新台幣改版可破中共偽鈔企圖 How Redesigning the New Taiwan Dollar Undermines the CCP’s Counterfeiting Strategy --- Why Beijing’s Objection to Anti-Counterfeiting Measures Raises Serious Security Questions

【雙魚之論】
The redesign of the New Taiwan Dollar is, in essence, an entirely normal—indeed routine—act of state governance. What is striking, however, is that beyond the loud opposition from Blue–White politicians, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) has also stepped forward to oppose it, inadvertently revealing that the issue carries political implications far from trivial.
The Blue–White camp claims the redesign is a “waste of money,” but this argument appears more like a contrived excuse than a serious objection. Globally, periodic currency redesigns are standard practice, and the costs of redesign and anti-counterfeiting measures are negligible when weighed against the risks to financial security. As for the TAO, it accuses Taiwan of using the redesign to pursue “de-Sinicization.” In response, the Deputy Minister of the Mainland Affairs Council has made the matter plain: whether Sun Yat-sen appears on the New Taiwan Dollar has nothing whatsoever to do with so-called de-Sinicization—after all, Sun Yat-sen does not even appear on China’s own Renminbi.
In reality, the most practical and fundamental reason for currency redesign has never been ideology, but anti-counterfeiting. As counterfeiters’ techniques gradually catch up with existing banknote designs, governments must upgrade security features. This is an entirely ordinary requirement of financial governance. The real question, then, is: what exactly is the Taiwan Affairs Office opposing?

History has long shown that counterfeit currency is not merely a criminal issue; it is also a national security and wartime instrument. North Korea has for years been accused of large-scale counterfeiting of U.S. dollars. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi abruptly pushed through a currency overhaul, in part to flush out hoarded cash linked to corruption, black markets, and the underground economy. More broadly, on the eve of war or major conflict, hostile states often deploy state-level resources to produce counterfeit currency, preparing to flood it into the targeted country once hostilities begin—both to bribe key civilian and military officials and to disrupt the local financial system and social stability.
For this reason, when the Chinese Communist Party openly opposes upgrades to the New Taiwan Dollar’s anti-counterfeiting features, it is difficult not to reasonably speculate: have they already prepared large quantities of New Taiwan Dollars, intending to use them in the future to interfere with Taiwan’s financial order? If so, such preparations would now be rendered futile. At the very least, this reaction in itself is highly abnormal.
What is even more alarming is that on this issue, Blue–White politicians have adopted an opposition line perfectly aligned with that of the CCP, jointly obstructing the advancement of anti-counterfeiting technology for the New Taiwan Dollar. This is no longer merely a disagreement over policy; it is a fundamental issue concerning Taiwan’s financial security and its assessment of national risk.

新台幣改版，本質上是一項極為正常、甚至例行的國家治理措施。令人錯愕的是，除了藍白政客高調反對之外，連中國國台辦也跳出來反對，反而暴露了這件事背後不單純的政治意涵。
藍白政客反對的理由是「浪費錢」，但這種說法更像是硬擠出來的藉口。放眼全球，各國貨幣定期改版早已是常態，改版與防偽成本相較於金融安全風險微不足道。至於國台辦，則指控新台幣改版是台灣在「去中國化」。對此，陸委會副主委已清楚回應：孫中山是否出現在新台幣上，與所謂「去中國化」毫無關聯——甚至連人民幣本身，也沒有孫中山。

事實上，貨幣改版最實務、也最核心的理由，從來不是意識形態，而是防偽。當偽鈔集團的技術逐步追上現行鈔券設計，國家就必須升級防偽機制，這是金融治理中再正常不過的需求。那麼，國台辦究竟在反對什麼？
歷史經驗早已說明，偽鈔從來不只是犯罪問題，更是國安與戰爭工具。朝鮮長期被指為偽造美元的大國；印度總理莫迪則曾以迅雷不及掩耳的方式推動貨幣改版，目的之一正是逼出貪污、黑市與地下經濟所囤積的鈔券。更進一步說，在戰爭或衝突前夕，敵對國家往往會動用國家級資源製造偽鈔，準備在戰事爆發時大量流入被侵略國家，一方面收買關鍵文武官員，一方面擾亂其金融秩序與社會穩定。
正因如此，當中共公開反對新台幣的防偽升級時，我們很難不合理地推測：他們是否早已準備好大量新台幣，意圖在未來用以干擾台灣的金融秩序？這樣一來，他們將前功盡棄。至少，這種反應本身就極不尋常。

更值得警惕的是，藍白政客在此議題上，竟與中共採取完全一致的反對口徑，共同阻擋新台幣防偽技術的進化。這已不只是對政策的不同意見，而是涉及台灣金融安全與國家風險認知的根本問題。

國台辦批新台幣改版去孫中山化 梁文傑訝異：胡攪蠻纏    央廣 20260205

黃國昌 匆忙走遊美國才能「分化美國政府」 Huang Kuo-chang’s Rushed U.S. Visit and the Political Leverage to Fracture the U.S. Government

【雙魚之論】

Those who are about to lose their stage tend to become extraordinarily anxious—greed grows, and behavior increasingly departs from reason and normal boundaries.
It is rumored that, with assistance from the AIT, TPP Chair Huang Kuo-chang even claimed, “The AIT Taipei director’s attitude is very different from that of Washington.” That remark itself is reportedly the reason he insists on making a trip to Washington, D.C.—even though, in terms of timing, it would be difficult to secure any meaningful meetings, and even having no meetings at all would not really matter.
As long as there are rumors of closed-door meetings (not necessarily factual), that alone is enough for Huang Kuo-chang to exploit politically. Because no one knows what was discussed, he can freely sow division within the U.S. government and between the U.S. and Taiwan, while others have no way to refute him. At most, it becomes a matter of competing narratives.
Huang Kuo-chang even went so far as to throw Raymond Greene’s own words back at him, saying, “We hope the United States will respect Taiwan’s democratic processes, just as Taiwan respects America’s democratic processes.” He further accused Greene of “behaving like a Taiwanese administrative official.” Such remarks, coming from the chairman of the Taiwan People’s Party, effectively amount to accusing a U.S. diplomat—Raymond Greene—of betraying his own country. This is extremely serious, and the tactic itself is strikingly communist in nature.
As for whether the special defense budget includes procurement conducted in Taiwan—of course it does. Anyone who has read Trump Administration’s U.S. National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy knows that rebuilding the U.S. military-industrial base, and dispersing—or even forward-deploying—production of critical weapons and ammunition closer to the front lines, is a defining feature of the current U.S. administration’s National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy. Therefore, procurement in Taiwan—whether weapons are produced by U.S. companies locally, or manufactured in Taiwan under U.S. licensing to U.S. specifications—fully qualifies as special military procurement.
If the Legislative Yuan does not even accept the Executive Yuan’s bill for review, how could legislators possibly learn the contents of the budget through legislative deliberation? The key lies in formally accepting the bill. Only after acceptance does the content exist for review. If aspects are deemed inappropriate, they can then be reduced or vetoed item by item.
即將失去舞台的人，會有多焦慮、貪念多大及行為多違常理。
傳聞在AIT幫忙安排下，黃國昌居然說「AIT處長的態度跟華府落差很大。」這句話就是他要走一趟DC的原因，即便時間上很難出現有意義的拜會，甚至沒有拜會，也無所謂。
只要有閉門會面的傳言（不一定是事實）就夠黃國昌發揮了。因為沒有人知道內容，所以，黃國昌可以隨便分化美國政府、分化美台關係，他人根本無從指正。最多是各說各話～
黃國昌甚至說以谷立言的話回敬谷立言「希望美國尊重台灣民主程序，就像台灣尊重美國民主程序。」更進一步指控谷立言「表現得跟台灣行政官員一樣」，此言等於民眾黨主席指控美國外交官谷立言叛國，非常嚴重。其行為模式非常共產黨。
至於是否國防特別預算有在台採購的部份，當然有——只要讀過美國國安報告與國防報告的人都會知道，重整美國軍事工業，以及分散甚至前進到戰線生產必要武器與彈藥，本就是本屆美國政府國安與國防的特點。因此，在台灣採購不管是美商生產，或美商授權在台生產的美規武器全部是特別軍購。
假使立法院不收行政院的草案，他又如何能透過法案審議，而得知預算的內容？關鍵在收文，收文之後才有內容。覺得不妥，刪減或單項否決即可。

黃國昌談軍購關稅 「谷立言介入台灣內政太深」    聯合 20260204

從張又俠落馬傳聞，看懂一件外界可能誤判的大事 郭譽申＠奮起 20260126

【雙魚之論】
本文主要說：將上將清除，習近平就可以直接指揮中少將，開戰容易多了，所以困難不是戰勝，而是戰勝之後。
此觀點，與開發中國家發動政變的多為校級軍官（因野心勃勃）不謀而合。這也表示先前我們認為把解放軍指揮官清洗一空會影響戰力的推論，可能是錯的。任何戰鬥與戰役是少將以下的軍官在領導的。沒有中將、上將的軍隊，在戰力上可能沒有差別，但會更衝動，不計後果。
若說士兵、士官、尉官、校官、將官有何不同？士兵在聽命達成交付特定任務；士官在運用戰技；尉官在選擇戰鬥所需的戰術；校官在編寫教案與想定，是軍隊主幹；將官則是盱衡大勢判斷進退，是軍隊與政治的連結點。現在，顯然政治缺乏軍隊實力的理解，而軍隊則不管政治的合理性，只關心絕對服從。

從張又俠落馬傳聞，看懂一件外界可能誤判的大事    郭譽申＠奮起 20260126

那天氣氛先變的，其實不是在北京……。近日關於中共軍委副主席張又俠「出事」的傳聞，在台灣媒體圈，罕見地引發了明顯緊張與嚴肅討論。這個現象，本身比消息真假更值得分析。

幾個長期以戲謔口吻談論解放軍高層人事的評論節目與社群版面，語氣忽然變得收斂、嚴肅，甚至帶著一點難以言說的不安。

Roger Wicker：不保衛台灣，美國將永久損害在印太地區的地位

【雙魚之論】
Roger Wicker特別指明的是，不保衛台灣，美國將永久損害在印太地區的地位。

 

Senator Roger Wicker　Wicker to Biden: Address China Threat, Protect American Interests in Taiwan

……

First, failure to defend Taiwan would forever damage our position in the Indo-Pacific, calling into question our credibility and capability to defend our other allies and partners, such as Australia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, Thailand. Since the end of World War II, our allies have relied on the United States of America, underpinning more than seven decades of peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific. America has also benefited greatly from this peace and prosperity. Today, Japan is our fifth largest trading partner, and South Korea is our sixth largest trading partner. A failure to defend Taiwan would upend that stability, and our allies and partners could abandon America if that happens. Simply put, peace in the Pacific means jobs for Americans. War in the Pacific, on the other hand, would put American economic freedom at risk.

首先，若不保衛台灣，將永遠損害我們在印太地區的地位，使我們保衛其他盟友和夥伴（如澳洲、日本、菲律賓、韓國、泰國）的信譽和能力受到質疑。自二戰結束以來，我們的盟友一直依賴美國，這為印太地區七十餘年的和平與繁榮奠定了基礎。美國也從這種和平與繁榮中獲益良多。如今，日本是美國第五大貿易夥伴，韓國是第六大貿易夥伴。若不保衛台灣，這種穩定將蕩然無存，我們的盟友和夥伴可能會因此拋棄美國。簡而言之，太平洋地區的和平意味著美國人的就業機會。反之，太平洋地區的戰爭將危害美國的經濟自由。 

Senator Roger Wicker
I’m disappointed to see Taiwan’s opposition parties in parliament slash President Lai’s defense budget so dramatically. The original proposal funded urgently needed weapons systems. Taiwan’s parliament should reconsider—especially with rising Chinese threats. 

Bloomberg
Taiwan’s opposition parties have advanced a bill that would slash a special military budget, potentially jeopardizing the purchases of billions of dollars of US weapons aimed at deterring the threat of invasion by China

國籍法公聽會

 

護照≠國籍、撤銷歸化無期間限、提供虛假資料（未放棄國籍、假結婚等），應撤銷國籍與戶籍

【雙魚之論】
徐春鶯案：不能只看台灣法律，要看中國法律

護照≠國籍：國籍來自出生或歸化，護照來自於國民向國家申請。護照可以逾期失效，國籍只能歸化或被剝奪，否則永遠有效。有護照者，表示有國籍。但有國籍者，不一定有護照。「日本人只有20％持有護照」。

李貞秀出國第一次來台灣，一定不是用台胞證，用的必然是PRC護照。表示李貞秀擁有PRC國籍與PRC護照。

台胞證申請文件：台灣護照正本＋台灣身分證正反面影本。表示李貞秀擁有RC國籍與ROC

護照。

台灣法律為避開惡用「一個中國」（PRC國籍與ROC國籍都是中國籍）的惡用，國籍法第20條規定：就職前申請放棄「中華民國以外國籍」，並於就職後一年內完成並提交證明，否則將被解職。不是規定擁有「外國國籍」，而是擁有「中華民國以外的國籍」。

這表示：

1.  李貞秀是雙重國籍，或兩種國籍身分。

2.  李貞秀對於立法院與內政部撒謊＝實際上擁有PRC國籍（中華民國以外的國籍）且未申請放棄。而因忠誠衝突問題，法律規定只能擁有一國籍。

3.  放棄中國國籍是否可行、是否困難，是中國的管轄與認定，並非我國權責。實際上，中國國籍法允許國民放棄PRC國籍。

3.  昨天（2/1）未宣誓就任前，內政部急件送申請表給李貞秀簽字（申請放棄），是最後機會。

4.  撤銷歸化無期間限制。只要檢察官查辦，憑此提供虛假資料的事實，戶籍登記事項自始不存在或自始無效時，行政機關應為撤銷之登記，以及立法委員資格（不知道後者是否要核備內政部與中選會？）

國籍法規定，申請歸化中華民國國籍時若有虛偽不實（如假結婚、假收養、冒用身分或提供虛假資料），經法院判決確定，內政部將依國籍法撤銷歸化許可，此類撤銷不受行使期間限制。虛假行為嚴重侵害國家法益，不僅會被撤銷戶籍，還可能涉及偽造文書等刑責。

國籍法對於假結婚或假收養撤銷歸化 符合國際立法通例

歸化國籍婚姻真實及品行端正認定原則

谷立言獨家專訪２》不只AI，關鍵礦物合作台灣也有角色！谷立言：台灣是美國全面性的伙伴 天下 20260130

【雙魚之論】
谷立言獨家專訪１》
谷立言獨家專訪２》
In the latter part of the interview, Raymond Greene clearly stated that agreements between Taiwan and the United States are bilateral Taiwan–U.S. agreements, and not extensions of U.S.–China relations or U.S.–China agreements. This critical clarification directly refutes Cheng Li-wen’s narrative that “the United States was once a benefactor, while China is a relative.” That narrative is rooted in a historical period spanning from Kissinger’s 1971 visit to China through roughly 1996, when the United States still regarded China as a potential partner. Since then, however, China has progressively transformed into one of the greatest challengers—and disruptors—of the existing international order.
The Blue–White camps’ persistent emphasis on drawing closer to China while avoiding reliance on the United States represents a profound misreading of global realities. Their thinking is outdated by roughly a quarter to half a century. More critically, they fail to recognize that the defining issue today is no longer cost, but security. Their obstruction of the Special Defense Budget Act further compounds this strategic misjudgment by actively weakening Taiwan’s defense posture.
Greene also emphasized that strengthening Taiwan’s defense budget would reinforce Taiwan’s role as a member of the community of allied nations, while advancing concrete areas of cooperation, including a comprehensive partnership, two-way Taiwan–U.S. investment, diversification of production layouts, green supply chains, and the “Pax Silica Declaration.”
He further stressed that cooperation between Taiwan and the United States extends beyond AI alone. In the realm of critical minerals, Taiwan likewise has a vital and indispensable role to play.

在本次專訪中，谷立言明確指出，台美之間的各項協議是台美雙邊協議，而並非美中關係或美中協議的一部分。這一關鍵聲明，直接回應並反駁了鄭麗文所提出的「美國曾經是恩人、中國是親人」的敘事框架。該種觀點源自1971年季辛吉訪中以來，一直到1996年前後，美國仍將中國視為潛在夥伴的歷史階段；然而，自此之後，中國已逐步轉變為顛覆既有國際秩序的最大威脅之一。
藍白陣營持續強調「應親近中國、避免依賴美國」的主張，不僅嚴重誤判國際情勢，其思維更已落後時代約四分之一至半個世紀。他們完全忽略，當前的核心問題早已不再是成本，而是安全。更甚者，藍白還進一步阻擋《國防特別預算條例》，在戰略上自我削弱台灣的防衛能力。
谷立言同時指出，國防預算的強化，將有助於鞏固台灣作為友盟國家一員的地位，並推動多項具體合作方向，包括：全面性夥伴關係、美台雙向投資、生產佈局多元化、綠色供應鏈，以及「矽盛世（Pax Silica）宣言」等。
他也特別強調，台美合作不僅限於AI領域，在關鍵礦物的供應與合作上，台灣同樣扮演不可或缺的角色。 

不只AI，關鍵礦物合作台灣也有角色！谷立言：台灣是美國全面性的伙伴    天下 20260130

谷立言獨家專訪2》從關稅到國防，美國最新的經濟安全走向是什麼？身為美國第四大貿易伙伴的台灣，中小企業與傳統產業將成為台美合作的新重心？

不到一年，美國在台協會處長谷立言（Raymond Greene）再度接受《天下》專訪。

時間點不只剛好在台美關稅協議揭曉之後，國防預算第十度在立法院被封殺，谷立言這陣子也不隱身，頻頻對外發言。

從關稅到國防，他多線溝通的內容看起來毫無相連，但背後，正牽動美國最新的經濟安全佈局。台美已不只是雙邊關係，更牽涉到區域、甚至全球經濟安全的搭建。

「台灣是美國的伙伴（Partner）。全面性的、尤其在經濟層面，」谷立言專訪時毫不諱言。

為什麼美國開始把經濟和安全綁在一起？台灣中小企業跟傳產在這個新戰略下，也有角色？

以下為《天下》專訪谷立言摘要，分為第一、第二篇，以下為第二篇：

谷立言獨家專訪１》國防預算十度封殺 獨家專訪AIT處長谷立言：台灣戰略正確，只差資源到位 天下 20260130 谷立言獨家專

【雙魚之論】
谷立言獨家專訪１》
谷立言獨家專訪２》
The conduct of Raymond Greene, Director of AIT Taipei, exemplifies how a great power wages regular warfare: every necessary step is taken, every contingency prepared for, leaving no opening for misinterpretation or accusation. Those who fail to understand this often mistake restraint for weakness. In reality, those who constantly shout, threaten, and call for confrontation are the truly weak ones.
A great power is not incapable of playing hardball—it simply knows when not to, and when such tools are best reserved for the final stage.
In the latter part of the first segment of the interview, Greene was asked what would happen if the Blue–White camps were to block the passage of the Special Defense Budget. His response was notably indirect. That very indirectness sends a clear signal: the United States has already anticipated this scenario and has its calculations in place. Even without going through Taiwan’s legislature in the usual manner—or in ways that align with public expectations of procedural formality—the United States will adopt what it deems an appropriate and strategically loyal course of action.
The reason is straightforward: Taiwan’s security is not merely a regional concern. It is the most critical pillar of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, and a core node of American national security itself.

AIT 台北處長谷立言的所作所為，正是大國進行正規戰（regular warfare）的典型展現：所有必要的程序與佈局都做到位，滴水不漏，不給任何人留下口實。外行人往往誤以為這是懦弱，其實恰恰相反——成天叫囂、喊打喊殺的，才是真正的懦弱。
大國並非不懂得耍流氓，而是知道什麼時候不該用、什麼時候才該留到最後再用。
在專訪第一部分的後段，當被問及「若藍白阻擋國防特別預算無法過關」的情境時，谷立言的回應相當間接。這種間接，反而透露出一個關鍵訊號：美國早已有所預期，也已有完整盤算。即便不經由台灣立法院的正常程序，或不完全符合一般人對「形式上處理方式」的想像，美國仍將採取其認定為適當、且符合戰略忠誠的因應作法。
原因很簡單——台灣的安全不只是區域議題，而是美國印太戰略中最關鍵的一環，更是美國國家安全的核心節點。

 

國防預算十度封殺　獨家專訪AIT處長谷立言：台灣戰略正確，只差資源到位    天下 20260130

谷立言獨家專訪1》1.25兆國防特別條例第十度卡關、中共解放軍高層張又俠落馬，當第一島鏈軍力平衡備受挑戰、台海風險升溫之際，華府究竟如何看待台灣的角色？

1.25兆的國防特別條例，至今已第十度被封殺。

海鯤號完成首次潛航測試，國民黨立委們立即增加預算解凍條件

【雙魚之論】
海鯤號完成首次潛航測試，然後國民黨立委們（馬文君、王鴻薇等）立即增加預算解凍條件：安全、裝備未全數到期等。 

海鯤號完成首次潛航測試    James Tseng FB 20260130

海鯤號在昨天完成第一次潛航測試，原本，我以為這只是非常單純的一項測試，沒想到，在傍晚居然看到有人在網路上嗆聲，說如何，潛艇是回來了沒？我才驚訝的發覺到，有一批人，正期待著海鯤號的失敗，對，台灣就是有這樣一群人，認為自己是中國人，每一天都在等待台灣落後，落難，比中國爛，然後他們才會感到開心。

但，事情就是永遠不會讓這些爛人開心，昨天海鯤號在晚上六點半順利完成返航，踏出我國潛艦國造進程中非常關鍵的一步。

這次海試的重要性就是「首次淺水潛航測試」，也就是讓潛艦正式離開水面，進入實際的水下作業環境，目的是驗證船體在承受水壓時的結構完整性，並確認各項密封組件是否滴水不漏。

新型態戰爭：滲透之戰已在台展開 A New Form of Warfare: The Infiltration War Has Already Begun in Taiwan

新型態戰爭：滲透之戰已在台展開　A New Form of Warfare: The Infiltration War Has Already Begun in Taiwan

回顧近兩年台灣立法院的運作，可以清楚看見一連串彼此呼應、並非偶發的行為：違憲立法、拒審預算、否決關鍵人事案，系統性地造成政府機關停擺。其影響涵蓋國家核心治理節點，包括國家通訊傳播委員會（可削弱紅色認知作戰）、憲法法庭（使違憲法律難以生效）、監察院（專注監督公務體系防弊與人權保護）。

Special Passport for Kinmen residents Chen Yu-jen 為陳玉珍設計專用的「福建護照」

 

【雙魚之論】
Chen Yu-jen（陳玉珍）, a legislator from Kinmen, is well known for repeatedly manipulating and conflating the concepts of China, the Republic of China, Taiwan, and Chinese nationalism to suit shifting political narratives. Her latest claim—that she is not Taiwanese but a “Fujian citizen”—is yet another example of this rhetorical paradox.
If this is truly her position, then by her own logic, the governing authorities in Taiwan, operating under the name of the Republic of China, should be expected to issue a separate passport specifically for individuals born in Kinmen and Matsu who explicitly deny being part of the Taiwanese people. After all, Kinmen and Matsu have, for an extended period, used currency specially overprinted and designated exclusively for circulation in Kinmen and Matsu.  After all, Kinmen and Matsu have, for an extended period, used currency specially overprinted military certificate designated exclusively for circulation in Kinmen and Matsu.

來自金門的立法委員陳玉珍，向來擅長在「中國」、「中華民國」、「台灣」以及「中國民族主義」等概念之間反覆挪用、混用，並依政治需要製造矛盾敘事。她近日宣稱自己「不是台灣人，而是福建人」，正是這種修辭操作的最新例證。
若這真是她的立場，那麼依其自身邏輯，台灣的治理當局——以中華民國之名行使主權者——理應為那些出生於金門、馬祖，且明確否認自己屬於台灣人民的人，另行核發一種專屬的護照。畢竟，金馬地區也長期使用過加印「金馬專用」的專屬貨幣——軍票。

中共要垮台？美軍警告：敢打台灣，習近平與高層全斬首！ 說故事的那個男人 20260123

說故事的那個男人 20260123

KMT’s Cheng Li-wen: America as a “Former” Benefactor, China as a “Relative” — and Its Organs 鄭麗文 曾經的恩人，親人的器官

【雙魚之論】
As expected of the chair of the “Chinese” Kuomintang, Cheng Li-wen refers to the United States using the word “once,” implicitly acknowledging America’s postwar assistance to Taiwan while framing it firmly as something of the past.
By contrast, when speaking of China, Cheng describes it as “family,” invoking DNA to suggest that such kinship is immutable. Yet when this rhetoric is juxtaposed with the reality of organ harvesting—and, by extension, the chilling implications of so-called “child farms” and even “infant farms”—her invocation of “family” becomes profoundly unsettling and sends a shiver down the spine.

果然是「中國」國民黨的主席，鄭麗文提及美國用的是「曾經」兩字，雖然不否認其戰後對於台灣的援助，但都已經是過去式。
但對於中國，鄭麗文以「親人」來描述，透過DNA，親人關係是不會改變。但聯想到器官農場，已經更進一步的學童農場、嬰兒農場。鄭麗文的「親人」之說，令人不寒而慄！！

綠：鄭麗文把敵人當親人　不應跟施暴者站同一邊　中央社 20260129

國民黨主席鄭麗文昨天表示，美國曾是恩人，大陸是親人，不需要在美中之間選擇。民進黨立法院黨團今天表示，中國時常派機艦擾台，是台灣的敵人，鄭麗文把敵人當親人，被家暴的人不應該跟施暴者站在同一邊；至於把美國比喻是恩人也大可不必，國家間平等往來，都是友人。

鄭麗文昨天在國民黨中常會中表示，有朋友向她提到，「美國曾經是我們的恩人，但大陸是我們的親人」，中華民國從二戰之後，絕對不會忘記美國情誼，因為大家不是忘恩負義的人，但大陸是大家的親人，絕對做不出骨肉相殘的事情，所以不需要在美中之間選擇，兩岸和解也能帶來美中合作。

武獲流程與軍購流程

A New Form of Warfare: The Infiltration War Has Already Begun in Taiwan

A New Form of Warfare: The Infiltration War Has Already Begun in Taiwan    HoonTing 20260126

國軍設聯合火力協調中心 台美聯合幕僚作業 聯合 20260125

【雙魚之論】
It seems to me that the Joint Fire Coordination Center is USTDC in a way.

國軍設聯合火力協調中心 台美聯合幕僚作業　聯合 20260125

因應各軍種陸續接裝美製火力裝備加上現役國造各式特種飛彈，國防部在台北大直博愛營區新成立國軍最高層級的「聯合火力協調中心」，藉以協調各軍種不對稱火力部署；且協調中心席位，有大批美國友盟人員所屬，台美傳已實施多次聯合幕僚作業。

為何柯文哲急推《人工生殖法》？ Why Ko Wen-je Is Willing to Trade National Defense for the Artificial Reproduction Act

Why is Ko Wen-je so fixated on pushing the Artificial Reproduction Act? He has even proposed using this bill as a quid pro quo to trade with the ruling party for the National Defense Special Budget Act.
Yet the nature, importance, and urgency of these two matters are fundamentally incomparable. The defense budget concerns Taiwan’s very survival and national security, whereas the Artificial Reproduction Act, while related to livelihoods and medical rights, does not carry the same level of urgency or strategic significance. If the ruling party were to accept such a trade, it would amount to allowing Ko Wen-je to “take advantage of a moment of crisis,” potentially placing Taiwan in an even more dangerous situation.
On the surface, the amendment to the Artificial Reproduction Act is being led by TPP legislator Chen Chao-tzu, but in reality this is also an issue that Ko Wen-je himself has been forcefully promoting—so much so that his impatience and agitation reveal possible personal ambitions or ulterior motives. So what, then, is his true motivation?
Recent media reports indicate that China has developed extreme and horrifying practices in the field of biotechnology: not only involving designated organ transplants, but even advancing to the stage of forcibly abducting people to harvest their organs. More disturbingly, there are reported cases of targeting vulnerable women—including prostitutes or trafficked women—for forced pregnancy and childbirth, followed by the direct harvesting of infant organs or stem cells. So-called “biotechnology centers” or “institutes of life sciences” in Cambodia are reportedly cooperating with Chinese biological research institutes, operating a “baby farm” model in which newborns’ cerebrospinal fluid or stem cells are extracted to produce so-called “rejuvenation” or anti-aging products for China’s elite.
Against this backdrop, Ko Wen-je’s urgency in emphasizing the passage of the Artificial Reproduction Act—particularly provisions on surrogacy—may not be focused on addressing infertility or helping ordinary families. Rather, it may be an attempt to open up a manipulable channel involving surrogate mothers and the children they bear. The draft proposed by Chen Chao-tzu has been acknowledged by Ko himself as “rough,” lacking clear regulations on newborn health protections and parental responsibilities. Yet he attempts to justify pushing it through by saying, “Let’s get something first, then improve it later.” In this context, the most critical objective of rushing the bill through may well be to commercialize surrogate mothers and the children they give birth to.
Although this line of reasoning is a reasonable inference and suspicion based on existing reports—and not groundless speculation—the mere possibility of such a scenario is deeply unsettling and terrifying. Is Ko Wen-je a “Merchant of Venice”?

柯文哲為何如此執著於推動《人工生殖法》？他甚至提出願以該法與《國防特別預算條例》和執政黨進行對等交換。
然而，這兩者的性質、重要性與急迫性根本無法相提並論。國防預算是攸關台灣生存的國家安全議題，而人工生殖法雖涉及民生與醫療權益，卻不具同等迫切性與戰略層級。若執政黨接受這種交換條件，等於讓柯文哲「趁人之危」，甚至可能將台灣置於更危險的境地。
表面上，《人工生殖法》修法由民眾黨立委陳昭姿領銜提案，但實際上這也是柯文哲本人極力推動的議題，甚至因氣急敗壞而見其個人企圖或私心。那麼，他的真正動機究竟是什麼？
從近期媒體報導可見，中國在生物科技領域已發展出極端且駭人的做法：不僅涉及指定器官移植，甚至進化到強行擄人摘取器官的階段。更進一步，已出現直接針對弱勢女性（包括娼妓或被拐賣婦女）進行強迫受孕、生育，隨後直接摘取嬰兒器官或幹細胞的案例。柬埔寨的所謂「生物科技中心」或「生命科學院」，據報導即與中國相關生物研究所合作，涉及「嬰兒農場」（baby farm）模式，抽取新生兒脊髓液或幹細胞製成所謂「回春」或抗衰老藥物，供應給中國權貴階層。
因此，柯文哲如此急切強調人工生殖法的通過（特別是代理孕母制度），其焦點很可能不在解決不孕症或幫助一般家庭，而是試圖為「代理孕母」與所生嬰兒開啟某種可被操縱的管道。陳昭姿版本的草案被柯文哲自己承認「粗糙」，對新生兒的健康保障、養育責任完全缺乏明確規範，他卻以「先求有、再求好」來掩飾強行推動的理由。在此脈絡下，倉促通過該法，最關鍵的目標恐怕正是將代理孕母及其產下的孩子做商業使用。
這雖然是基於現有報導所做的合理推論與懷疑，並非空穴來風，但光是想像這種可能性，就令人感到極度不安與恐怖。柯文哲是「威尼斯商人」嗎？