-broken_b_2603
: Sad, But Not Broken
: Posted: 02/01/2013 10:41 pm
: Read more
: Ping Fu , Bend Not Break , Bend Not Break Controversy , Memoirs , Books News
: share this story
: Submit this story
: I am shocked, heartbroken and deeply saddened by the smear campaign that is
: taking place against me personally and my book, Bend, Not Break, which was
| d**********r
发帖数: 24123 | 7 惹上肘子算她倒霉，在美国生活久了，按照对付美国人的方法来对付肘子估计会死得很
惨。
这次我支持肘子 | a**********t
发帖数: 774 | | s*******l
发帖数: 597 | | k*******r
发帖数: 16963 | 10 看来傅大妈所谓的经历没有一件是真的。怀疑她的phd也是假的，至少掺水了。大妈也
就在中国人中神话破灭。她那些又黄又暴力的故事很适合美国人胃口。真相不重要，说
美国人想听，愿意听的故事才重要。 | | | T***0
发帖数: 669 | 11 傅大妈绝对深海，中共卧底，专门在中国人中搞臭西方媒体。xiaxia次帅已经分析过了。 | f*****9
发帖数: 6768 | 12 肘子的东西有杀伤力， 但都是在老中里面打圈，对打击洋人没有多大用 | f*******v
发帖数: 528 | 13 迄今为止 没有任何证据说明傅萍撒了谎，各位TG走狗包括菊花的老公只能泛泛而谈，
拿不出任何证据。 | N***c
发帖数: 1090 | 14 中宣部没掺和进来就很聪明，中宣部掺和进来就会让人觉得是政府组织的
【在 d*****t 的大作中提到】
: re.
: 这事搞大了好，中宣部要是聪明。
| O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 15 方舟子应该给所有这些网站的网页截屏留证。 傅苹的灭火队会很快要求这些网站修改
内容。 她有的是钱，请几个昂贵律师不成问题。 她的录音录像都要存底，估计会很快
从网上消失。 她现在正在做的，就是销毁证据。 福布斯的证据已经消毁了一部分了。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: http://fangzhouzi.blog.hexun.com/83089444_d.html
: [原创 2013-2-2 17:47:04]
: 傅苹今天在其博客上针对我的批评，贴了一篇澄清声明：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/clarifying-the-facts-in-bend-not-break_b_2603405.html
: 傅苹声称，虽然我的批评是正确的，但是是根据福布斯不准确的报道，而不是根据
: 她新出的书，福布斯的报道后来更正了（意思是我的批评成了无的放矢）。
: 事实上，看过我对她的批评文章的就知道，虽然福布斯的报道引发了我的批评，但
: 是我的批评并非仅仅针对福布斯的报道，而是针对自2005年以来美国媒体对傅苹的各种
: 报道、傅苹的电台和视频访谈。我也看了傅苹新书放在google book上供试读的前面两
: 章。它们的内容都相当的一致。如果说福布斯的报道有错的话，那么此前美国媒体的其
| O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 16 支持方舟子。 傅苹撞到他手里，算是遇到更强的对手了。 | d**e
发帖数: 2420 | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 18 凡是有眼的，都可以看出来她撒没撒谎。你也去读读Amazon上的评论再说话。
【在 f*******v 的大作中提到】
: 迄今为止 没有任何证据说明傅萍撒了谎，各位TG走狗包括菊花的老公只能泛泛而谈，
: 拿不出任何证据。
| k*******r
发帖数: 16963 | 19 你和那个sb扯蛋就是浪费时间。Y就一个职业发贴的sb。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 凡是有眼的，都可以看出来她撒没撒谎。你也去读读Amazon上的评论再说话。
| O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 20 你不需要跟世维会的疆独分子扯。那个foolsnovv是世维会驻买卖提的特派专员。 现在
疆独分子都跳出来为傅大妈辩护了，太喜剧了。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 凡是有眼的，都可以看出来她撒没撒谎。你也去读读Amazon上的评论再说话。
| | | B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 21 红卫兵出身的都是这个逼样
可以睁着眼睛说瞎话
老美这次见识一下什么叫泼妇
【在 c****t 的大作中提到】
: 这人没有底线的，属于睁着眼睛说瞎话那种，她照片里明明带着红卫兵套子还可以在回
: 复文章里说你们去zoom in,没有袖章的。也许她老花眼了？
| B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 22 傻逼啊这是，老邢也不审查一下就放脑残近来。
【在 f*******v 的大作中提到】
: 迄今为止 没有任何证据说明傅萍撒了谎，各位TG走狗包括菊花的老公只能泛泛而谈，
: 拿不出任何证据。
| B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 23 她没那么多钱
美国律师多厉害啊，个个都是吃人不吐骨头的主
它要这么干，坐等它破产吧
【在 O*******d 的大作中提到】
: 方舟子应该给所有这些网站的网页截屏留证。 傅苹的灭火队会很快要求这些网站修改
: 内容。 她有的是钱，请几个昂贵律师不成问题。 她的录音录像都要存底，估计会很快
: 从网上消失。 她现在正在做的，就是销毁证据。 福布斯的证据已经消毁了一部分了。
| n*****8
发帖数: 19630 | 24 方大侠真是一剑封喉啊。
韩二不出来声援一下副品？
:) | B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 25 韩二哪里有那个文笔
还是得韩大出手。
【在 n*****8 的大作中提到】
: 方大侠真是一剑封喉啊。
: 韩二不出来声援一下副品？
: :)
| h***y
发帖数: 4936 | 26 哈哈，这脑残现在就是一宣传利器。它说浮萍没撒谎对浮萍的打击比n个猥琐男证实浮
萍撒谎还管用。它对<西藏秘密>的诋毁给这部片子做了出色的推广，无数人因为它的反
对而去看，ld说华人上的大妈都开始看了,lol
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 凡是有眼的，都可以看出来她撒没撒谎。你也去读读Amazon上的评论再说话。
| x***s
发帖数: 851 | 27 浮萍应该做的就是死咬着她10岁被强奸的创伤太大，后来那些可能属于记忆偏差，或许
还能挽回些。否则一味否认，最后死得很难看。她毕竟和韩寒没法比，韩寒身后的公知
集团多厉害啊，还有这么些年培养的粉丝成千上万。傅没什么人帮她。也就是她的几个
亲戚和朋友。 | B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 28 它现在能肯定就是个10岁被轮奸和大学期间有人检查它阴道看是不是有月经了
其他的，都太TMD的容易证伪了
丫自己的几次访谈都前后不一
有当事人，有录像，有文章
它想反驳的难度相当大
说到底，中国真是TMD的言论自由的天堂啊
公知们一面造谣生事出书诽谤，侮辱约架
一面大喊中国没有言论自由
广大愤青白领们各个开车制造污染
一到雾霾的时候没一个出来说从自己做起少开车的
【在 x***s 的大作中提到】
: 浮萍应该做的就是死咬着她10岁被强奸的创伤太大，后来那些可能属于记忆偏差，或许
: 还能挽回些。否则一味否认，最后死得很难看。她毕竟和韩寒没法比，韩寒身后的公知
: 集团多厉害啊，还有这么些年培养的粉丝成千上万。傅没什么人帮她。也就是她的几个
: 亲戚和朋友。
| d*****n
发帖数: 3033 | 29 大妈在中国人中有p个神话，听都没听说过
大妈在美国人中才是神话般的存在，
还难民庇护，还杰出归化，
这回倒要看看美国人究竟有多么傻B了
我赌至少要傻逼半年
因为美国人转不过弯
【在 k*******r 的大作中提到】
: 看来傅大妈所谓的经历没有一件是真的。怀疑她的phd也是假的，至少掺水了。大妈也
: 就在中国人中神话破灭。她那些又黄又暴力的故事很适合美国人胃口。真相不重要，说
: 美国人想听，愿意听的故事才重要。
| B********r
发帖数: 2787 | 30 这泼妇是在卖公司的当口出这本书的
是不是自己要搅黄这买卖啊
【在 d*****n 的大作中提到】
: 大妈在中国人中有p个神话，听都没听说过
: 大妈在美国人中才是神话般的存在，
: 还难民庇护，还杰出归化，
: 这回倒要看看美国人究竟有多么傻B了
: 我赌至少要傻逼半年
: 因为美国人转不过弯
| | | d*****n
发帖数: 3033 | 31 现在去买她的书
过几个月就可以起诉她欺骗
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: http://fangzhouzi.blog.hexun.com/83089444_d.html
: [原创 2013-2-2 17:47:04]
: 傅苹今天在其博客上针对我的批评，贴了一篇澄清声明：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/clarifying-the-facts-in-bend-not-break_b_2603405.html
: 傅苹声称，虽然我的批评是正确的，但是是根据福布斯不准确的报道，而不是根据
: 她新出的书，福布斯的报道后来更正了（意思是我的批评成了无的放矢）。
: 事实上，看过我对她的批评文章的就知道，虽然福布斯的报道引发了我的批评，但
: 是我的批评并非仅仅针对福布斯的报道，而是针对自2005年以来美国媒体对傅苹的各种
: 报道、傅苹的电台和视频访谈。我也看了傅苹新书放在google book上供试读的前面两
: 章。它们的内容都相当的一致。如果说福布斯的报道有错的话，那么此前美国媒体的其
| U***5
发帖数: 2796 | 32 这次要顶肘子。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: http://fangzhouzi.blog.hexun.com/83089444_d.html
: [原创 2013-2-2 17:47:04]
: 傅苹今天在其博客上针对我的批评，贴了一篇澄清声明：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/clarifying-the-facts-in-bend-not-break_b_2603405.html
: 傅苹声称，虽然我的批评是正确的，但是是根据福布斯不准确的报道，而不是根据
: 她新出的书，福布斯的报道后来更正了（意思是我的批评成了无的放矢）。
: 事实上，看过我对她的批评文章的就知道，虽然福布斯的报道引发了我的批评，但
: 是我的批评并非仅仅针对福布斯的报道，而是针对自2005年以来美国媒体对傅苹的各种
: 报道、傅苹的电台和视频访谈。我也看了傅苹新书放在google book上供试读的前面两
: 章。它们的内容都相当的一致。如果说福布斯的报道有错的话，那么此前美国媒体的其
| O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 33 把lin的在Amazon上的帖子在这里转一下
Since my first writing of this review on Jan. 22, many things have happened.
As what Forbes reporter Jenna Goudreau put it in today's Forbes article '
Bend, Not Break' Author Ping Fu Responds To Backlash, "along with coverage
by other media outlets serious questions have been raised in the Chinese
blogosphere and elsewhere about Fu's credibility". Ping Fu herself commented
my review on Jan 24th and wanted to address the questions I raised in
private through email with me, which I refused.
Now she is trying to clear some of the questions in my review through Jenna
Goudreau's article. The problem is she is defending her lies with more lies.
At this moment, I'm kind of angry with this shameless, mentally sick,
morally low and pathetic liar. So if my writing sound emotional, please
forgive me.
In her response in 1/28 to a reader of her book, Ping Fu blamed reporter for
the inaccuracies in Forbes article. Now in today's Forbes report on her
response to the accusations of being lying, she also blamed the media for
referring to her as a "child soldier" and a "factory worker." She
shamelessly tried to explain away her lie of being deported to the US by
saying "if someone wants to say this is not deportation, fine. That's my
interpretation."". Because China and Chinese government have been demonized
and discredited to such extend in the West, she knows that she can say
whatever she wants about what Chinese government did to her, nothing from
China can be used to dispute her on this, whether it is a government record
or her former classmate's words .
Now she admits that she entered the college in the fall of 1978. We all know
that class of college students in all of universities in China were
graduated in the SUMMER of 1982. But in her book, she said that in the FALL
of 82, while she was walking on campus and PREPARING for her GRADUATION from
the university, someone sneaked up to her, put a black canvas bag over her
head, took her to an unknown place and arrested her. How she can explain
this contradiction in timeline here, huh? And now she suddenly claims "that
she got in trouble with the police in 1983". Not fall of 82 any more?
In Jenna Goudreau's article, when Ping Fu was asked about the timing gap
between getting trouble with the police in 1983 and deportation to the US in
Jan 84, this is her response:" "That's true. That's a good question," Fu
says. "Let me go back and verify that one." " So our successful CEO Ping Fu
couldn't remember what happened and how it happened about the most important
events in her life, she had to go back to verify that. Verify from where?
Hasn't she been telling these stories to medias numerous times since 2005 if
not ealier? If she has such a bad memory and can't remember these most
important events happened to her in her 20's, how much those childhood
memory in her book could be true?
According to her book, the words came through her own mouth on an NPR
interview and many Western media reports, the timeline is: She spent 6 month
to investigate in countrysides on infanticides due to One Child Policy,
then did her senior year graduation thesis(should be in middle of 1982), the
thesis was reported on Chinese newspaper People's Daily (which was the
tightly controlled number one government mouth piece back then), the Chinese
media reports caught international media attention, United Nation then
sanctioned China, Chinese government was upset about this and arrested her
in the Fall of 1982. How all this could happen in a such short time before
in the fall of 82? Or even before January 1984 when she arrived in the US?
College students in China usually wouldn't be able to start their graduation
thesis until the last semester of their senior year, when did she start to
investigate infanticides? When did she hand in her thesis? When did People's
Daily reported her findings? Were international media and UN worked that
fast and efficient in early 80's? Can anyone, Westerner or Chinese who is
old enough to have memory of early 80's, comes out to say that he/she had
ever heard of infanticides in China or UN sanction of China for this in that
time period?
She also forgot that China's One Child policy is considered to be started in
Sept. 1980, when central government of China published an open letter
urging couple's to only have one child. I don't remember when detailed
policies came out. So in 2 years between Sept. 1980 to the Fall of 82,
infanticide became prevalent in China, which caught Ping Fu's attention to
spend 6 month to investigate and wrote her graduation thesis, ..., UN
sanctioned China and she was arrested in the Fall of 82(or 1983 according to
her newest claim). Would anyone with a mind that can do minimum reasoning
believe this?
In a Chinese media report which glorified her story of success and
accomplishments in the US on 3/14/2012 [epaper.chinanews com html 2012-03 14
content_3303 "dot" htm), after she graduated from Suzhou University, she
went to graduate school at Nanjing University, then came to the US. How
would she explain about this? Where did the reporter get that information?
Because Chinese media have been portrayed in the West as always lying and
unreliable, so this one must be a lie or unreliable too, even it is a report
all positive on her and glorifying her, right?
Then, let's see the report of her in Western media. In 2005, INC magazine
ran a story about her in the article Entrepreneur of the Year: Ping Fu (inc
com magazine 20051201 ping-fu "dot" html). It said: "In February 1981,
without a trial or even a formal charge, the Chinese government locked 23-
year-old Ping Fu in solitary confinement, in a wing of Nanjing prison
reserved for political criminals."
February 1981 was the first semester of her junior year. So by then she had
already spent 2 years (yes, in INC's report, she used 2 years to do that) to
investigate infanticides due to a policy that started 5 months ago,
finished her senior year graduation thesis on that,...., and got arrested?
How ridiculous this could be? Who to blame for this inconsistency with her
book and the ridiculousness of the story?
In fact, many things in Ping Fu's book are in contradiction with 2005 INC
magazine's report, from how many sisters being taken from her Shanghai home
to Nanjing, to time and year many things that happened. Again, she can blame
the reporter for all the inaccuracies and mistakes.
Now Ping Fu's publicist told Jenna Goudreau that "The government asked Ping
to leave a couple of weeks after her release," "However, getting a passport
was very difficult, if not impossible". So Chinese government asked her to
leave, but wouldn't issue her a passport, made her to wait for an year?
Difficult to get passport? How come many college graduates that I knew of
back then could get passport in about a month as long as they have foreign
school's acceptation letter and I-20 form. US universities usually send out
these documents to foreign student around March. It would take about a month
to get passport, then we have to apply for visa from US consulate or
embassy. Actually, what difficult to get was not the Chinese passport but
American visa. The US government wouldn't accept poor foreign student come
to the US without enough financial back up. Even if we had back then, many
of us were still rejected (totally different from today).
Foreign students in the US are not allowed to work outside of their campus
to support themselves. Ping Fu's claimed that she came here with no money,
paid her way through school by working first as a babysitter, cleaning lady
then as a waitress. Which means that she did all those work illegally. It
also means that she fabricated her financial documents and lied about the
source of her support when she applied visa from the US consulate.
So, Ping Fu, better stick with your deportation lies. The new lie will not
only make your a liar, but also a law breaker.
Besides, how can a government ask its citizen to leave? If it were that easy
, I suggest Chinese government to ask 3 billions poorest Chinese peasants to
leave China and send them to the United States like it sent Ping Fu here.
Those poor peasants will have much better life and wouldn't need to kill
their infant girls any more. If this way could work, those illegal Mexican
immigrants should just follow Ping Fu's path to tell INS that Mexican
government asked them to leave, so they have a legal status here.
http://www.amazon.com/Bend-Not-Break-Life-Worlds/product-review | n*****8
发帖数: 19630 | 34 副品事件至少说明两个问题：
1在米国，撒谎是可以成功的。被抓住现行也没事儿，红脖子和媒体会替你罩着。
2 不撒谎是没有希望的，像许多小将们，只能是打工的料。这也是老将们习惯性撒谎的
原因吧。
:) | A****r
发帖数: 2746 | | s***c
发帖数: 1926 | 36 韩大作为一个大学被逼退学的苦主，怎么会去帮助一个同年代拿到学位，放弃国内研究
生，又靠投机取巧到国外拿PhD的女人。不踩上两脚就不错了。
【在 B********r 的大作中提到】
: 韩二哪里有那个文笔
: 还是得韩大出手。
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 37 她难道来到美丽奸这个自由的国度，也没找个心理咨询师抚平一下自己过去的的创伤？
【在 x***s 的大作中提到】
: 浮萍应该做的就是死咬着她10岁被强奸的创伤太大，后来那些可能属于记忆偏差，或许
: 还能挽回些。否则一味否认，最后死得很难看。她毕竟和韩寒没法比，韩寒身后的公知
: 集团多厉害啊，还有这么些年培养的粉丝成千上万。傅没什么人帮她。也就是她的几个
: 亲戚和朋友。
| k*******r
发帖数: 16963 | 38 你得是外F，否则撒谎也没人理你。
【在 n*****8 的大作中提到】
: 副品事件至少说明两个问题：
: 1在米国，撒谎是可以成功的。被抓住现行也没事儿，红脖子和媒体会替你罩着。
: 2 不撒谎是没有希望的，像许多小将们，只能是打工的料。这也是老将们习惯性撒谎的
: 原因吧。
: :)
| t****4
发帖数: 7500 | 39 这泼妇关键是一生中都撒谎，尼玛根本就不可能圆谎，也不可能有逻辑链接，
必然是矛盾漏洞处处有 | s*****n
发帖数: 1794 | 40 你和那个二逼较什么劲。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 凡是有眼的，都可以看出来她撒没撒谎。你也去读读Amazon上的评论再说话。
| | | u*2
发帖数: 433 | 41 你们啊，过于正义了，撒个谎对这种人来说算个什么事。
在美国
撒谎了没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了也没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了 有关部门调查了也没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了 有关部门调查了 证据确作了也没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了 有关部门调查了 证据确作了 没逃掉也没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了 有关部门调查了 证据确作了 没逃掉 上诉没成功也没坏处
撒谎了 被揭穿了 有关部门调查了 证据确作了 没逃掉 上诉没成功 事情闹大了，最后
还可以转作污点证人反咬同伙一口cut a deal，此后天朗气清，可以出书拍电影上采访
，衣食无愁。
别忘了，美国不讲究道德文化，但讲究给人second chance 。傅苹作为一个见过世面的
"杰出美国人"，心里很清楚的啦。
【在 n*****8 的大作中提到】
: 副品事件至少说明两个问题：
: 1在米国，撒谎是可以成功的。被抓住现行也没事儿，红脖子和媒体会替你罩着。
: 2 不撒谎是没有希望的，像许多小将们，只能是打工的料。这也是老将们习惯性撒谎的
: 原因吧。
: :)
| n*****3
发帖数: 94 | | c********l
发帖数: 3254 | 43 必须要弄清楚。不冤枉一个好人，不放过一个坏人。 | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 44 http://jqzheng.org/weblog/
Defending the Indefensible?
Posted on 2013-02-04
When I was watching Sorkin’s Newsroom, i loved its wit. But i didn’t
relate too strongly with the show, because i didn’t really think the US
media is as bad as Sorkin was trying to portray: jaded, sensationalism,
interested in the rating only, not interested in exposing the truth.
In real life, none of the media focus has been anything I can vouch for, so
even when i took a side, it was mostly based on my judgement on people’s
character rather than on facts (e.g. Obama vs. Romney).
Until now. Over the last four days, I watched this controversy over Ping Fu
and her new book “Bend, Not Break” unfold, going from semi-amused, stunned
, entertained, and then angered, I couldn’t believe how jaded, non-critical
, sensationalist, and ignorant the US Media has been in dealing with this
incident.
Ping Fu is a very successful Chinese American business woman. She is the CEO
of a cool 3D printing company and serves on the National Advisory Council
for Innovation and Entrepreneurship for the Obama Administration. She
released her memoir “Bend, Not Break” recently. The book detailed her
childhood during China’s Cultural Revolution, and her amazing success in
America.
I first heard of the book on NPR, when Tina Brown was reviewing the book.
When Tina mentioned the phrase “labor camp for children as young as four
year old”. I filed the book in my mind as fabricated talltales tailored to
Americans who know nothing about China. I let it go cuz i thought it was a
fiction. There were enough of those around. This is a free country. People
are free to read what entertains them. Later last week a friend started to
tell me about Fang Zhouzi’s new target. Fang was famed to expose fraud
surrounding famous Chinese returning from overseas, who took advantage of
Chinese ignorant of Western world and parading around with fake Western
credentials. His blog was baned by China because in the process of exposing
varies famous and well connected figures he has touched on too many
sensitive nerves for Chinese Government’s taste. Fu is the first case he
has trying to expose that’s trying to cheat the other side. As a result,
most of his followers were laughing instead of getting angry. They couldn’t
believe how gullible the US Media is.
As Fang’s findings grew, I became interested. First the book is labeled as
Non-Fiction, categorized as Biography/Memoir. Also I couldn’t believe how
someone could be so bold and tell so many obvious lies, yet still get away
with it. Initial research indicated that Fang started exposing Ping Fu after
the Forbes article on Fu was translated to Chinese and published on Forbes
China. My research also brought me to amazon’s book review page where
someone named “lin” has already posted a one-star review a week before
Fang started exposing Fu. Admist all the raving five star reviews, “lin”‘
s review was detailed and full of facts and pointed out inconsistency
between the book’s claim and reality as we know it.
I started participating in the discussion on amazon.com review page.
Initially I was merely curious and amused. Curious why despite all her
success she still needs to take such a risk and publish her lies, curious
how could she be so bold and blatant (e.g. providing a photo that shows
herself as a red guard while her story all along portraying herself as a
victim of red guard abuse), curious how could she get away with so many lies
so many years (the earliest news report on her fairytale started with Inc.
’ interview of her dated 2005). Amused that spontaneously the flood of
Chinese and Chinese Americans came to amazon’s review page dragged down the
book rating from its original 4.5 stars pumped up by Fu’s PR team to 2
stars within 24 hours since Fang broadcasted his findings in weibo (Chinese
version of twitter), where Fang had 127k followers.
Events started to twist and turn like a roller coaster. With the mountains
of evidence piled up against Ping Fu, she started blaming Forbes article
author Jenna Goudreau, “mis-interpretation” “lost in translation” “they
didn’t let me review the article before publishing…”. To my surprise (i
guess Forbes didn’t rate as high in my mind when it comes to journalist
integrity area as some other news media. My apology, Forbes and Jenna. I
underestimated you.), Jenna responded with a great article. She started fact
checking and asked Fu to clarify some of the questions raised by Fang and
the comments on Forbes.com.
The original Forbes article was published on Jan. 23, 2013. Jenna published
a follow up on Jan. 31, 2013. The followup article exposed more
inconsistency than it answered. amazon review community became more excited
and more evidence and testimony of Fu’s classmates and neighbors in China
started surfacing.
More one-star reviews continues to grow on Amazon.com’s review page. Fu
released a clarification on her Huffington Post blog on Feb. 1, 2013 around
midnight.
Her “clarification” marked a turning point in my attitude toward this
entire fiasco. Fu indicated she would release a public statement on an early
morning post to amazon review’s comment section. I thought maybe she will
offer some statement in the line of “I took too much liberty at
exaggerating my own history, in the hope of being the spokes-person for all
those suffered during Cultural Revolution and have the world known how much
atrocity has been committed.” I thought that would be a grace way to say,
yeah i fabricated this book with good intention. Then i would have been fine
with it. Because then the media has to retract their story and the book
will go to line up with the other “fake memoir” instead of “non-fiction”.
I was stunned when her “clarification” finally came out. It stone walled
all the major controversy, produced more lies to cover previous ones,
accusing everyone questioning the authenticity of her story as motivated by
political means to protect China’s image(LOL), and engage in smear
champaign. What angered me the most was Huffington Post’s role in this. As
“lin” has put it
“huffingtonpost… let Ping Fu open a blog at their website yesterday.So
now she is enjoying her free ride provided by huffingtonpost, accusing all
the critics of engaging in a “smear campaign” against her personally and
her book. She can cover, spin and spread her lies with more lies freely
without being challenged or questioned. And huffingtonpost don’t need to
take any responsibility for that. I would say this is very irresponsible
journalism.”
I think “lin” has been too kind. What Huffington Post has done has shown
not a speck of journalist integrity. They might as well be a celebrity
gossip column that is aimed at sensationalize whatever story come their way
and they believe will please their audience.
I was looking through all the book promotion Fu’s PR team were able to book
, produce, and publish during Janurary 2013, ranged from radio shows, tv
interviews, newspaper publication, editorial book “review”(more like copy
and paste of Fu’s PR team’s brochure), live recording. Among the twenty or
so such publications, both in UK and the US, including lots of great names
that i used to trust: NPR, PBS, BBC, WSJ, Reuters, Economist. There were
only one host who obviously not only has read the book but also has some
basic knowledge of Cultural Revolution, and he showed his skepticism during
the show. Fu was obviously irritated at the end of it.
Only One!
The rest were whoo and waa, fanning the sensationalism of Fu’s story.
Cheering her on. It partly explained one of my original questions on why she
dares to do this. Because she has been able to get away with telling her
fairytale with such a cheerleading media force around her.
This only host who demonstrated critical thinking ability was Leonard Lopate
on WNYC radio station’s The Leonard Lopate Show. From the likes of Sorkin
’s Newsroom, i learned that good journalists are supposed to ask sharp
question and tease out the truth from chaos, guiding the public to arrive at
a fair picture of what really happened. My immediate thought was it is
probably really hard to find such sharp question to ask. One has to do lots
of research, able to find suspecting gap among mountains of information. But
in Ping Fu’s case, all it required really were some common sense questions
that no one but Leonard Lopate asked.
“why were you sent to SH( instead of staying with your parents in
Nanjing)?”
“were your SH family impacted by the Cultural Revolution, too? were
they sent away? ( if you weren’t taken away from your SH family, you would
be parentless too)”
Lopate will start by using the more rational and trueful term “school
dorm” and “student dormitory”, trying to prevent her from delivering her
usual graphic sentionalized stories, which all other talk hosts/reporters
relished.
“did working in factory help your interest in technology?”
“are you the only children in the factory?”
“the red guards raped you? The red guards were supposed to be the moral
conscience of China at the time, how can they reconcile with being rapists?”
“You published a book in China?! But you were in so much trouble with
Chinese government that they had to deport you, now they allow you to
publish a book?!”
I was talking to a friend about this today. She said the book rating is at 1
.6 stars, you guys found so many convincing evidence that proves the
inconsistency of her story, she had to cover one lie with more lies, their
defense has been so pathetic that they had to rally people on G+ and Twitter
to come and fake positive reviews. Aren’t you guys already win? What more
do you need?
Then i realized. All along, Fu, Fox and Co. has been calling the one-star
reviewers on amazon “Chinese Nationalists” “Holocaust Deniers” “
Communist Hack” who were trying to defend the image of China. How wrong
they are!
Here is one excerpt from one of best reviews on amazon (there were so many!
If nothing else, I have been truly inspired by my fellow reviewer’s words!)
Why we speak up, February 1, 2013
By Xin Liu
Most people who commented here are Chinese American professionals. We
came here 10, 20 or 30 years ago, just like Fu. This country offered us more
than the first-rate education; more importantly, it reshaped or reinforced
the moral standards that were once lost or distorted in the dark ages of
China. Honesty, Integrity and Responsibility are the true assets of this
society, on this land we call home. My salute to everyone who speaks up –we
are fulfilling our citizen responsibilities to ensure zero tolerance to
lies, to make sure our children growing up in a society where they have true
role models to look up to.
We’ve either heard from older generation or personal experienced varies
horrors of recent China. We’ve been depressed by China’s current human
right violations and ever tightening Orwellian style censorship to the free
flow of information. We loved the ideal that America stands for: Freedom,
Democracy, and a media that care about right and wrong, care about public
interests, and care about the truth. For the past week, we’ve spent so much
time on amazon.com, forbes, and (god forbid) huffington post, arguing with
the other side, looking for truth, because we want to believe in our ideal,
because we want to defend the media that we thought we had here in America,
because we thought if we spent enough time providing evidence, bridging the
knowledge and culture gap between the east and the west, the Media would see
their mistake and act as the true public guardian it should have been.
To Fu and Co.’s surprise, and probably beyond their comprehension, we are
doing what we do because we want to defend the America Media.
Are we defending the indefensible? Is the American media as bad as Sorkin
described in The Newsroom? I started to think maybe it is. Especially after
i went through all these Ping Fu’s book promotions provided by great names
i used to trust. Am I too pessimistic? We will find out in the following
days or weeks.
Thank you Leonard Lopate for being the pleasant surprise and the only bright
spot of a very depressing evening during my research.
Jenna Goudreau, Thank you for your follow up and I hope you would continue
to investigate further and help us get to the bottom of this tory.
The rest of US and UK medias, the ball is in your court.
—–
REFERENCES:
- A list of unanswered questions with evidence and inconsistency identified.
- A list of best reviews on the book (not comprehensive since good ones
continue to pop up, i’m so proud of this grassroot community!)
~~~the worst, promoted Fu’s fairytale biography and now publicly supporting
Fu ignoring all the evidences already uncovered~~~~
Huff Post Live
Josh Zepps (Jan.11, 2013)
GoogleTalk series
Ping Fu: “Bend not Break”, Authors at Google via @googletalks –
Host: Chade-Meng Tan (Monday, Jan. 7, 2013)
~~~~Still promoting the fake Biography
Jan. 30, 2013 PST
Tavis Smiley
PBS
Jan. 29, 2013 GMT
BBC Hardtalk
Stephen Sackur
Mon, Jan 21, 2013 9:54 PM EST
interview with Yahoo finance/CNBC, “Off the cuff”.
Monday, Jan 28, 2013 4:30PST, on XM Radio “the Fran Tarkenton Show”, live.
Jan. 23, 2013 NPR
Tina Brown
reviews the resilient @PFuGeomagic’s Bend, Not Break
Jan. 20, 2013
Daily Beast
Fri. Jan. 25, 2013 at 1:15p / EST 10:15a PST
WSJ LIVE
Mary Kissel (this interview didn’t get into any specifics on PF’s life in
China, so it sounds less ridiculous than the others)
Jan. 17, 2013
ReutersTV
Ping Fu’s dramatic journey from captivity to computer entrepreneur
Editor-at-Large Sir Harold Evans.
Jan. 21, 2013
BBC Women’s Hour
Jane Garvey.
Jan. 18, 2013
Fortune.CNN.COM
An entrepreneur’s long, strange trip
By Jessi Hempel, senior writer
Jan. 15, 2013
MSNBC: Today on The Cycle: Ping Fu
Abby Borovitz
(an excerpt inside that hasn’t surfaced before, on how she perform self-
abusive activities on stage, this woman and/or Fox need help)
Four Hosts: “Touré TV”, “Per S.E.”, “Steve Speak”, and “Krystal
Clear”.
Jan. 15, 2013
Swissmiss
Tina Roth Eisenberg
Jan. 12, 2013
Economist Print Edition
Jan. 3, 2013
The Fast Company
By Jessen Obrien
Jan. 8, 2013
WSJ
By MELANIE KIRKPATRICK
Jan. 1, 2013
Oprah.com
Leigh Newman
Jan 1, 2013
NY Journal of Books
Diane Brandley
~~~~Journalists demonstrated their obligation to public interests, trying to
expose the truth, with a healthy dose of skeptism
Jan. 14, 2013
The Leonard Lopate Show | WNYC Radio
Bend, Not Break: From China to America
Jan. 31, 2013
Forbes
Jenna Goudreau
Posted in Books & Authors, News & Media | Leave a reply | k*****r
发帖数: 474 | 45 唧唧歪歪的吐槽没用，人家白人媒体就是把你们当成共党五毛了 | G****1
发帖数: 8414 | 46 对头
【在 k*****r 的大作中提到】
: 唧唧歪歪的吐槽没用，人家白人媒体就是把你们当成共党五毛了
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 47 这有什么关系么？难道你做事情就是为了得到白煤的认可？
【在 k*****r 的大作中提到】
: 唧唧歪歪的吐槽没用，人家白人媒体就是把你们当成共党五毛了
| z*******i
发帖数: 673 | 48 如果浮萍不是想出口转内销，可以继续骗美国人，过好日子。谁叫她贪心呢？反正这事
闹大了，美国人可能会暗杠她，过几年才可能会听到浮萍被收监的消息。像以前有个叫
高瞻的就是这样的处理办法。
【在 d*****n 的大作中提到】
: 大妈在中国人中有p个神话，听都没听说过
: 大妈在美国人中才是神话般的存在，
: 还难民庇护，还杰出归化，
: 这回倒要看看美国人究竟有多么傻B了
: 我赌至少要傻逼半年
: 因为美国人转不过弯
| a***e
发帖数: 315 | 49 浮萍已经精分了，她越来越相信她的谎言就是事实
News
is
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 保存一段傅苹的回应。这女人开始撒泼打滚了：
: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ping-fu/sad-but-not-broken_b_2603
: Sad, But Not Broken
: Posted: 02/01/2013 10:41 pm
: Read more
: Ping Fu , Bend Not Break , Bend Not Break Controversy , Memoirs , Books News
: share this story
: Submit this story
: I am shocked, heartbroken and deeply saddened by the smear campaign that is
: taking place against me personally and my book, Bend, Not Break, which was
| n*****3
发帖数: 94 | | | | n*****3
发帖数: 94 | | l******t
发帖数: 12659 | 52 认为她说谎的就是tg走狗？
你的逻辑真强大
【在 f*******v 的大作中提到】
: 迄今为止 没有任何证据说明傅萍撒了谎，各位TG走狗包括菊花的老公只能泛泛而谈，
: 拿不出任何证据。
| D**d
发帖数: 1186 | 53 她妹也要出来了，在澳洲。
【在 z*******i 的大作中提到】
: 如果浮萍不是想出口转内销，可以继续骗美国人，过好日子。谁叫她贪心呢？反正这事
: 闹大了，美国人可能会暗杠她，过几年才可能会听到浮萍被收监的消息。像以前有个叫
: 高瞻的就是这样的处理办法。
| k*******r
发帖数: 16963 | 54 她妹有啥故事可编？轮奸手插阴道都用过了，不好编啊。得来个双飞吸引眼球。
【在 D**d 的大作中提到】
: 她妹也要出来了，在澳洲。
| D**d
发帖数: 1186 | 55 帮她姐呗。
【在 k*******r 的大作中提到】
: 她妹有啥故事可编？轮奸手插阴道都用过了，不好编啊。得来个双飞吸引眼球。
| x***s
发帖数: 851 | 56 好事啊。看看她妹妹怎么帮她。
【在 D**d 的大作中提到】
: 她妹也要出来了，在澳洲。
|
|
