下面是我直接記錄英文後翻譯的原稿，讓大家看看外國記者如何做功課，把連宋問得滿頭包。
歡迎指正、轉載。更歡迎平面媒體全文刊載。
3/22 連宋中外記者會實況記錄：外國記者提問part 1
影像來源：中視
記錄翻譯：josephtyw
註：中文翻譯盡量直接根據所聽寫的英文、忽略那個一直在干擾大家聽英文的口譯員。中括弧內的字是英文聽不清楚，由記錄自行補上的字。
第一題，(影片時間0:30-4:20左右)。
Catherine from International Times: I would like to ask Chairman Lien and Chairman Soong if the suit filed by you under legal procedure is handled according to Taiwanese law, the election recall law, will you accept a result of a recount that is conducted during that lawsuit if it still shows that Mr. Chen is the winner of the election?
國際時報記者問：我想請問連主席和宋主席，如果你們提出的選舉訴訟，按照臺灣的法律──選罷法──來處理，如果訴訟過程中法院進行驗票，結果還是陳水扁先生當選的話你們會不會接受？
Lien: Well, I think the court is our last resort in this case. We have asked the court to conduct a transparent, immediate recount. We hope they will agree to this, and start to recount immediately. So this is [still] depending, because whether they are going to recount or not, we do not know. But the margin is razor-thin---it is only 0.2 percent. And I think we are entitled to a speedy and fair recount. If my memory serves [me] well, then I remember in the last United State's [presidential] election, something came out in Florida. The margin was 0.5 percent, and there was a recount. So in this case, it is only about 0.2 percent. There is a better reason to expect a recount. [Also,] we believe that we will respect the results of the recount.
連戰答：我想這種情況下，司法途徑是我們最後的手段。我們已經要求法院進行透明、立即的驗票。我們也希望他們能夠同意驗票，並立刻開始驗票。但是這還不確定，因為他們會不會驗票我們還不知道。但是這次雙方的差距非常小，只有百分之零點二。所以我覺得我們應該可以要求，要立即、公平的驗票。如果我記得沒錯的話，上次美國大選，佛羅里達州也發生過問題，當時的差距是百分之零點五，因此
法院就重新驗票。我們的情況是差距百分之零點二，因此我們更有理由要求驗票。而且，我相信我們會尊重驗票的結果。
Soong: May I add a few comments on what Lien just said. There is a so-called legal problem. Basically, it affects our constitutional, uh, crisis. We are a so-called young democracy, so both the parties DDP and KMT agree the people can raise the question about the validity of the election outcome.
This is why we want to seek a meeting with the president if he agrees. This is a constitutional crisis of having a recount.
宋楚瑜答：讓我對連先生所說的再補充幾點。這裡有一個法律問題，會造成憲政危機。我國的民主還年輕，所以兩黨──民進黨和國民黨都同意人民能夠質疑選舉的結果。這是為什麼我們希望面見陳總統，如果他同意的話。因為重新驗票會造成憲政危機的。
第二題(影片時間4:30~9:50)。
NY Times: I would like to ask both of you if you have been in touch with the defense minister within the last three days? Did you encourage him to resign? Would you expect him to provide any support for your contention that military forces have been improperly denied the privilege to vote?
Thank you.
紐約時報記者問：我想問你們兩個人，在最近三天有沒有跟貴國國防部長聯絡？是不是你們鼓勵他辭職的？你們是否期待他會證實你們所質疑的「軍警人員被剝奪投票權」一事？謝謝。
Lien: Well, I have not privately talked to the defense minister not only in the past three days, but almost in the past three years. So there has been no contact [between us and him].
But, I don't know whether his resignation was influenced by the fact that the so-called, "national security alert," was started after the gun shot.
And, I don't know how many military personnel, including military police, and regular police forces were deprived the voting rights because of this decision made only about a few, less than 24 hours before the election.
[Whether General Tang's] decision, [was] influenced by this event or not, I do not know. But we do expect the president to give the nation, [and] the country an explanation, [so that we can] to find out why the people---numerous members of the military and police forces were deprived their voting rights under the so-called national security alert. At the same time, the central election commission made the decision that the election can go, can continue, under normal conditions. This is rather, well, controversial. If it is normal, one side is normal, one side is not normal, then which is true? We don't know! So, this is one point that is beyond recounting. This is one thing more! This is something else.
連戰答：我不但在最近三天沒有跟國防部長私下談話，連最近三年也很少談。所以，我們沒有任何的聯絡。但是，我不知道他辭職的原因是否跟槍擊案後政府決定啟動所謂的「國安機制」有關。我也不知道有多少軍人，包括憲兵和警察，因為這個選前不到24小時所作的決定而被剝奪了他們投票的權利。湯部長的決定是否受這影響，我不知道。但是我們倒是期待總統能給全民、給全國一個交代，為什麼這麼多人民、無數的軍警人員因為所謂的國安機制，使得他們的投票權被剝奪了。而且，中央選舉委員會在同一時間則決定總統選舉可以照常舉行。這就有點矛盾了。如果真的可以照常，一邊認為照常，一邊認為是非常狀態(所以才啟動國安機制)，那到底哪一邊講的才是真的？我們不知道！這是我們在要求驗票之外的另一點質疑。這是額外的、另外的質疑。
Soong: By the way, I wish to want to add that I didn't meet or contact with Gen. Tang, either. In other words, I didn't have any contact, just for the past few years, I didn't get a chance to talk to him, because this is very sensitive. [Because] he is a member of the KMT, I did not have the chance to meet with him. But, I want to add one more point, that is, not only the [timing of the] decision to introduce the so-called national security mechanism, or to impose on this country a national security alert [is in question,
but] Minister Tang was quoted to have said, "there was no unusual military activities on the other side of Taiwan Strait." [Again,] He was quoted to have said this: "there was no unusual military activities on the other side of Taiwan Strait." So there was no military reasons or defense reasons for this country to introduce the so-called, "national security alert," which actually deprived thousands of the military personnel of their rights to vote in this election.
宋楚瑜答：順便一提，我希望我可以補充說，我沒有跟湯部長見面或聯絡。換句話說，我也沒有跟他聯繫，近幾年我甚至沒有機會跟他講話，因為這是很敏感的。(因為)他是國民黨員，我沒有機會跟他見面。但是，我要補充的一點是，不只是啟動所謂的國安機制這個決定，或者是讓國家處於國安警戒狀態的時間令人起疑，而且湯部長被引述說，「對岸沒有任何異常的軍事活動。」再重複一次，「對岸沒有任何異常的軍事活動。」因此，沒有任何軍事或者是國防的理由應該要啟動所謂的國安警戒，使得幾千位的軍人在這次選舉中投票權被剝奪。
Lien: You mentioned General Tang, and it reminds me that not long ago he had publicly expressed his view that he was for the absentee voting system, or the absentee voting institution for the military.
連戰答：你提到湯部長，這讓我想到不久前他還公開表示他支持軍人不在籍投票的制度或機制。
Ho: Let me just add quickly that the number of those military police personnel who were deprived the right to vote is about 200,000.
The lady on the right... (Next question)
主持人蘇起：讓我很快的補充一下，被剝奪投票權的軍警人員大概有二十萬人。請右邊這會女士發言...
註：注意！主持人雞婆地說了那個「二十萬人」的數字，引起後來一連串的追問。
第三題(9:30-12:00)
QUESTION 3 (9:30-12:00)
Mary from Public Radio International: I would like to ask for a clarification.
You are asking for both a recount and for the entire to election to be declared null and void. If there is a recount, and you're found to have won, are you going to decide that the election was fair?
國際公共廣播電臺記者問：我想請你們澄清一下。你們要求驗票，但也要求法院判決選舉無效。如果驗票結果是你們贏了，那你們是否會改口說這場選舉其實是公平的？
Lien: Whether there will be a recount is to be decided by the court, by the judicial process...
連戰答：我們還不知道法院會不會同意驗票，所以...
Soong: May I answer the question first?
宋楚瑜答：我可以先回答嗎？
Lien: Yeah, Please.
連戰答：可以，請回答。
Soong: I think the whole election process is very unfair. But still under that circumstances, we feel that we are confident [that] we still can win because we are notified by many many people here in Taiwan [that] they have noticed the corruption, and the poor performance, and the incompetence of
the incumbent administration under the leadership of president Chen. So, there is no connection between just the unfairness and THE result. But, [for] the first step, we feel that one part [to resolve] the unfairness, is the recount. If we can establish, that [if] we take those invalid ballots
we still can win, even on that amount, [that would be enough].
宋楚瑜答：雖然我認為整個選舉過程非常不公平，但是在這樣的情況下，我們還是對勝選有信心，因為我們發現有許許多多的臺灣人民都對於現任的扁政府貪污、表現不佳、無能。所以，最後的選舉結果和過程中的不公沒有關係。但是，至少第一步，我們可以用驗票來試著解決這些不公。如果在驗票時把廢票中原本應該屬於我們的票數加回去，我們就會贏了，那就夠了。
Su: The lady in the back, and then the gentleman in the front.
主持人：請在後面的那位女士先問，然後是前面這位先生。
第四題(12:00-20:00)
QUESTION 4 (12:00-20:00)
Chen for the Associated Press: I would like ask Mr. Lien and Mr. Soong,
you are demanding a meeting with Mr. Chen Sui-Bian. What would you say to him when you meet with him then?
美聯社記者問：我想請問連先生和宋先生，你們要求與陳水扁總統會面。你們準備跟他當面說什麼？
Lien: Well, I would say that this election has create a unprecedentedly constitutional, Uh, crisis. Because the,.. what is the issue involved? Not only the ordinary legal process, but the constitutional problem. The legitimacy
and the legality of the country (and the government) is being put in doubt.
When people have this kind of position and doubt, I think it is the responsibility of President Chen to come up, come out, and face the nation, and solve the issue. This is what I want to tell him.
連戰答：我會跟他說這場選舉造成一場前所未有的憲政危機。因為你們看，問題出在哪裡？不只是普通的法律程序，而是一個憲政問題！人們正在懷疑國家、政府的正當性、合法性。當人們開始產生這樣的懷疑時，我認為陳總統有責任出來面對全國人民、解決問題。這是我要告訴他的。
And then secondly, the three points that we have mentioned here. We demand a immediate, public, transparent recount of all the ballot. This would not be the first time that we do this. We have been doing this in the past.
This is particularly because the margin is razor-thin, as I said. It is therefore necessary that we do this immediately. Although this is not [part of] the presidential power, but at least he should express his support to the court, to go ahead with the recount. And, up to this point, he has been
reticent on this issue. [Maybe] he would say that this is not my power, [or that] this is a problem for the judiciary or the court. But this is an issue involving himself. So I think he must express his own stand.
再來，就是我們剛剛講的那三點。我們要求立即、公開、透明、全面地驗票。而這也不是我們第一次這麼做，以前也做過，只是這一次正如我剛剛講的，雙方差距非常小，所以我才一定要立即開始驗票。雖然這不是總統職權的一部分，但是他至少應該表示支持法院去驗票。到目前為止，他還是不肯表態。也許他會說這不屬於我的職權，這是法院的問題、司法的問題，但這也是一個跟他有關的問題！因此我認
為他應該要表態。
And secondly, of course that you will accept an investigation board, or task force, or a team of specialists, organized by either international or domestic specialists, investigating the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, surrounding the so-called, "gunshot." There are so doubts,
so many suspected doubts. [T]his is what we demand. And also this is not the first time. In the past we did have the same problems, that we invited the international specialist to come do some coincident investigation.
第二，當然就是你(陳總統)要讓由國內外專家組成的調查小組或專家小組來調查所謂的「槍擊案」，查出整個事件的唯一真相。這是我們要求的。這也不是第一次有類似的情形，以前發生同樣的狀況時，我們也有請國外的專家來一起調查。
And the third point is the so-called, "nation security alert." Why was it started, [and why did] the event only effect the personnel in the military and police forces. And at the same time the election went [on] [un]affected.
Those are the questions we like to ask. The basic point is that there is a confidence crisis in this country. The people, a great number of our people do not believe our government. So, how trust our government? So [if you ask] the government, [it] will reply that if you have doubts, why don't you go to the criminal police bureau and find [it] yourself? But the problem is that the people do not trust this process. That is my answer.
第三點就是所謂的「國安機制」。這個機制為什麼啟動？為什麼只有影響軍警人員，而選舉則是照常舉行？這些是我們要問的問題。基本上，目前我國面臨的是一個信心危機。許許多多的人民不相信政府。我們怎麼相信政府？如果你質疑政府，他會叫你自己去刑事警察局找答案，可是問題就是人民不相信政府呀！這是我的回答。
Soong: Let me add [why this is] important. The reasons that we want to request the audience with the president is so urgent and we feel it is very urgent and necessary [is] because, number 1, if this constitutional disputes cannot
be settled before May 20, our incumbent term of president of office is going to be expired and terminated. By that time, then [if the] constitutional crisis [has] not been resolved, according to our democratic process we don't have an elected president. Who is going fill that position? This is a genuine
question. And as you know that the legal procedure takes time. The legal procedure takes time. If this legal procedure prolongs and drags on, then our country faces a serious constitutional crisis. That's one.
宋楚瑜答：讓我們說明為什麼這件事很重要。我們覺得有必要馬上跟陳總統見面是因為，第一，如果這個憲政危機拖到五月二十日還沒有解決，現任總統的任期卻結束了。屆時，如果這個憲政危機還沒解決的話，根據我們的民主程序，我們就是還沒有選出新的總統。到時候誰才是總統？這是一個真的問題。而且，你們知道，司法途徑很花時間的，如果法律程序拖太久，我們國家就會面臨嚴重的憲政危機。這
是第一點。
Second, rumors will spread out that the government is trying to move in police forces, thousands of them, to the presidential office squares. And, if the crush between the demonstrators and these police force become bloodshed, it is going to be very serious. Not only domestically, as you know, these may cause serious repercussions. That is second. Third one, if these crisis prolong, our economy is going to be seriously affected as you have noticed from the today's stock market.
第二，有謠言說政府正在調動大批警力到總統府廣場。如果抗議民眾跟這些警察的對峙演變成流血衝突的話，那就很嚴重了。不只是國內的問題，你們知道，這會引起很嚴重的後果。這是第二點。第三點，如果危機持續不解除，我們的經濟會大受影響，正如你們在今天股市看到的。
問題五 (20:00-21:20)
QUESTION 5 (20:00-21:20)
(Unknown): According to the State Public Prosecutor-general of the supreme court, Mr. Lu Jen-fa, the evidence of the DNA on the bullet shows that the blood was Mr. Chen's. Do this [help to] dispel your doubts about the [gunshot], or the doubts about whether he is injured or not injured?
某記者問：根據最高檢查總長盧仁發所說，DNA檢測的結果顯示子彈上的血液確實是陳先生的。這有沒有解除你對槍擊案的質疑？有沒有去除你原先所懷疑陳先生究竟有沒有受傷？
Lien: I'm not a forensic expert. But I believe whether, in any case, the blood should be Mr. Chen's blood. Whether injured or not, I don't know. I am not a forensic expert, but the blood should be his, because it would be find out eventually.
連戰答：我不是法醫專家。但是我相信，不論真相如何，子彈上的血顯然會是陳先生的血。但是他有沒有真的受傷，我就不知道了。我不是法醫專家，但是血應該是他的，因為這點總是會查出來的。
問題六 (21:20-22:30)
QUESTION 6 (21:20-22:30)
Knight Ridder Newspapers: Clear the country is very divided. The stock market went down today. [The people] are unclear about what happened. Are you concerned that you are going to be perceived as sore losers?
騎士武士報記者問：顯然你們的國家正充滿對立。股市今天也大跌，人民也不清楚到底發生什麼事。你們會不會擔心別人覺得你們是輸不起？
Lien: Are we going to be concerned?
連戰答：我們擔不擔心什麼？
Knight Ridder Newspapers: Are you concerned that so指控me people are seeing you as sore losers that you haven't mounted sufficient evidence to back [your claims]?
騎士武士報記者：你們會不會擔心你們到現在還提不出足夠的證據來支持你們的指控，大家會覺得你們只是輸不起？
Lien: Sore loser...
連戰：輸不起？！
Soong: As I have said at the beginning, I even had it written [as] an opening remarks. These sure is a painful decision to make, but we have decided to reject the election result not because we can not accept the losing, [but] because we won't compromise Taiwan's vital democracy, and principle and
mechanism of fair and just competition.
宋楚瑜：正如我一開始所講的，我甚至還寫下來作為開場白。「我們作了一個痛苦的決定，就是我們不承認選舉結果。這並非我們不願意接受失敗的事實，而是我們不願意犧牲臺灣的民主機制，與公平競爭的原則。
問題七 (22:30-27:15)
QUESTION 7 (22:30-27:15)
Allen Patterson from Bloomberg News: This is a very simple question. How soon are you going to call off the protest outside. How soon are you going to end the protest. And, what do you hope to accomplish by its continuation.
布倫堡新聞記者亞倫．派特森問：一個簡單的問題。你何時要叫示威群眾散去？什麼時候要結束抗爭？又，你們持續示威有什麼目的？
Lien: I hope we can answer the question. We have been trying to calm them down the first night. We wanted to calm them down and send them home the first night. But it was impossible. So I like to answer your question that the crowd is not a manipulated crowd. I think you find the Mayor Ma has
tried. Maybe some other people have tried. But [did not succeed.] So, I don't really know. But I think the government should do something.
連戰答：很可惜我無法回答你的問題。我們從第一天晚上就一直試圖要讓群眾冷靜下來。我們第一天就想叫他們冷靜下來回家去，但是沒辦法做到！我必須這樣回答你的問題：這些群眾都是自發的，沒有人在背後策動。我想你一定有發現馬市長也有試著勸他們，別人應該也有勸，可是都沒有成功。所以我真的不知道示威什麼時候結束，但我知道政府應該要處理。
Allen: Have you asked crowd outside to go home? But I think if YOU called them to go home they would listen.
亞倫：你有叫群眾回家嗎？我想如果是「你」叫他們回去的話，他們會聽從！
Lien: Do you think so?
連戰：真的嗎？
Allen: I am asking YOU!
亞倫：是我在問你耶！
Lien: I think the government can do something.
連戰：我想政府能夠處理。
Allen: But they are your supporters!
亞倫：但是他們是你的支持者！
Lien: They are my supporters? They are my supporters, but I think they have a legitimate right to [protest], and the reason is, [we don't know] what is the reason the recount cannot be done? Recount! And the investigation.
In addition to our own police investigation, you can also invite some outsiders, so that you can really clarify certain issues. And people can agree that this is indeed the case, nothing but the truth. So [only] the government can respond in such a way.
連戰：他們是我的支持者？對，他們的確是我的支持者，但是他們仍有權抗爭！因為，我們不知道為什麼到現在還不能驗票？驗票！還有調查！除了我們自己的刑警調查之外，你們也可以邀請一些外界的公正人士，來澄清一些疑點，使大家都能相信真相確實有水落石出。只有政府才能對抗議群眾做這樣的回應。
Allen: I don't think you answered my question. I just want to know when you are going to call off the protest outside. And, what to hope to accomplish by its continuation.
亞倫：我覺得你並沒有回答我的問題。我只想知道，你們什麼時候要結束抗爭？你們持續示威有什麼目的？
Lien: (!!) I, I, I don't think I can end the protest.
連戰：我，我，我不覺得我有辦法可以結束這場示威。
Allen: Is it out of your control?
亞倫：難道情況已經失控了？
Lien: It is out of my control, yes.
連戰：沒錯，情況已經失控了。
Soong: I want to say these two things. One is that our supporters, they feel that their constitutional rights to elect the president has been deprived simply because the election fraud. So, on the other hand, we have seen unusually
high proportion of invalid ballots and also we have sought to compile all those information and solid information from these supporters. There are numerous, many many evidence [that] their constitutional rights to elect their own preferred president is not been respected.
宋楚瑜：我要講兩點。第一點，我們的支持者覺得由於選舉舞弊，他們按照憲法選舉總統的權利被剝奪了。而且，我們也看到有異常高的廢票比率，我們也開始樣這些支持者收集這些證據、確實的證據。有許許多多的證據顯示他們沒有辦法使用按照憲法選舉他們想要的總統這個權利。
Lien: The first night I told the [crowd] it's already very late, it's already very late. And, it's about the time that we leave. But the response was, "Why you are so weak? Chairman, why you are so weak?"
連戰：第一天晚上我跟群眾說，已經很晚了，該回去了。但群眾的反應卻是，「你怎麼這麼軟弱？主席，你怎麼這麼軟弱？」
Soong: They said, "Mr. Lien, why are you so weak? 站起來, stand up!" That's the language Mr. Chen insulted our presidential candidate.
宋楚瑜：他們說，「連主席，你怎麼這麼軟弱？站起來！」而「站起來」這句話是陳先生用來侮辱競爭對手連先生的。
問題八(27:15-37:34)
QUESTION 8 (27:15-37:34)
International Radio: To us outsiders, observers, it doesn't look like you are trying very hard to disperse this crowd, and you are not doing [it].
So, do you realize you might be playing Beijing's game? Second question, you published this afternoon a long list of why the election was pisted, [part of the book was] in English, including this very serious allegation that a hundred and ninety thousand military police and emergency person were affect, abate from voting. This a huge accusation because the margin is only thirty thousand, so everybody can see that. [If] two hundred thousand people have been affected from voting, this is huge. Now, we checked with the Ministry of Defense and the Executive Yuan, nobody is confirming this
number. So, if this accusation is wrong, it's a very big one. And so, can you back it? Or, should you be responsible for spreading such a tremendous accusation?
國際廣播記者問：從我們這些外界旁觀者的角度來看，你好像沒有很努力解散群眾，而且你也沒有去做。所以，你有沒有發現你可能正按著北京方面希望的劇本在走？第二個問題，今天下午你們印製了一長串你們不接受選舉結果的理由，有英文的，裡頭有一項很嚴重的指控：十九萬軍警人員受到影響不能投票。既然雙方差距只有三萬票，這是一個天大的指控，因為如果真的有二十萬人不能投票，這很嚴重。可是，我們向國防部和行政院查證，沒有人能夠證實這個數字。如果這個指控不對，那也是一個很嚴重的錯誤。你能夠就這個指控提出證據嗎？如果不行，你又該如何為任意散佈這麼嚴重的指控負責？
Su: ...
主持人：...
Lien: 我知道, but did I see the two hundred thousand? You said it! (Pointing to Su) Hundred ninety thousand? 十九萬？ Who said that? My party?
連戰：我知道，可是那是二十萬嗎？二十萬是你說的！(指著蘇起) 十九萬？誰說的？我的政黨？
International Radio: This is actually the number of the total ground staff of your army, not counting maybe an error. So, it doesn't make sense.
國際廣播記者：這個數字其實大約等於貴國地面部隊的總數，所以好像不太合理...
Lien: Including police, yes. Military personnel including police.
連戰：包括警察，對，軍人包ň
