斯諾登事件爆發以來，我一直在留意李柱銘及劉慧卿有沒有評論，他們一直都噤聲，我希望沒有走漏眼。終於，唉！藏頭露尾，狐狸的尾巴始終藏不住。請看New York Times 今晚這篇報導，如果嫌長，可淨看着了色的部份：
With Snowden Gone, Hong Kong Focuses on U.S. Surveillance
By
KEITH BRADSHERPublished: June 26, 2013
HONG KONG — The abrupt departure from Hong Kong on Sunday of Edward J. Snowden, the American former national security contractor, with the explicit approval of the Hong Kong government, has drawn the ire of the United States. But in Hong Kong the focus remains on Mr. Snowden’s exposure of American intelligence-gathering operations in Hong Kong and mainland China.
Leung Chun-ying, the territory’s chief executive, has called repeatedly for the United States to explain its surveillance activities here, brushing aside White House criticism that Mr. Snowden was allowed to fly to Moscow despite a pending American request for his arrest.
“Snowden has left, but the matter is not over,” Mr. Leung said at a tea with local journalists on Tuesday, the contents of which were confirmed on Wednesday by the government. “The Hong Kong government needs to safeguard the interests of Hong Kong.”
Mr. Snowden’s release of documents showing American efforts to hack into computers in Hong Kong and mainland China has drawn support not just from pro-Beijing groups in this semi-autonomous Chinese territory, but from pro-democracy groups that have long looked to the United States as an example of strong protections for civil liberties.
Emily Lau, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party, said that she would be very disturbed if Mr. Snowden someday came out of hiding and said that he had been forced by the local government or Beijing to leave Hong Kong against his will.
But with Mr. Snowden’s lawyers insisting this week that he left Hong Kong voluntarily, Ms. Lau said she had few other concerns about the case. She said she was focused on whether Hong Kong engaged in deliberate foot-dragging in not detaining Mr. Snowden sooner, which has been the complaint of the White House.
“My overriding concern is we operate according to the law,” she said, adding that she was not aware of any clear evidence that the Hong Kong government had broken its legal obligations.
The Hong Kong government contends it did not have a legal basis for stopping Mr. Snowden when he headed for the airport. Mr. Leung has noted that Hong Kong had posed questions to the United States last Friday about the details of an American request for his provisional arrest, which had been made six days earlier. The Hong Kong government had not yet received a reply when Mr. Snowden went to the airport Sunday morning and left the territory on an Aeroflot flight to Moscow.
Simon Young, director of the Center for Comparative and Public Law at Hong Kong University, said that in allowing Mr. Snowden to leave while legal wrangling continued, Hong Kong had acted within the letter of the law as set by its bilateral agreement with the United States for the surrender of fugitives. But Hong Kong did not act expeditiously, he said, and it is still unclear why Hong Kong did not detain Mr. Snowden on the United States’ allegation that he had stolen information, leaving the touchier issue of espionage charges for later.
Mr. Young said that based on his research, it usually took three to four days in previous cases for a request from overseas to lead to an arrest.
“It’s really about good faith and wanting to be a strong partner in these things, or keeping a distance,” he said, adding that Hong Kong had clearly chosen to keep its distance from the United States.
Security experts and democracy proponents say that mainland China’s domestic surveillance operations in Hong Kong are far more extensive than the American effort. But those operations have largely disappeared from public discussion as attention has focused on the many details released by Mr. Snowden.
Martin Lee, the founding chairman of the Democratic Party but now mostly retired from day-to-day politics, has been a lonely voice here in questioning the Hong Kong government’s handling of Mr. Snowden. Mr. Lee said that he was concerned whether Hong Kong had fully followed its obligations to detain or surrender fugitives under its bilateral agreement with the United States.
“It looks like the government turned a blind eye to all these formalities and let him go,” he said.
Mr. Lee said that if Mr. Snowden had stayed, his presence would have focused more international attention on the territory’s annual pro-democracy protest on July 1. “Now the guy’s gone, nobody is interested in Hong Kong,” he said.
The Hong Kong government considered in advance the possibility that the United States might retaliate for the decision to let Mr. Snowden leave, a person with detailed knowledge of the Hong Kong government’s deliberations said. Hong Kong has long asked that the United States issue visas on arrival to its citizens, instead of requiring them to apply in advance at the U.S. Consulate here. That pursuit of easier visa access could be hurt by the decision to allow Mr. Snowden’s departure, said the person, who requested anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.
But the Hong Kong government concluded that the United States was not likely to grant visas on arrival anytime soon anyway, the person said. The United States requires residents of mainland China to obtain visas in advance, and Hong Kong has been under Chinese rule since Britain returned it in 1997.
The United States has been concerned that mainland Chinese not use Hong Kong as a steppingstone to gain quick travel rights to the United States.
The United States already granted several years ago another plea of the Hong Kong government, by making available multiple-entry, multiple-year visas. The person familiar with the Hong Kong government’s deliberations said that there had been little discussion of whether the United States might revoke this privilege.
American companies that depend heavily on trade with China, importers and exporters alike, have been a powerful lobby in Washington in favor of the United States offering more visas to citizens of Hong Kong and mainland China.
Albert Ho, who was one of Mr. Snowden’s lawyers but is also a Democratic Party member of the legislature and a former chairman of the party, said Mr. Snowden’s sudden departure might have actually helped relations between Hong Kong and the United States in the long run.
“There would have been a lot of noise in the community in support of Snowden,” he said. “The longer he stayed, the more embarrassment there would have been.”
紐約時報這篇評論當然是站在美國立場來講，所以訪問爭取美國人歡心，講美國人中聽的說話的香港人。劉慧卿不講美國侵入香港電腦的劣行，另闢蹊徑(Ms. Lau said she had few other concerns about the case.)，李柱銘也荷戟獨徬徨(has been a lonely voice here in questioning the Hong Kong government’s handling of Mr. Snowden)。(恕我粗鄙)李妖怪的口吻，十足是美國國務院的發言人。我以前講過，你純講正義，斯諾登爆料，你第一個就應該駡美國佬，然後你駡香港政府，我服了你------夠戇居。但只鬧香港政府而對美國的行為置若罔聞，就等同在妓院門前立貞節牌坊，我呸！這就是李柱銘在訪問所講 turned a blind eye。看到這種妖孽，我怒火中燒。當白鴿黨在斯諾登事件沉默的時候，我把它叫鵪鶉黨，殊不知它一發聲，竟然是民妖黨。
律政司長反駁美國的講法，裏面當然有歪理，那是一場政治角力，不是在講純情講天真。只有妖怪才會搖着骷髏頭旗在吶喊，當正自己是王者之師。
斯諾登事件在香港爆發的時候，梁振英適值在紐約訪問，他一定預期被記者提問，預先盤算回應策略。斯諾登擺明是燙手山芋，可以提升至中美外交層面處理的事件， 梁振英當然要言辭謹慎，不能胡亂講超越身分可講的話，更不能講與中國立場相悖的話，所以他講了10次No Comment。如果選擇不評論，講一兩次No Comment不夠嗎？何必一次又一次去No Comment呢？作為一個有魅力的領導人，就不應有這種失措的表現，他身邊隨員也抵打。隨非這答案是請示中央之後囑咐他講的，否則老早就應該講一切依法處理。依法處理是妙不可言，屹立不倒，無械可擊的一句話。既可凸顯香港法治獨立，會履行港美之間簽訂的協議，又可抵抗美國佬的壓力，還暗地裏揶揄美國佬的侵權監察屬非法行為，講出來又漂亮又鏗鏘，為何不講？