• 瀏覽: 23,582
  • 回覆: 691
引用:
原帖由 00lawv13SEB 於 2009-5-10 05:20 AM 發表

輸方投訴有自己人在票箱, 要求重選, 呢 d叫做民主? 你識唔識乜叫民主?

Have you ever heard of something called 'due process'????


今次的罷免公投無合理原因展開, 不跟正常程序進行 ....

http:// ...
無癩賴皮陳水騙式民主在港大發生, 你有乜咁開心? 玩漏洞的流氓有乜值得歌頌? 論壇上陳先生講錯乜? 點解被攻足幾星期? 你可以指出來嗎?

你在中國人社區, 連中文都不用, 我點信你的發言是關心中國?



引用:
原帖由 爆雲歸西 於 2009-5-10 04:35 發表


你連 89年中國公佈六四死三百幾人都唔知, 看來你的回覆大部份都是在不清不楚下作出討論


真相從來不是在電視中找, 所謂的醫院消息來源是美國之音作的



你將 3樣野混為一談, 學生領袖、和平學生、暴徒平 ...
I don't think you are following our arguments....

I did not dig that clip up..... 古靈仔 did.......


平民有無開過庭決定殺唔殺軍人?

Oh right.... so police should behaves like robbers (shoot whoever they want to...... bla bla bla) and vice versa...... we don't care about the law..... we don't care about principles....

Besides, could you tell me, with confidence, that all the students who were killed deserved to die? Were they all involved in killing soldiers? Every single one of them?


我認為中國法制問題不在她的法, 是她的執行出問題, 我和你識鬼中國法律, 你去請教鼠王芬啦 ! 睇幾篇蘋果就識中國法律咩?

That, I disagree. I don't think I said anything wrong about the Chinese legal system (well at least that's what my lecturer told me); and I believe the Chinese Constitution is itself flawed and incompatible with democracy (of course, as I said before, it could be modernised). Besides, you don't need to be a legal expert to point out the apparent flaws within the Chinese Constitution.

你就唔好拿個小國和 13億人口的中國比啦 !

Right..... Hong Kong is small city though..... surely we can have democracy????

So large countries could not be democratised? That's a new theory......



引用:
原帖由 00lawv13SEB 於 2009-5-10 05:45 AM 發表


I don't think you are following our arguments....

I did not dig that clip up..... 古靈仔 did.......
你講乜野? 要我 follow乜? 你做乜唔 follow我?
引用:
Oh right.... so police should behaves like robbers (shoot whoever theywant to...... bla bla bla) and vice versa...... we don't care about thelaw..... we don't care about principles....

Besides, could you tell me, with confidence, that all the students whowere killed deserved to die? Were they all involved in killingsoldiers? Every single one of them?
軍警被殺就應該, 暴民 (平民或學生)就不該? 你要知死得最多唔係學生, 係受煽動的平民啊! 唔好再打學生牌啦, 佢地死得夠冤了, 鞭了 20年屍, 賣了20年錢, 支聯會都係收皮既時間啦 ! 黃毓民兩年前都叫支聯會泛民諗諗要食老本到幾時?
引用:
That, I disagree. I don't think I said anything wrong about the Chineselegal system (well at least that's what my lecturer told me); and Ibelieve the Chinese Constitution is itself flawed and incompatible withdemocracy (of course, as I said before, it could be modernised).Besides, you don't need to be a legal expert to point out the apparentflaws within the Chinese Constitution.
又係牙牙學語的中國專家
引用:
Right..... Hong Kong is small city though..... surely we can have democracy????

So large countries could not be democratised? That's a new theory........
睇下偽民和港大, 香港有著民智未? 國民教育的不成熟, 爛鬼、綜援人士、懶鬼的叫囂, 香港行得乜民主?

你在英國得閒就上街抗議皇室制度, 快 d廢除爛鬼皇室制度, 但就唔好學訓街卿講乜公民抗命, 要衝入白金漢宮捉英女皇, 這樣會有 fatal 後果, 無英國人會可憐你的 ! this is my advice!

[ 本帖最後由 爆雲歸西 於 2009-5-10 06:10 AM 編輯 ]



引用:
原帖由 爆雲歸西 於 2009-5-10 06:08 AM 發表

睇下偽民和港大, 香港有著民智未? 國民教育的不成熟, 爛鬼、綜援人士、懶鬼的叫囂, 香港行得乜民主?

你在英國得閒就上街抗議皇室制度, 快 d廢除爛鬼皇室制度, 但就唔好學訓街卿講乜公民抗命, 要衝入白金漢宮捉英女皇, 這樣會有 fatal 後果, 無英國人會可憐你的 ! this is my advice!.
在看過這網友的顛倒是非, 我已失去興趣跟他繼續討論下去

1) 他的論點只是想提出中國憲法出問題, 尤以顛覆、煽動判亂罪的憲法,  事實上這是西方國家及曾被中國判過顛覆、間諜、煽動判亂刑罰的人, 一直在躲藏在西方國家, 不斷出文指責中共, 不斷地叫囂著

可惜他不能指出以何方法推翻一國法律, 哪國/誰能有這權力做得到?  即使2009年後能夠推翻, 也就是以後的事, 怎能以此作為理據說中共在六四事件是錯的?

在1989年及至現在的中國, 中國人民也必須遵守當地法律, 這一點無容置疑

那網友欲想以此作為理據, 只會顯出他的不智

爭取更完善的中國法制, 是一個漫長的過程, 這並非說這想法是錯的, 但就斷不能以此作為理據反證六四事件



2) 加拿大CBC的錄影, 能夠清楚見到暴徒毒打軍人的暴行, 而他竟可指出是:
「they have actually provided evidence for the CCP's crime, but not the students)」!!!!

加拿大CBC電視台:
Massacre in Beijing's Tiananmen Square 天安門事件 (June 4, 1989)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyj-3S_ulvI&feature=related

這位網友可以將「能眼看見的錄影 影像」不去信, 反而去相信新聞報導員「口講, 未有實證」的旁白!  此可謂香港人之中「顛倒是非」的表表者



3) 一面迴避/ 無法提出理據我在前帖提出的「顛覆政權、暴亂情況」的客觀錄影資料, 一面叫讓著六四的死難者在未經審判前是不該死,  這樣無視客觀資料存在的思維, 還能有甚麼討論價值?


4) 陳一諤事件, 就更不用說了, 這網友可以認同第二次重選, 輸方以自己有人「企」在票箱旁(企喳喎), 以「不公正」為理據發起第二次公投, 認為這是合理的

卻又可以在提不出陳一諤錯處下, 否定今次公投不是「不公正」, 特別是那封正在報警處理中的SU EMAIL、宣傳的扭曲言論、造謠



以上是這模範香港人的「雙重標準」式思維, 已令我極度反感, 失去跟他討論興趣

試問香港的民智是如此多的歪理及顛倒是非, 行民主又點可能會令香港更好?

[ 本帖最後由 古靈仔 於 2009-5-10 01:13 PM 編輯 ]



[隱藏]
引用:
原帖由 爆雲歸西 於 2009-5-10 06:08 發表

你講乜野? 要我 follow乜? 你做乜唔 follow我?


軍警被殺就應該, 暴民 (平民或學生)就不該? 你要知死得最多唔係學生, 係受煽動的平民啊! 唔好再打學生牌啦, 佢地死得夠冤了, 鞭了 20年屍, 賣了20年錢, 支聯會都 ...
又係牙牙學語的中國專家

That maybe..... but was I wrong about the Chinese Constitution?


國民教育的不成熟, 爛鬼、綜援人士、懶鬼的叫囂

That's not very nice to talk about HK citizens like this..... especially when most of those people are mainland immigrants having a hard time to start off their lives in HK....



引用:
原帖由 古靈仔 於 2009-5-10 13:06 發表


在看過這網友的顛倒是非, 我已失去興趣跟他繼續討論下去

1) 他的論點只是想提出中國憲法出問題, 尤以顛覆、煽動判亂罪的憲法,  事實上這是西方國家及曾被中國判過顛覆、間諜、煽動判亂刑罰的人, 一直在躲藏在 ...
1.) 可惜他不能指出以何方法推翻一國法律, 哪國/誰能有這權力做得到.....

You said you are from HK right? You must have heard of the concept of judicial review (when the court declare a law or a government's legislation to be unconstitutional and void it) then......... It is an old concept (administrative law)...... and the first major case happened back in 1803 (Marbury vs Madison).

2) Hold on, you were the one who quoted from the presenter first (you mentioned he said "rebellion" a few pages back).... now suddenly, that became unreliable......

Also, did you not hear the gunshots? Did you not see the tanks firing at the crowd? Did you not see the wounded and the dead in that doctors' scene?


3.) You know what my argument is (and it still stands)..... Were they all 顛覆政權、暴亂情況?? Was execution the right punishment (even for the student leaders)? No one was innoccent?

And I have quoted a few foreign examples on treason (as requested by you) to support my argument...... You are the one who haven't answered my question.....


4.) The mechanism of impeachment/ a vote of no confidence is that a simple majority should be passed to initiate the process (SU committee) just like in the USA or UK (even less complicated in terms of process).

You can disagree with the reason for that impeachment (look at US history, an impeachment was launched against President Andrew Johnson in 1868 because he dismissed a minister !!!).... but remember, the vote (referendum in this case) is the last gatekeeper....... and what give the process its legality......

I don't see why do you oppose the process that much...... You know, unlike China.... Hong Kong also has a similar impeachment mechanism (not with a referendum but the Legco has power over that mechanism).....


P.S. As I said,  陳一諤 has violated collective responsibility...... and you seemed to have agreed..... so I really don't see why are you opposing the whole thing.....

[ 本帖最後由 00lawv13SEB 於 2009-5-10 06:41 PM 編輯 ]



引用:
原帖由 00lawv13SEB 於 2009-5-10 06:35 PM 發表

You said you are from HK right? You must have heard of the concept ofjudicial review (when the court declare a law or a government'slegislation to be unconstitutional and void it) then......... It is anold concept (administrative law)...... and the first major casehappened back in 1803 (Marbury vs Madison).

2) Hold on, you were the one who quoted from the presenter first (youmentioned he said "rebellion" a few pages back).... now suddenly, thatbecame unreliable......

Also, did you not hear the gunshots? Did you not see the tanks firingat the crowd? Did you not see the wounded and the dead in that doctors'scene?
當奴曾都和我們香港人講中文, 你可唔可以用中文? 用英文會高級些嗎?
係暴亂, 係作反就係人都知, 你唔知?

係有槍聲, 係有人受傷, 但點解要開槍, 點解有人受傷倒地? 受傷的人事前做過乜?

坦克車向人群開炮我又真係未見過, 請給片 !
引用:
3.) You know what my argument is (and it still stands)..... Were theyall 顛覆政權、暴亂情況?? Was execution the right punishment (even for thestudent leaders)? No one was innoccent?

And I have quoted a few foreign examples on treason (as requested byyou) to support my argument...... You are the one who haven't answeredmy question.....
死者事前做乜你又唔知, 中國政府公佈死幾多人你又唔知, 你講乜?
學生領袖和支聯會係要顛覆, 你又知唔知?
引用:
4.) The mechanism of impeachment/ a vote of no confidence is that asimple majority should be passed to initiate the process (SU committee)just like in the USA or UK (even less complicated in terms of process).

You can disagree with the reason for that impeachment (look at UShistory, an impeachment was launched against President Andrew Johnsonin 1868 because he dismissed a minister !!!).... but remember, the vote(referendum in this case) is the last gatekeeper....... and what givethe process its legality......

I don't see why do you oppose the process that much...... You know,unlike China.... Hong Kong also has a similar impeachment mechanism(not with a referendum but the Legco has power over that mechanism).....


P.S. As I said,  陳一諤 has violated collective responsibility...... andyou seemed to have agreed..... so I really don't see why are youopposing the whole thing....
成日投票, 投票, 選過乜 q 港大學生會主席幾個月玩三四五穫, 即係乜都唔使做, 日日投票?



提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
引用:
原帖由 Nu-Virgos 於 2009-5-10 10:33 PM 發表
「六四」到「五一二」的殺人幫兇

左共明顯要負責任的問題, 一各都會龜縮, 唔敢出黎回帖

原來除了日本的右翼分子之外,還有我們那些冷血卻自稱「愛國左共分子」的中國人
叫少兩日口號, 多用實質討論代替



[隱藏]
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
引用:
原帖由 Nu-Virgos 於 2009-5-10 10:38 PM 發表


「六四」到「五一二」的殺人幫兇

原來除了日本的右翼分子之外,還有我們那些冷血卻自稱「愛國左共分子」的中國人
你還有咩口號叫? 一次過叫 !



唉, 又一個用上西方社會政治模式,標準去審視中國的人出現
今次仲用埋英文, quote外國法律, 外國的選舉.........



我想問陳一諤下左台未?


條友除左6.4 單野出哂名外, 唔知做過d 乜。
但我覺得關鍵係依家港大生對學生會既態度, 下下都係得個10零個巴仙人出黎投??? 仲係咪咁有代表性? 香港立會選舉都有約30%啦~~



[隱藏]
引用:
原帖由 00lawv13SEB 於 2009-5-10 06:35 PM 發表


1.) 可惜他不能指出以何方法推翻一國法律, 哪國/誰能有這權力做得到.....

You said you are from HK right? You must have heard of the concept ofjudicial review (when the court declare a law or a government'slegislation to be unconstitutional and void it) then......... It is anold concept (administrative law)...... and the first major casehappened back in 1803 (Marbury vs Madison).

2) Hold on, you were the one who quoted from the presenter first (youmentioned he said "rebellion" a few pages back).... now suddenly, thatbecame unreliable......

Also, did you not hear the gunshots? Did you not see the tanks firingat the crowd? Did you not see the wounded and the dead in that doctors'scene?


3.) You know what my argument is (and it still stands)..... Were theyall 顛覆政權、暴亂情況?? Was execution the right punishment (even for thestudent leaders)? No one was innoccent?

And I have quoted a few foreign examples on treason (as requested byyou) to support my argument...... You are the one who haven't answeredmy question.....


4.) The mechanism of impeachment/ a vote of no confidence is that asimple majority should be passed to initiate the process (SU committee)just like in the USA or UK (even less complicated in terms of process).

You can disagree with the reason for that impeachment (look at UShistory, an impeachment was launched against President Andrew Johnsonin 1868 because he dismissed a minister !!!).... but remember, the vote(referendum in this case) is the last gatekeeper....... and what givethe process its legality......

I don't see why do you oppose the process that much...... You know,unlike China.... Hong Kong also has a similar impeachment mechanism(not with a referendum but the Legco has power over that mechanism).....


P.S. As I said,  陳一諤 has violated collective responsibility...... andyou seemed to have agreed..... so I really don't see why are youopposing the whole thing.....
我上邊答另一網友, 也是同樣的回應你

有幾點你應該值得注意:

1) 中國法制是另一課題, 不能以中國法制未完善作為理據, 反證中共在六四的錯處, 你說的修改憲法, 也是一個重大議題, 一國憲法要考慮作出修改, 需經過多個會議及程序, 不會隨便可作出修改, 中共成立以來, 也只曾修改過幾次憲法

並非說不應修改憲法令中國法制更附符合國際標準, 而是要指出這是一個漫長過程





2) 關於暴亂情況, 假如你細心看我的論點, 你應該會知道我的立場是:「不認同以高殺傷力鎮壓」, 不過, 我同樣「不認同平民學生的暴力行為」

2者的責任應各負, 2邊也同樣應該受譴責, 我立論跟你不同之處, 是你只針對中共的錯, 而對學生平民的責任嘗試加以掩飾

你說的「受審判」,就是認為中共不應用武力, 將有問題的暴徒捉拿再作出審判, 這我會認同

不過我考慮的是更多其他客觀因素, 例如:

a) 當時的客觀情況能否容許軍方以「平靜方法」控制局面? 資料所見, 軍人曾試過多次徒手進場, 也被群眾圍打, 軍車被攔截及被燒毀,  似乎當時的群眾已失去理性, 不單是不願離去, 更是要「以暴力」抗爭到底的一種姿態

因此你所說的先作審判的可行性是極低

b) 暫無證據顯示軍人是「向天開槍」或是「向人群開槍」, 2者同樣也可造成死傷, 但動機分別就很大

c) 見不到有裝甲車開砲, 請你提供資料, 沒的話, 則不要造謠


不過很明顯是你刻意忽略資料中的客觀情況的存在, 你的言論因而變得偏頗, 同時你亦未能提出理據否定六四是一場合「暴亂」性質的運動


3) 關於學生組織的顛覆企圖及其相關的行動, 我在前帖也貼過, 若有足夠證據觸犯當地法例, 這群人當然應被捉拿, 同時否定了64是「愛國民主運動」


你不斷問「 No one was innoccent? 」, 我也反問你, 是否當時所有參予過的人都被捉拿或殺死? 道理同出一撤





3) 陳一諤事件我所指的是「不公正」, 似乎是你想扭曲我是「質疑程序」, 你見不到我之前說過: 「玩程序嗟, 人人都識」的批評咩?  

collective responsibility? 這更可笑, su以往立場不是支持平反咩?  陳一諤立不是支持平反咩?  既然立場一致, collective responsibility方面出左咩問題? 呵呵, 似乎是屈人多一點吧

[ 本帖最後由 古靈仔 於 2009-5-11 01:22 PM 編輯 ]



[按此隱藏 Google 建議的相符內容]