割蓆

我上一篇劈頭第一段講蔡維邦資深大律師辭去大律師公會副主席一職一事, 立即惹來攻擊。我當初只是估計他辭職的原因, 也有估錯的危險。幸好"安得老"今天把蔡維邦昨晚在南華早報表心迹的文章連結給我看:

Hong Kong Bar Association has been shamefully silent on protester violence and those who support it

是否同意蔡的立場和觀點並不重要, 重要的是他以第一身解釋辭職的理由, 也顯示出我在上一篇第一段的觀察, 並非留言批評我的人所講「妖言惑眾」。單看標題, 就可以看出他批評大律師公會的字眼有多不客氣。我贊同他整體看法, 雖然他對警察過份用武方面甚少著墨, 若要向他反映, 請移玉步到南華早報留言, 不過, 也別忘記, 他代表過七警之一, 也代表過梁天琦, 不能以藍/黃來區分立場。文章的末3段說明他與大律師公會割蓆的原因。

I saw an acute need for my profession to denounce those offering nothing but the most specious of reasonings in shifting the attention away from those actually committing those criminal acts. When the rioters are led to think that they have secured allies from within our ranks, they are likely to be emboldened into taking even more radical actions, thereby raising the risk of greater harm to our fellow citizens.

I thus felt strongly that the bar association must express its strongest disapproval against both the perpetrators of the ongoing unrest and those who provide a spin on these rioters.

As it became increasingly apparent to me that a substantial majority of my colleagues on the Bar Council remained highly reticent to state, with unequivocal clarity, that both the rioters and those who proffer excuses on their behalf should be condemned, I was convinced that my outlook diverged too much from the council for me to remain among its rank.

他用了很多段落來批評時下不惜身陷囹圄的年青勇武暴徒, 我不想為他的文章撮寫, 以免力不從心斷章取義, 請隨連結自己看。

上一篇有「外星人」留言, 問我有沒有看新聞片, 言下之意我對警察動武視若無睹。有幸, 本blog無遠弗屆, 更加有幸的是, 我真的沒有多看這些片, 有時看下標題就夠, 老人家不想看恐怖片, 尤其是殺人放火的, 別追這些「劇集」, 不單只會上癮, 也會上身的。不是嗎, 十怨九仇要割頸殺人, 汽油彈扔得多一定比煲蠟過癮, 看得太亢奮會躍躍欲試, 或者已欲罷不能, 所以我不敢看, 所以我沒有黐筋。看了個梗概就應向宏觀方面想。

時下在網上呼籲就一呼百應, 也讓我呼籲一下, 一起去睇醫生喇, 除了勇武者, 也包括那些鼓勵默許使用暴力的旁觀者, 包括政客、議員、律師、牧師和教師, 當然也包括警察。

拜託, 別割錯蓆, 別一味對理智割蓆, 。