User talk:Hillgentleman/20070708002243

I say what I mean. Terrorist= 恐怖主義者.

20070707162812

• 有嘢講：/Comment： I do not use the term "terrorist". And when other people use it, I never translate the term into "terror faction member".

--Hillgentleman | 書 2007年7月7號 (六) 16:28 (UTC)

• 新評論：

分子、份子

20070709072800

• 有嘢講：/Comment：

Yesterday I went to the library to check 分子，and found out that the term appears in the ancient time. Exact quoting I don't have, but if you it, I will find it. Two ancient meanings: "descendent of a clan", "spliting money." 分子 is wrongly translated into fraction (派系), it should be "element" or "particle", or just people belonging to a group. It appears to be a very neutral terms - with good or bad.

I understand why you think 分子 have something to do with class struggle. The term 知識分子 is a group being 抖 in the "Cultural Revolution".

--WikiCantona 2007年7月8號 (日) 23:28 (UTC)

• 新評論：

"People belonging to a group" is a phrase which sometimes leads to bias; use it carefully

20070708234257

• 有嘢講：/Comment： Thanks. However: A man can belong to a group but a man is more than a member of a group. A man can carry out "an act of terror" without belonging to any group. A man can do something without joining (either explicitely or implicitly) a group which does it. In anycase, terrorist =/= terror group member.

--Hillgentleman | 書 2007年7月8號 (日) 23:42 (UTC)

• 新評論：

Agreement

20070709172531

• 有嘢講：/Comment：

I agree with you very much. I will take your advice in heart. I have been so worry about the neutrality of the words. I guess this is interesting example to illustrate my point. Words do carry point of views. Thank you for your advice.

--WikiCantona 2007年7月9號 (一) 09:25 (UTC)

• 新評論：

User talk:Hillgentleman/20070709172531 有乜連過來

有乜連過來

有乜連過來

有乜連過來