"The actual source of money gifted... was never established", the report says, and "Saif Gaddafi's word alone was relied upon." |
調(diào)查報告還透露:“捐款的資金來源無法證實,學(xué)校僅獲得了賽義夫?卡扎菲的一面之辭?!?#160; |
Lord Woolf also concludes that the timing of the donation, six weeks after Saif Gaddafi was awarded a PhD, was "unfortunate", "risky", "indicative of naivety at the LSE" and gave the impression that Saif had "purchased his degree". |
沃爾夫還在報告中評論說,賽義夫?卡扎菲是在獲博士學(xué)位6個星期后向?qū)W校捐款的,這一行動涉嫌“花錢購買學(xué)位”。對倫敦政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)院來說,這個時間很是“不巧”, 不僅帶來了一定的“風(fēng)險”,而且足以顯示學(xué)院的“幼稚”。 |
Lord Woolf says academics and staff acted in, what they perceived to be the best interests of the School, but the donation would not have been accepted if its source had been properly checked. |
沃爾夫表示,學(xué)院教職人員的這些做法在他們看來符合學(xué)校的最大利益,但是殊不知,資金來源倘若得到恰當(dāng)?shù)暮藢?,這筆捐款也就不會被接受。 |
He singles out Sir Howard Davies for criticism, concluding that "despite his great experience and ability, responsibility for what went wrong must rest with the [former] director." |
他還將霍華德?戴維斯挑出來進行了一番批判,“盡管他有著豐富的經(jīng)驗,能力也很強,但這些錯誤的舉動還得由這位前院長來承擔(dān)責(zé)任?!?/td>
|
The report also says that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi "duped" his academic supervisors by receiving extensive outside help in preparing his PhD thesis. |
報告還顯示,賽義夫?伊斯蘭?卡扎菲“騙過”他的學(xué)術(shù)導(dǎo)師,在準(zhǔn)備博士論文期間獲得了外界的廣泛幫助。 |
It says he was admitted to study at the LSE's philosophy department in 2003 because of an "idealism factor" that he might improve Libya - even though he had already been rejected by other LSE departments on the basis that his academic standards were not sufficiently high. |
2003年,賽義夫進入倫敦政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)院哲學(xué)系學(xué)習(xí)。因為學(xué)術(shù)水平不夠高,學(xué)院的其他院系都拒絕錄用他,但是,考慮到他或許可以改善利比亞現(xiàn)狀這個“理想化”因素,哲學(xué)系向他敞開了大門。 |
A separate University of London panel has been investigating allegations that Saif Gaddafi's PhD thesis might contain plagiarism or have been ghostwritten.
(Excerpts from BBC, Deceber 2, 2011)
|
倫敦大學(xué)另外成立了一個小組,目前正在對賽義夫博士論文是否涉嫌剽竊或雇人代寫進行調(diào)查。
(China.org.cn Wendy 譯)
|