[编者按 :本刊收到韩明阳同志的严正声明已是 5月 10日了 ,当时第二期 (即 69期 )早已开印了 ,所以只好在本期上刊出 ,应该说是没有耽误吧 !对于本严正声明 ,我们很为纳闷 ,怎么韩明阳同志连自己做的事都不知道了 ,使人费解。在此 ,我们不妨回顾一下 :我刊于 99年 6月的 65期上刊出“一大怪事”一文后 ,收到一些稿件及信件 ,包括韩明阳的“保卫航空史研究的旗手”(此标题是我们加的 )一信 ,信中说“姜长英是当代中国航空史研究的旗手 ,应勇敢地保卫他 ,不允许任何人纂改历史 ,这是历史赋予我们的责任。”(可以说 ,就是在他的促进下 ,我们后来才发表了两批文章的 )这些稿件信件均刊于 99年 12月的67期上。这下又来了一些稿件和信件 ,但正值学校放寒假 ,基本上都是开学时才收到的 ,所以只能在今年 6月份的 69期上 ,才刊出这些。其中包括韩明阳同志于 2月 2 4日写的信 ,其中称“最近我看一些保卫旗手的文章 ,我感到主攻目标是对的……。”我们想信韩是看到 67期上的文章 ,才写出此信的 ,而“保卫旗手”还是他首先提出来的呢 !可那时不来声明 ,还反而“感到主攻目标是对的。”到五月份才来这严正声明 ,我们实在不好理解。有兴趣的读者 ,可以对照 67期及 69期阅读之。至于这场“争论”是否毫无意义容后再议之 [Editor’s note: This journal has received a solemn statement from Comrade Han Myung-Yang on May 10, when the second (or 69) of the period was already printed, so it had to be published in this issue. It should be said that it has not been delayed. For the solemn statement, we are very puzzled, how Comrade Han Ming Yang do their own thing do not know, puzzling. Here, let us recall: After I published a “monstrosity” issue in the June issue of June 1999, I received a number of manuscripts and letters, including Han Mingyang’s “bearer of the defense of aviation history research” (the title We added) a letter which said “Jiang Chang-ying is the standard-bearer of contemporary China’s aviation history and should be bravely defend him and not allow any person to make changes to history, which is the responsibility that history has given us.” (It can be said that With his help, we later published two installments of the essay.) These manuscript letters were published in December, 1999, issue 67. Here are some other manuscripts and letters. However, when the winter break was held in schools, it was basically only received at the beginning of the school. That is why it was only published in the 69th issue of June this year. Including a letter written by Comrade Han Myung-yang on February 24, in which he said: “Recently, I read some articles on defending the beaachan and I think the main goal is right ....” We would like to believe that South Korea saw the 67th article, Only wrote this letter, and “defend the bearer” or he first proposed it! But then do not come to a statement, but also “the main target is right.” Only come to this solemn statement in May, we really do not Well understood. Interested readers, you can compare 67 and 69 read. As for whether this “controversy” is meaningless, let us discuss it later