Cave rescue: Elation as Thai boys and coach freed by divers
泰國足球隊13人全數自洞窟中獲救
Joy and relief have greeted the rescue of 12 boys and their football coach from flooded caves in northern Thailand after divers completed a daring operation to bring them out.
泰國北部,潛水夫們勇敢地完成了這次營救行動,把12名男孩和他們的足球教練救出被暴雨淹沒的洞穴時,人們高興萬分,如釋重負。
Seventeen days after they got trapped underground, the last five members of the group emerged on Tuesday.
他們已經被困在洞穴內17天。這個星期二(7月10日),最後一批5名成員被成功救出。
Their plight and the complex three-day-long operation to free them gripped the world's attention.
他們所處的困境和長達3天的複雜營救行動引發了全世界的關注。
The group was cut off on 23 June after heavy rains flooded their way back out of Tham Luang.
這一行人在6月23日與外界失去聯繫,當時暴雨淹沒了他們從清萊Tham Luang洞穴返回的路。
Aged between about 11 and 17, the members of the Wild Boars football team had entered the cave system during an excursion with their coach.
他們都是「野豬」足球隊的成員,跟著教練遠足時進入了這個洞穴,隊員們的年齡在11歲到17歲之間。
They were found by British divers last week, huddled in darkness on a ledge.
上周,英國潛水夫發現了他們,當時他們全都擠在一處岩脊上,四周漆黑一片。
Elation at the discovery of all 13 members of the group alive quickly turned to concern as it emerged just how difficult it would be to rescue boys who could not swim and had been weakened by their time underground.
人們最初發現這13人還活著時非常開心,但很快地就轉為擔憂,因為想要救出他們太困難了,其中一些孩子不會游泳,而且由於在洞穴裡呆了太久,身體很虛弱。
The complex, three-day operation saw four boys emerge on Sunday, four on Monday, and the final four boys plus their coach on Tuesday. All were immediately taken to hospital, but they are said to be in reasonable condition given their ordeal.
在持續3天的複雜營救行動中,星期日、星期一分別有4個孩子被救出,星期二,最後4個孩子和教練被救出。他們都被立即送往醫院,但據稱雖然經歷了這些折騰,他們的身體狀況還不錯。
Confirming the completion of the rescue operation, the Thai Navy Seals Facebook page announced: "We are not sure if this is a miracle, science, or what. All the 13 Wild Boars are now out of the cave."
泰國皇家海軍海豹突擊隊在官方臉書發佈消息確認救援行動圓滿完成:「我們不知道這是奇跡、科學,還是別的什麼。13名野豬隊的成員都已經離開了山洞。」
A team of 90 expert divers - 40 from Thailand and 50 from overseas - worked in the Tham Luang caves.
90位專業潛水夫參與了這次洞穴營救,其中40人來自泰國,50人來自其他國家。
They guided the boys and their coach through darkness and submerged passageways towards the mouth of the cave system.
他們指導孩子們和教練穿過黑暗的洞穴,在被淹沒處潛水,游向出口。
Getting to and from the trapped group was an exhausting round trip, even for experienced divers.
就算是經驗豐富的潛水人員,往返於洞穴出口和被困人員之間也非常耗費體力。
The process included a mixture of walking, wading, climbing and diving along guide ropes.
在這一路程中,潛水員們需要根據地勢沿著導引繩行走、涉水、攀爬和潛水。
Wearing full-face masks, which are easier for novice divers than traditional respirators, each boy was accompanied by two divers, who also carried his air supply.
營救人員為被困者準備了全罩潛水鏡,對初學潛水的人來說,這比傳統的呼吸面罩更容易佩戴。每個孩子由兩位潛水員陪伴,潛水員還要攜帶氧氣瓶。
The toughest part was about halfway out at a section named "T-Junction", which was so tight that the divers had to take off their air tanks to get through.
路程中間的「T形交叉口」是最難通行的一段,這裡十分狹窄,潛水員需要卸下氧氣瓶才能通過。
Beyond that a cavern - called Chamber 3 - was turned into a forward base for the divers.
此外,一個名為「第3室」的洞穴還成為了大家的前線基地。
There the boys could rest before making the last, easier walk out to the entrance. They were then taken to hospital in Chiang Rai.
孩子們可以在這裡休息,之後他們就能走出洞穴,最後的一段路程相對輕鬆。出來之後他們就被送往清萊的醫院。
Global football body FIFA offered the 12 young footballers tickets for Sunday's World Cup final in Moscow, but they are too weak to travel.
國際足總邀請這12位小球員觀看星期日在莫斯科舉行的世界盃決賽,但他們身體太虛弱無法前往。
Portuguese club Benfica has invited the boys and their coach an all-expenses-paid week at its training academy.
葡萄牙本菲卡足球俱樂部邀請這些獲救者免費去他們的培訓基地參觀一星期。
Manchester United - the English club several of the boys support - has offered them the chance to attend a game.
孩子們中有好幾個是曼聯的小球迷,曼聯還提供他們一次觀賽機會。
England football players preparing for a World Cup semi-final with Croatia - including Manchester City defender Kyle Walker - are sending football kit to the boys after one of them was pictured wearing an England shirt inside the caves.
正準備在半決賽中對陣克羅埃西亞隊的英格蘭球員給孩子們寄來了隊服,這些球員中還包括曼聯隊後衛Kyle Walker。在之前公佈的照片中,其中一名被困少年穿著英格蘭隊服。
#高雄人 #學習英文 請找 #多益達人林立英文
#高中英文
#成人英文
#多益家教班
#商用英文
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「manchester city members」的推薦目錄:
- 關於manchester city members 在 多益達人 林立英文 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 Sam Tsang 曾思瀚 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於manchester city members 在 Be a Cityzen | Official Manchester City Club Membership 的評價
manchester city members 在 Sam Tsang 曾思瀚 Facebook 的最讚貼文
The very fact it's called "Third World" says a lot, and then they publish an article on the "benefit" of colonialism using selective data. I guess that didn't take long...You can't make this stuff up. Occidental hegemony corrected?
19 September 2017
LETTER OF RESIGNATION FROM MEMBERS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF THIRD WORLD QUARTERLY
Dear Shahid Qadir, Taylor & Francis, Colleagues and Interested Public,
We are deeply disappointed by the unacceptable process around the publication of Bruce Gilley’s Viewpoint essay, “The case for colonialism,” which was published in Third World Quarterly without any consultation with the Editorial Board. As International Editorial Board Members, we were told in an email on 15 September from Shahid Qadir that this piece was put through the required double-blind peer review process. We asked for these reviews to be sent to the Editorial Board, and they were not.
We have now been informed by our colleagues who reviewed the piece for a Special Issue that they rejected it as unfit to send to additional peer review, and they stated in an email to us:
“We would question the editorial process that has led to the publication of the piece. It was initially offered to guest editors Dr John Narayan and Dr Leon Sealey-Huggins as an article to consider for inclusion in the aforementioned special issue. The guest editors relayed their unease with the article and rejected considering the piece for peer review. It has subsequently come to light that the article was later reviewed as a standard article and rejected by at least one reviewer and then repackaged as an opinion piece.”—email from Dr John Narayan (Birmingham City University)
Dr Leon Sealey-Huggins (Warwick University)
Dr Kehinde Andrews (Birmingham City University)
Dr Eugene Nulman (Birmingham City University)
Dr Goldie Osuri (University of Warwick)
Dr Lucia Pradella (King’s College London)
Professor Vijay Prashad (Trinity College)
Dr Sahar Rad (SOAS, University of London)
Professor Satnam Virdee (University of Glasgow)
Dr Helen Yaffe (London School of Economics)
We have also been informed through correspondence between Prof Ilan Kapoor and our colleague who was the peer-reviewer, after the piece was rejected by the Special Issue editors, that her review also rejected the Viewpoint. Thus, the fact is established that this did not pass the peer-review when we have documentation that it was rejected by three peer reviewers.
As the Viewpoint did not pass the double-blind peer review as claimed by the editor in the statement he issued in the name of the journal, it must be retracted and a new statement issued.
The Viewpoint fails criterion #1 of the Committee on Publication Ethics COPE guidelines that state: “Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if: they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).” https://publicationethics.org/…/Retractions_COPE_gline_fina…
These COPE guidelines are Taylor & Francis’s reference documents for ethics of retracting a publication the editorial board was told in an email on 18 September by Shahid Qadir.
Thus, Bruce Gilley’s Viewpoint essay, “The case for colonialism” must be retracted, as it fails to provide reliable findings, as demonstrated by its failure in the double-blind peer review process.
We all subscribe to the principle of freedom of speech and the value of provocation in order to generate critical debate. However, this cannot be done by means of a piece that fails to meet academic standards of rigour and balance by ignoring all manner of violence, exploitation and harm perpetrated in the name of colonialism (and imperialism) and that causes offence and hurt and thereby clearly violates that very principle of free speech.
The Editor of TWQ has issued a public statement without any consultation with the Editorial Board that is not truthful about the process of this peer-review, and thus, as we fully disagree with both the academic content of the Viewpoint and the response issued in the name of the journal, we are forced to resign immediately from the Editorial Board of Third World Quarterly.
As scholars, we remain ever-committed to the ideals that this journal has stood for over the past 40 years, and we would consider serving on an Editorial Board under different editorial arrangements.
Sincerely,
Ilan Kapoor (York University, Canada)
Stefano Ponte (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark + Duke University, US)
Lisa Ann Richey(Roskilde University, Denmark + Duke University, US)
Mahmood Mamdani (Makerere Institute of Social Research, Uganda + Columbia University, US)
Asef Bayat (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, US)
Naila Kabeer (London School of Economics and Political Science, UK)
Katie Willis (Royal Holloway University of London, UK)
David Simon (Chalmers Univ. of Technology, Sweden + Royal Holloway Univ. of London, UK)
Walden Bello (State University of New York at Binghamton, US)
Giles Mohan (The Open University, UK)
Ayesha Jalal (Tufts University, US)
Uma Kothari (University of Manchester, UK)
Vijay Prashad (Trinity College, US)
Klaus John Dodds (Royal Holloway University of London, UK)
Richard Falk (Princeton University, US)
manchester city members 在 Facebook 的最讚貼文
【#迷上英式英文】Theresa May回應倫敦恐襲
"We cannot and must not pretend that things can continue to carry on as they are. Enough is enough.”
Source: BBC
"Last night, our country fell victim to a brutal terrorist attack once again. As a result I have just chaired a meeting of the government’s emergency committee and I want to update you with the latest information about the attack.
Shortly before 10:10 yesterday evening, the Metropolitan Police received reports that a white van had struck pedestrians on London Bridge.
It continued to drive from London Bridge to Borough Market, where 3 terrorists left the van and attacked innocent and unarmed civilians with blades and knives.
All 3 were wearing what appeared to be explosive vests, but the police have established that this clothing was fake and worn only to spread panic and fear.
As so often in such serious situations, the police responded with great courage and great speed. Armed officers from the Metropolitan Police and the City of London Police arrived at Borough Market within moments, and shot and killed the 3 suspects.
The terrorists were confronted and shot by armed officers within 8 minutes of the police receiving the first emergency call.
Seven people have died as a result of the attack, in addition to the 3 suspects shot dead by the police. Forty-eight people are being treated in several hospitals across London. Many have life-threatening conditions.
On behalf of the people of London, and on behalf of the whole country, I want to thank and pay tribute to the professionalism and bravery of the police and the emergency services – and the courage of members of the public who defended themselves and others from the attackers.
And our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and with their friends, families and loved ones.
This is, as we all know, the third terrorist attack Britain has experienced in the last 3 months. In March, a similar attack took place, just around the corner on Westminster Bridge.
Two weeks ago, the Manchester Arena was attacked by a suicide bomber. And now London has been struck once more.
And at the same time, the security and intelligence agencies and police have disrupted 5 credible plots since the Westminster attack in March.
In terms of their planning and execution, the recent attacks are not connected. But we believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face, as terrorism breeds terrorism, and perpetrators are inspired to attack not only on the basis of carefully-constructed plots after years of planning and training – and not even as lone attackers radicalised online – but by copying one another and often using the crudest of means of attack.
We cannot and must not pretend that things can continue as they are. Things need to change, and they need to change in 4 important ways.
First, while the recent attacks are not connected by common networks, they are connected in one important sense. They are bound together by the single, evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division, and promotes sectarianism.
It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth.
Defeating this ideology is one of the great challenges of our time. But it cannot be defeated through military intervention alone. It will not be defeated through the maintenance of a permanent, defensive counter-terrorism operation, however skilful its leaders and practitioners.
It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence – and make them understand that our values – pluralistic, British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.
Second, we cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed. Yet that is precisely what the internet – and the big companies that provide internet-based services – provide.
We need to work with allied, democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremism and terrorist planning. And we need to do everything we can at home to reduce the risks of extremism online.
Third, while we need to deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online, we must not forget about the safe spaces that continue to exist in the real world.
Yes, that means taking military action to destroy ISIS in Iraq and Syria. But it also means taking action here at home. While we have made significant progress in recent years, there is – to be frank – far too much tolerance of extremism in our country.
So we need to become far more robust in identifying it and stamping it out – across the public sector and across society.
That will require some difficult and often embarrassing conversations, but the whole of our country needs to come together to take on this extremism – and we need to live our lives not in a series of separated, segregated communities but as one truly United Kingdom.
Fourth, we have a robust counter-terrorism strategy that has proved successful over many years. But as the nature of the threat we face becomes more complex, more fragmented, more hidden, especially online, the strategy needs to keep up.
So in light of what we are learning about the changing threat, we need to review Britain’s counter-terrorism strategy to make sure the police and security services have all the powers they need.
And if we need to increase the length of custodial sentences for terrorism-related offences, even apparently less serious offences, that is what we will do.
Since the emergence of the threat from Islamist-inspired terrorism, our country has made significant progress in disrupting plots and protecting the public.
But it is time to say enough is enough. Everybody needs to go about their lives as they normally would. Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values. But when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.
As a mark of respect the 2 political parties have suspended our national campaigns for today. But violence can never be allowed to disrupt the democratic process. So those campaigns will resume in full tomorrow. And the general election will go ahead as planned on Thursday.
As a country, our response must be as it has always been when we have been confronted by violence. We must come together, we must pull together, and united we will take on and defeat our enemies."
manchester city members 在 Be a Cityzen | Official Manchester City Club Membership 的推薦與評價
Cityzens is Manchester City's official Club membership.Get closer to the Club, become an official member.http://www.beacityzen. ... <看更多>