學生燒基本法 泛民前輩反感
陳祖為拂袖離場 學生：承傳抗爭精神
【明報專訊】今年支聯會維園六四晚會緊扣雨傘運動，高歌《撐起雨傘》，有參加者即場舉起黃傘和應﹔不少環節改由大專生「擔大旗」，但4間大學學生會代表在台上燒《基本法》的舉動引起極大爭議，主辦單位支聯會兩邊難討好，引發泛民主派「老一代」反感，如香港大學政治及公共行政學系教授陳祖為更即時拂袖離場，斥學生代表「騎劫」悼念晚會。在台上燒基本法的中大學生會會長王澄烽則反駁，火燒基本法反而是承傳八九民運的抗爭精神。
陳祖為拂袖離場 學生：承傳抗爭精神
【明報專訊】今年支聯會維園六四晚會緊扣雨傘運動，高歌《撐起雨傘》，有參加者即場舉起黃傘和應﹔不少環節改由大專生「擔大旗」，但4間大學學生會代表在台上燒《基本法》的舉動引起極大爭議，主辦單位支聯會兩邊難討好，引發泛民主派「老一代」反感，如香港大學政治及公共行政學系教授陳祖為更即時拂袖離場，斥學生代表「騎劫」悼念晚會。在台上燒基本法的中大學生會會長王澄烽則反駁，火燒基本法反而是承傳八九民運的抗爭精神。
............
(6/62015明報節錄)
六四集會燒《基本法》宣示甚麽？學生的智慧説是承傳八九民運的抗爭精神，我看像紅衛兵不像民運人士的心智啊。《基本法》這憲制文件承傳殖民地時代管治香港的憲法《英皇制誥》(Letters Patent)。《英皇制誥》釐定香港政治及法律制度的權力來源，對港督及三權機關的權力，都嚴格釐清。《英皇制誥》不時會因應需要而修改，譬如在1984年代議政制白皮書提出在1985年試行立法局(九七前的名稱)間接選舉，由選舉團和功能組别各選12名立法局議員，因為在政制上的改變，《英皇制誥》也先作出修改，以確定選舉的合法性。憲制文件是法律制度的泉源，也是制度上的法律依據，到了九七回歸，《基本法》就取代了《英皇制誥》，成為保障香港政治制度的憲法，否則共產黨就可以直接統治香港，何來一國兩制？無論中國大陸怎樣干預香港事務，怎樣曲解及詮釋《基本法》，那是唯一確保香港五十年不變的憲法。學生為了洩憤而燒掉它，我可以理解，因為心智不成熟就容易喪失理智，但不要忘記這憲法背後的意義，很無知地豪言壯語一番。他們看似在承傳文革時紅衛兵的破壞傳統，成為無腦的一代。打開黃傘，大義凜然，就做無法無天的一代嗎？
(6/62015明報節錄)
六四集會燒《基本法》宣示甚麽？學生的智慧説是承傳八九民運的抗爭精神，我看像紅衛兵不像民運人士的心智啊。《基本法》這憲制文件承傳殖民地時代管治香港的憲法《英皇制誥》(Letters Patent)。《英皇制誥》釐定香港政治及法律制度的權力來源，對港督及三權機關的權力，都嚴格釐清。《英皇制誥》不時會因應需要而修改，譬如在1984年代議政制白皮書提出在1985年試行立法局(九七前的名稱)間接選舉，由選舉團和功能組别各選12名立法局議員，因為在政制上的改變，《英皇制誥》也先作出修改，以確定選舉的合法性。憲制文件是法律制度的泉源，也是制度上的法律依據，到了九七回歸，《基本法》就取代了《英皇制誥》，成為保障香港政治制度的憲法，否則共產黨就可以直接統治香港，何來一國兩制？無論中國大陸怎樣干預香港事務，怎樣曲解及詮釋《基本法》，那是唯一確保香港五十年不變的憲法。學生為了洩憤而燒掉它，我可以理解，因為心智不成熟就容易喪失理智，但不要忘記這憲法背後的意義，很無知地豪言壯語一番。他們看似在承傳文革時紅衛兵的破壞傳統，成為無腦的一代。打開黃傘，大義凜然，就做無法無天的一代嗎？
I respectfully disagree with your argument that simply by burning the ‘Basic Law’, this generation has become ‘無法無天’. Firstly, the act of burning the constitution of Hong Kong is not an act of recklessness, but an act that demonstrate the hollowness of the document. By the limitless interpretation of the law by the national people’s congress, it has turned it from a constitutional document into a punchline that the DAB and its associates use to deceive the people of Hong Kong into beliving the ‘legality’ and the ‘rightfulness’ of an unjust electoral reform. The Chairman of the Bar Association commented earlier this year on how government officials are increasingly using words such as ‘obey the law’ and how such phrases are misleading the public. In my opinion, such is verging much true in relation to the ‘Basic Law’. Just because it is a constitutional document doesn’t mean that it is self justifying. For CY Leung to say that "香港法治社會，每個人都有維護和執行《基本法》的權利和義務；包括政制等任何香港問題，凡是《基本法》有規定的，都必須遵從” is misleading and does not address the fundamental issue of political obligations. Since the dawn of history, much debate has gone on whether there is an obligation for citizens to obey the law. As a citizen that doesn’t hold public office, having never sworn allegiance to protect and defend the ‘Basic Law’, and having born as a Queen’s subject in ‘British Hong Kong’, there is no explicit obligation for me to obey the ‘Basic Law’. In my opinion, the burning of the constitution amounts to an act of defiance and dissatisfaction of the status quo, of the lack of legitimacy of the Government of Hong Kong and of the Chinese Communist Party, and amounts of a figure of speech. Just like the desecration of flag, Justice Kennedy famously said in Texas v. Johnson (1989) that "Though symbols often are what we ourselves make of them, the flag is constant in expressing beliefs Americans share, beliefs in law and peace and that freedom which sustains the human spirit. The case here today forces recognition of the costs to which those beliefs commit us. It is poignant but fundamental that the flag protects those who hold it in contempt.” Such should be the case with the constitution, just because we express our defiance against parts of it, doesn’t amount to the total ‘undermining’ of the ‘One Country, Two System’ principle, rather, it gives us fruits for thought on the future role that the ‘Basic Law’ should place in Hong Kong and whether any of the clauses and definition of democracy, for example is unjust and unfair and should be amended.
回覆刪除I suppose the law on desecration of flag was thoroughly canvassed by CFA. Please refer to FACC4/1999. Your US case citation was also discussed in para 85 and 86.. I never said the Basic Law cannot be amended. Whether the burning of the Basic Law was reckless or well contemplated is a matter of point of view. I don't dispute there are pro China gangs manipulating, misinterpreting and intimidating people by propagating their threat. No need to cite, out of context or selective of what you desire to read, what other people have said. The ultimate question remains, where does this act, the burning, lead us to? An expression of defiance or a personal emancipation or whatever I have not thought of. Perhaps, regard has to be given to the political chronology. History may not be what we desire to see but you cannot just erase it. At the time of the negotiation of the handover, what could be done had been done. On reflections, there may be a lot of disadvantages to the HK people under the Basic Law. We may have to live with it and try our best to safe guard what we have. Politics is full of compromises. When a political wrangle leads us no where and holds up the entire society, we should see what is the best we can fight for through compromise. We have to look at what stakes we have in the negotiation instead of how big our mouth is. If defiance is only an emotional outburst and beyond that the hollowness is like a black hole. What is the way out?
刪除ps If you feel you are a born British subject, I am blunt to say, you are just a deserted child.
"deserted child" !? - You must be kidding!! A dog in a barn is not a horse. You are not even a bastard if you can read the brain of an Anglo-Saxon person.
刪除Whatever you say.My comment is in response to Tim's saying he is born as a Queen’s subject in ‘British Hong Kong’
刪除sure, do you know which barn he is in?
刪除Sorry, must be the Queen's barn. Must be very well fed.
刪除Dammit. What a stupid me, the name of the barn is clearly written "British Hong Kong"!!
刪除最近有人去西非旅行，驅車隔著車窗觀賞獅子，見到獅子溫馴，打開車窗和獅子接觸，不理忠告獅子兇殘嗜血，結果被獅子咬死，實屬不幸！
回覆刪除想想共產政權的歷史，現在香港竟然有人想燒掉車窗，年輕人如此無知，真是情何以堪！
"現在香港竟然有人想燒掉車窗" - I pity you, if that's the lifestyle you have chosen, living behind glass windows.
刪除sorry, forgot to add - probably is better than living in the bottom of a well!
刪除I suppose Anonymous was talking about the safari goer killed the lioness by opening the window. It is where the window's analogy comes to play.
刪除After my further thinking - the only creatures that live behind glass panels are marine creatures, mostly fish and scientists are still trying to work out if they have a brain. Even though you sound like one, but I think you are still a human being, are you?
刪除I won't stop you thinking more.
刪除thank you Bill this is very kind of you, allowing me being the lone voice.
刪除You have the right to enjoy your solitude and make your soliloquy or monologue. I am not competent enough to respond to all comments.
刪除嘿嘿！
刪除恕我無腦和井底蛙！
請教你有何高明方法去推翻共產政權和基本法！
虛心求教！
"enjoy your solitude" - with 1.3 billion people and god knows how many more, I do not think this is solitude.
刪除"恕我無腦和井底蛙!" - Ok you are excused. After all fact is fact and you are not the only one.
"推翻共產政權和基本法" - ?????!!!!!. Please read my last sentence.
BTW, I am getting to like this forum more and more. Sorry I do not have Chinese input means so I have to borrow Bill's remarks with a little alteration - 打開黃傘，大義凜然，成為無腦的一代。It does make me feel good when I know I'm not a "大義凜然" people. Wondered who might be the "brain" people? the 黃傘 manufacturer/supplier?
嘿嘿！
刪除Ha ha!
刪除個人認為匿名君只是用哪一事情作比喻有點不足, 現在的勇武份子的行為是:
刪除先給車裡面的其他人每人刺一刀放血(堵路,侮辱,衝擊,暴力等傷及一般公眾的利益和權利),再不理忠告打開車窗放獅子入來把全部人害死.
KT
Bill,
回覆刪除"他們看似在承傳文革時紅衛兵的破壞傳統，成為無腦的一代。打開黃傘，大義凜然，就做無法無天的一代嗎？"
Your view echoes that of the following article in today's Ming Pao:
http://news.mingpao.com/pns/劉紹麟﹕誰是敵人？從退聯到當前社運的兩點思考/web_tc/article/20150606/s00012/1433527332549
In any political "discussion" in HK, irrationality rules. Those in the communist regime would be quite happy to see such in-fighting among HK people.
基本法？ 不是港人或者直选港人代表所起草的， 不是经由直选港人代表所投票通过的， 不是经由民选政府首脑所写进法律。 有什么合理合法合情之处的？ 有什么神圣不可侵犯了？ 烧就烧了， 我今天还在FB上说， I want to take a giant dump onto the BL 呐。
回覆刪除BILL你知道红卫兵的事情是什么吗？ 支那的历史你知道多少？ do u? apparently u dont . 年轻一代有什么不合你心意的做法， 你就扣一顶红卫兵帽子上去。 红卫兵本身是支那ISIS党内 毛泽东用来斗周恩来那派的， 用来争权夺利的工具， 毛周两边都是魔鬼。 真实的红卫兵和你等港汕想像的根本毫无一致。 被红卫兵斗的 也大都是共产党员，都是死不足惜死有余辜的魔鬼代理。 比如64屠夫邓小平。
他们烧一本 支那ISIS用来压迫港人的规矩册， 你激动些啥的？ 你又不住在香港， 都入籍澳洲了。 还那么义愤填膺的， 和那个马恩国一般的。 死蠢白痴中佬一个。 grow up. will ya?
真那么confident with what you believe in. 来香港啊， 做个蓝丝带， 和我们斗过。至少马恩国这点比你强， at least he is 坐言起行。
Maro
唉哎，Maro，我從沒有像你那樣逞強，你在美軍服過役，一定好揪得，我自愧不如。我有權評論香港嗎？你的自由民主言論自由意識都躲到那裏了？向像我這樣一個普通人發動批鬥是沒有用的，一來你可以罵我(因為我不刪留言)，我屹立不倒，二來一個普通人的言論沒有人會理會的。
刪除我還是喜歡見到談法律時的Maro，起碼條理分明，激情時的Maro給我biopolar的感覺。別誤會，我是指我要分裂自己的腦袋才能接收你的訊息。
我好有興趣知，基本法以及其他香港法律都不是港人或者直選代表港人的議員所訂立的，你作為律師，要在這種不民主又無代表性的法律制度下揾食，是痛苦還是快慰。上庭面對不是由全民選出來的法官，你鄙夷抑或尊敬？在這種極度矛盾的心情下生活，你怎樣確保精神健康？有空聊下，我想讀者也有興趣知。賺支那豬的銅臭，你快樂嗎？
没说和你比武， 你以为辩论你stand much of a chance吗？ the facts are on my side , and the law is on my side as well. 我有阻止你发表谬论吗？ 但你发谬论 我指出， ur argument sans logic and reasoning. the defense you put up is groundless. 有错？
刪除我就是bipolar 又如何了？ 我上篇的说法有错？bipolar患者就丧失了说话权力了？ 就该suppress 良知任由支那ISIS 横行香港？ 你自家亲人都在香港工作生活， 你难道要香港变成个支那二线城市才高兴？ just what is your major malfunction?
是啊， 我的确不满意香港的政治制度， 所以i am doing something about it. hence i put my money where my mouth is. i am doing what i can to resist evil. what about u, dude?
Maro
別動真氣, 何必呢! 你除了喊口號, 還有甚麼? 你在一個你認為沒有法治的地方執業, 存着根本性的矛盾。 同理, 也可以和中共共存, 推翻不是唯一的出路。 況且, 它太強, 你無能力推翻時, 就要想下改變它, 改變不到就唯有保護自己。 否則, 你先去駐港解放軍營找人隻揪, 行得通嗎?
刪除我上面提出來問你的問題, 你只逃避, 只喜歡空泛口舌之爭, 不如想下怎樣答我。
BILL： one minor suggestion. if u want to have any hope in winning a debate up against me. u should stop base your arguments upon hallucinations conceived by no one but your goodself. 1） 毫无证据indicates 我有生气 2）我反共反支那从来没喊过口号 事实上 我因为广东话有口音，别人喊口号的时候我都不大喊 3）你提出的我都回应了， 你看不见或者convinced 你自己看不见。 这就不是我的错了。
刪除很多时候你的arguments 都不是基于事实的。 我猜想， 作为被告before you back in the days 应该是相当倒霉的事情。 and unfortunately for HK, justice was not served.
Maro
拜託，Maro，你立場反共，卻又使用腦殘中共領導人創作出來的殘體字，太滑稽了吧。難道以你的才智，區區正體字都駕馭不了？
刪除To be fair, simplified characters were not "created" by the communist regime, and one should not judge a person by whether he chooses to use traditional or simplified characters. Maro could be Malaysian or Singaporean.
刪除maro我为什么要用简体汉字？ 因为。。。。。我喜欢。。。
刪除Maro
標少, 這次我不全同意你的看法。焚燒《基本法》只是一場政治秀和情緒的發洩, 我不會有甚麼感受 。
回覆刪除共產黨無法「直接統治香港」, 並非因為有基本法出現來打救世人, 而是因為(現今本地法律系統內沒有意義的)中英聯合聲明。基本法的出現是源於它丶中英雙方的談判和北京考慮到香港的實際情況而要穩定人心的結果。
《基本法》一些關於公民權利丶司法制度的條文都寫得很好, 為香港的法治定下很好的基礎。然而, 如我之前寫的文章所說, 它訂下政治制度其實是一場笑話。
劍文弟
政治秀不在話下，但他們真的有仔細想過基本法其實在憲法上提供對香港的保障嗎？
刪除聯合聲明只是外交契約，基本法才是實質的保障。當時英國的國力根本不足以，也不肯與中共抗衡。在政治制度上，大陸一定握著上家牌。
"當時英國的國力根本不足以" - now you are talking.
刪除John Cheung： you are a sportsman and a gentleman who is capable of thinking on his own feet. i am beginning to like you.
刪除Maro
Hi Maro, I do not know if I like you but I certainly like what you said. As what you said and the way it is said affirms my belief and prompted me to say what I wanted to say. BTW, I'm no sportsman nor gentleman. I believe in jungle law and if I did appear like a sportsman or gentleman, I'm just acting, don't be fooled by me! To that regard, I must compliment the Americans and their gang and I am not even sure I am capable of "thinking on my own feet" - what does that mean? don't people think by their brain?, sitting down or standing up or in any other postures?
刪除Cheers, Mr. Cheung. have a good one.
刪除Maro.
Hi Maro, you too.
刪除I very much agree with your point, burn the basic law is a stupid and pointless act. The CCP would like to change it much more than you do, but so far the most they have done is just "interpret" it. If HK kids really like to start burning it, and send out a message to the world that HK people does not want to commit to the basic law, I think CCP is more than happy to ignore its "1 country 2 system" committement. And the naive people who think "1 country 2 systems" is practically dead now will understand then, what does it really mean to have no protection of "1 country 2 systems".
回覆刪除This is the trend in HK for recent years. And if continue on this road, future will not be pretty.
P
1。Maro 可能真的沒有生氣，他只是生病而已 2。他也從來沒有喊過口號，他的口號都是用鍵盤打的 3。你提出的問題他全回應了，只是沒人看得懂，大概只有JC 看懂了，所以他們互相吹捧，惺惺相惜。
回覆刪除另方面我看懂了JC 的意思，他是要直接跟獅子肉搏了。你要做香港林覺民，我五體投地，但可否請你不要打破那玻璃窗呢，車上還有其他乘客的，他們可能從沒有想過要慷慨赴義的。
//语云：仁者 “老吾老，以及人之老；幼吾幼，以及人之幼”。吾充吾爱汝之心，助天下人爱其所爱，所以敢先汝而死，不顾汝也。汝体吾此心，于啼泣之余，亦以天下人为念，当亦乐牺牲吾身与 汝身之福利，为天下人谋永福也。汝其勿悲！// 送給香港的勇武烈士們，祝你們早日圓夢。pc
"送給香港的勇武烈士們，祝你們早日圓夢" - me too. I look forward to you helping me enjoy HK$5 wanton soup and perhaps HK$3 iced yuen yeung in HK. And by that time, will my dear friend in North America (?) care to join me?
刪除Join you for what? Fight the Lion? 抱歉，我從來沒想過當烈士。Not even 三文杯凍鴛鴦或五文個細茸。那是一個賤物鬥窮人的年代。
刪除代表一層四百尺太古城（應該是太安樓才對，太古當時還是個船塢）大約在五萬文樓下，但九成香港人住在徙置區。人口四五百萬，卻只得一家大學，幾家書院（这倒好，少了許多有學位，無學問的知道份子，儘管他們都叫自己做知識份子）。那時大半勞動人口在工廠工作，見到皇家警察就好像三四十年前回鄉探親必經的海關“心震”。那是港督直接從英國派來，所有議員都是官守議員，華人比英國人低等的年代。
那是看專科醫生要清晨四點出門去排隊輪籌；搭巴士隨時要等一小時，還需要點體力與搏擊技術才能上車的年代。一個經常制水，新聞報道說今天下了多少寸的雨水可惜卻沒下到水塘區的年代。
是的，我現在不長期居住香港，但我最好的時光都在香港度過，我的家人，親友很多還留在那裏。他們就是在那片玻璃後面的普通人。他們的夢很樸素，就是要過些安穩太平的日子，有權不受騷擾的日子（不管那些人喊的是如何偉大的口號）。民主選舉這個遊戲對他們大部分人來説只是飯後甜品（有固然之好，沒有也無妨）。一般的紅豆沙已經很滿足，實在不需要什麽建蓮紅棗湯的。pc
Mr. Cheung： 我和勇武派的其中一领袖劝说， martrydom is not the way to go 。 instead of sacrificing our own lives for the CAUSE. we are going to make the other bastard DIE for his.
刪除Maro
Maro, please call me John. Although I'm not a young man but calling me Mr something still makes me feel very old. And, I afraid I do not understand your comment. Who is the other bastard? and die? how? and when?
刪除John： when I say "the other bastard" 就是指所有支持支那ISIS共产党恐怖暴力谎言压治香港的支那猪猡。 比如上面那个PC。
刪除Maro
Oh I see. I was a little bit unsure about PC. He/she is a bit ambiguous, isn't him/she? But as far as I am concerned, I do take offence anyone calling Chinese by that name. I do not know if you are Chinese by your blood line. If you are not, then you are simply nobody, end of the story. If you are, I pity you, Maro, you are so pathetic. Cursing your own people only shows the true demeanor in you and worse, you have to live in your own shadow and cannot do nothing about it. I pity you, Maro.
刪除John： might as well get used to this saying, conceived by yours truly: 自詡是中國人/華人的， 一律是支那豬玀
刪除*chuckle*
Maro
Sure Maro, was your mum screwed by a pig and gave birth to you? so you are not even a pig? But it dos'nt really matter whether you are not even a pig or are any kind of other bastards, you are doomed to live in your shadow and worse, you can't do nothing about it. I pity you, Maro. So stupid me! why the hell do I even bother to talk to a being who is not even a pig?
刪除Sir,
刪除I have a very modest request to make. Please mind your language. You can spit in Maro's face but no bad language. Maro has been using this pig depiction for umpteen times. Nobody is interested to find out whether he has copied Michael Jackson by changing his colour from yellow to white or he has transfused his blood to blood.
WIll do Bill. Let us go back to our senses.
刪除Thank you mate.
刪除I meant to say transfused his blood to blue.
刪除Don't worry Bill, It really would not make any difference. Let us concentrate on debating our beliefs on a sane approach. Though it seems we do have quite different views but isn't it more meaningful if we were to do it in a civilized way?
刪除匿名2015年6月11日 下午2:04
刪除Join you for what? Fight the Lion? 抱歉，我從來沒想過當烈士。Not even 三文杯凍鴛鴦或五文個細茸。那是一個賤物鬥窮人的年代。
Hi PC, join me for the "三文杯凍鴛鴦或五文個細茸" if you care. If we cannot stop it might as well enjoy it! For the selfish me, I quite look forward to it though it is not fair to the majority of simple people in HK. But if you do not stand up and be counted, you are pretty much asking for it.
正常人係無辦法同精神病人溝通講道理！
回覆刪除//無論中國大陸怎樣干預香港事務，怎樣曲解及詮釋《基本法》，那是唯一確保香港五十年不變的憲法。//
回覆刪除中共既然可以肆意干預，也可以隨意曲解《基本法》，則無理由再視之為「可確保香港五十年不變的憲法」，對不對？
務實而言，香港要實現「港人治港，高度自治」、「河水不犯井水」，不必深究《基本法》條文，只需知道《基本法》講乜唔重要，中共有解釋權，佢講曬，就知道乖乖地遵守和尊重《基本法》根本無用，除非中共良心發現，或者香港人、香港政府充權，取得與中共對等的談判地位，重訂《基本法》、劃清楚河漢界。
燒不燒《基本法》我沒意見，但港人絕無必要擁護《基本法》。
如果有人問你，你憑甚麼講一國兩制，有何依據，除了基本法，你還可憑藉甚麽？你可以不用「擁護」這字眼，可以用遵守這中性字眼，但除此之外，沒有其他東西可以從法理上提保障。政治難講良心，共產黨更甚。修改基本法的話事權也在大陸手上，硬碰恐怕不是時候，也不成氣候。
刪除上面諸君有些留言我無能力答，有些實在超乎我理解能力，故此我放過自己，置之不理。
Hi Bill, how nice to see you write again.
刪除"政治難講良心，共產黨更甚" that's why the fittest survive and thank you for your compliment. Wonder what Kevin Rudd was thinking when he was stabbed at the back?
"上面諸君有些留言我無能力答，有些實在超乎我理解能力" - don't worry - 正常人係無辦法同精神病人溝通講道理！
目下形勢，不甘為奴終要硬碰。而今問題在，好多人根本不敢碰、不知怎麼碰。零星亂碰惹人笑，但若動起真格，只怕很多人沒這個膽。標少講法理當然有其道理，但現在的問題根本不是遵守基本法就能解決，況且，燒了一本基本法並不會對影響基本法的實施，正如燒一本香港法例並不會影響香港法例的實施。如果燒一燒能令更多香港人看清「基本法其實不能保障一國兩制」這一點，燒多兩本又何妨？
刪除政治角力講實力，港人底子愈薄，明天中共要收香港做直轄市，港人又有法理依據申訴嗎？
"目下形勢，不甘為奴終要硬碰" - is that a joke? bu you? Is your middle name Moron or Jerk? And, how 奴 are you? or whom are you 奴 to?
刪除"法理依據" - President Bush said something like you are either with us or against us. What he did not say is "fxxk the UN" before he invades Iraq
匿名2015年6月10日 下午1:46
回覆刪除正常人係無辦法同精神病人溝通講道理！Says all
洗腦的步驟, 粗口, 掉蕉, 不合作運動, 佔街, 暴力衝擊, 港獨論, 燒基本法, 嘿!
回覆刪除革命尚未成功, 同志仍需努力!
HM
"同志仍需努力" - hi HM, these morons have peanut brains. You need to be specific to tell them something like "setting alight, jumping from IFC with a yellow umbrella, etc". Otherwise they do not know what and how to 努力. And also, label everything under democracy, human rights, bla bla bla.
刪除nowadays in HK, it is hard to have a conversation about politics, before it becomes a conversation, it will turns into a shouting games. No one cares what the others would say, they only want to shout out loud what they want to say, and mock others for anything they can attack. Continue like this, HK's chips to negotiate with CCP will becomes less and less, so eventually 激進 becomes the main way.
回覆刪除sosad...
P
Hi P don't be sad. This is good. I shall see my HK$5 wanton soup sooner.
刪除我敢肯定Maro 跟那個語無倫次比他還要瘋上十倍的John Cheung 一定是中國人，只是他們都不是豬玀，他們是豬狗不如的廢物。一個自稱勇武的殉道者卻原來盤算著如何讓別人去死。一個就蠢得連我叫佢去死都未知（看他的反應，應該是連林覺民係邊個都未知）。看到這兩個瘋黃精人板，香港人大可放心，他們最勇武也不過是扮懞面超人欺負婦孺，老弱，在網上發癲和燒基本法而已。pc
回覆刪除当然要令ISIS的支持者们下地狱做烈士 蓝尸嘛。
回覆刪除Maro
"匿名2015年6月12日 下午2:36 : John Cheung 一定是中國人"
刪除Of course I am and I do stand up tall and proudly tell gwailos I am from China when quite often I was asked where I was from during travelling though I do hold a HKSAR passport.
And please, with due respect, please read carefully to know who's your friend and who isn't.
That was to respond to PC. I'm still not quite good enough to handle all these techs.
刪除