|
作者
|
內容
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/8 上午 09:54:21
|
|
|
I would analyse as follows:
The CE actually has the power under the BL to dismiss the Legislative Council, so actually he HAS the power to push through things if he wants to.
However, Beijing still wants the One Country two systems game. Note that one country is in capitals, unlike what the Democrats say : they say one country TWO SYSTEMS in a way that tantamounts two countries. This is the first fundamental rift.
The second big concern, which concerns the Church, is the residual power of some diehard communists in Mainland. As long as the CCP still rules, some 'Christians' say that there will be NO freedom of religion.
How far is this true is in no way scientifically or statistically substantiated. The lurking fear however now becomes prevailing over the entire Diocese, after massive propaganda in Hong Kong.
Somehow the Church here links itself up with Falungong.
Is this approach ncessary? Helpful? Not to say 'right' or 'wrong', which I am in no position to judge.
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/10 上午 02:20:56
|
|
|
那的確是民主派跟北京的最大一個rift。當然﹐民主派反對共產黨﹐反對“人民民主專政”﹐要把“資產階級民主”(西方的民主政制)帶到大陸等等﹐也構成另一個很大的rift。此外﹐西方的制度是地方政府可以跟聯邦政府抗衡﹔地方跟聯邦政府可以在很多事情上有重大的分歧﹐甚至對罵也行。但中國領導人的思維模式卻跟西方的思想有如南轅北轍。如果香港由跟中央有嚴重分歧的民主派執政﹐在西方的政治思想中是完全沒問題﹐但在中共的思維中卻是跟“香港淪陷”沒有什麼分別。
我對於陶傑(明報的專欄作家)所寫的政論常常有不能同意之處﹐但我卻很認同他昨天在明報專欄中所提出的一些觀點。陶傑說如果真的要爭取全民普選特首﹐就一定要涉入中南海的高層政治。若然舊派勢力仍有主導權﹐那港人爭取普選特首﹐就一定要有應付“解放軍出營及軍事戒嚴”的準備及打算(不是說這一定或極可能會發生﹐但至少有一定的可能性)﹔若胡溫新政勢力佔優﹐則有成功的可能。至於港人敢不敢及能不能玩到這一步﹐他說六百萬人都要思考一下。
關於香港教區﹐其實一般的教友以至陳主教都不相信董政府及中國共產黨﹐所以會對相關的條文憂心忡忡。事實上﹐大家都知道董政府及中共的“track record”是怎樣﹐所以我們也很難怪一般教友覺得他們是不能信任的。當雙方是如此嚴重的缺乏互信的時候﹐一切的懷疑就只會越加越深。陳主教對中共的“信任”程度當然是很低﹔他對特區政府的信任也並不比對中共的高出多少。在這樣的情況下﹐很自然就會懷疑到這些不可信賴的對手會“胡作非為”。這其實不能說是主教的錯﹐況且﹐追究這“缺乏互信”是如何形成也未必能解決問題。然而﹐事到如今﹐在短期內也確難有恢復一些互信的方法。
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/10 下午 12:08:35
|
|
|
閣下跟鄙人真是'所見略同';陶傑是個有眼光的人,他對事物比較有一針見血和洞察先機的觀察.他的死門是 - 沒信仰,太悲觀.
時到今日,是廣大香港人決定'先死'一鋪二後生,還是慢慢死去的時候了,天主教徒們,又是否人人都有追隨主教'死一鋪'的勇氣.
今後神父們牧民一定要想好如何面對這尖銳的問題.
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/14 上午 10:47:01
|
|
|
陶傑的好處是可以看到一般人看不到的盲點。我並不是常常同意他的看法﹐有時也覺得他過於偏激及悲觀。不過﹐無論你是否同意他的觀點﹐至少他寫的東西可提供另一種perspective﹐那對啟發思考很有幫助。
這幾天中央政府派了一些官員來港收集民意﹐顯示他們已著手處理七一遊行所引發的種種風波。現時的相對寧靜﹐反而令人有“暴風雨前夕”的感覺﹐或可說現在是充滿“山雨欲來風滿樓”的氣氛。但願不會有什麼不好的事才好。如果可以的話﹐請大家多一點為七一後的香港政局祈禱。
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/15 下午 12:33:09
|
|
|
英文版'人民日報'作出了對7.1的看法 - 香港是顛覆中央的基地.
唉,法輪大法,無孔不入;大法所至,中央不容.
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2003/7/15 下午 03:52:58
|
|
|
Indeed, 'we' consider that our march on 7.1 spontaneously made by HOng KOng people. None of us would think that the event was also being made use of by Falun Dafa. But is it true? Would the central government think so?
I always wonder why the diocese keeps on equating catholics with Falun Gong practitioners, and the Legion of Mary with the Falun Dafa - that association is a dissident faction from the Central PRC government. If you say that you are against the CCP, then most of the top people in Falun Dafa 'are' in fact that top notch of the originaly CCP!
When would catholics wake up?
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/16 上午 01:34:10
|
|
|
在我看來﹐英文《中國日報》香港版的那篇評論算是一個小小的警告吧﹐但已令人覺得不舒服了。大概目前只是想叫民主派死了「從中央手中奪權」這條心吧。香港沒有進一步的行動則可﹔但如果香港方面有進一步的行動﹐中央的行動也會昇級。
最後的結果會怎樣﹖現在實在是很難預料到。有些人相信現在的「中央人民政府」會很開明､會肯作「根本」的讓步。其實﹐我還是認為......不要對此存有太大的希望會好一些...
即便是在2007年普選特首﹐也會是中共定義中的普選﹐不會是像選台北市長那樣的普選(西方民主政制中的地方選舉)。
Dear Josemaria,
No, I personally don't think we need to link up ourselves with Fanlun Gong. But obviously, most Catholics out there do not feel the same. A friend of mine told me that the Communist proscribed the Legion of Mary in the Chinese Mainland in the 50's. So, he said that he had to march on July 1. Otherwise, chances are that the Legion of Mary in HK will get banned after the National Security Bill is passed in the Legco.
Did people like my friend over-react? I don't know. But some believe that today even our bishop can't give us an unbiased answer in that respect. I'm not losing faith in Bishop Zen, but I think we all need to calm down and reflect in this critical moment. Remember, we have the future of HK at stake.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/16 上午 11:08:34
|
|
|
Let's put it this way: the way our Bishop approaches Falungong is that 'if they flop, we will flop', since it will similarly be under the banner of 'religion prohibited'.
Outsiders' views are : Falungong is a group dissident CCP commissars under the guise of a 'religion'. They are in this respect like the Tai Ping Tin Guo and the Boxer Movement, as any one with Chinese history knowledge would tell at once.
The Central government is bent on toppling Falungong at all cost.
Should catholics 'line themselves up' with them, so to speak? Is our strategy good? Valid? Over-reacted? Logical?
We are a religion over 2000 years old. Who is Li Hung Zhi, by the way? What are his teachings? Can we equate it with our Legion of Mary?
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2003/7/16 下午 04:02:25
|
|
|
Thank you for responding to my posting.
Are we losing faith in Bishop Zen? I for one am 'not'. Never do I for one moment doubt the integrity and goodwill of our Bishop.
As for those catholic politicians, I am much more sceptical. But they share one fundamental thing with the Bishop - the fear of the CCP.
I think for Chinese in the modern world, there is no one that is so 'naive' and oblivious about the CCP's past - at least those in the free Hong Kong society. We have undergone the '60's, the Cultural Revolution, the 1949 and '50's hardships.
Back in my own family, I have family members of the Chiang clique and the Mao clique (mind you, inner cliques, not just followers). My family background is not only political, but outright revolutionary.
And it is because of this very fact that I am very sceptical about what's going on now in HK, with the so-called democrats. Yea, if they got power, they would be another Chiang Kai Shek.
Nobody talks about Gen. Cheung Hok Leung and his would-be published book of memoirs. The power struggle between CCP and KMT had brought China so many hardships, so much bloodshed.
I for one like the marshal art stories of Jin Rong very much, especially his last one - Lu Ding Ji. IN the beginning of this story, Jin Rong wrote something that I consider containing the wealth of his wisdom as writer, journalist, merchant and scholar in an era of bloodshed and hardship - that the masses, when those going after power start 'chasing the deer' (ie struggle for power), the masses, like the deer, will die inevitably.
LIke Bishop Zen and Barrister Li, my family witnessed the toppling effect of the 1949 power struggle. We ended up in HK's outlying island, with illness and poverty savouring the grown members. Kids like me were left to the care of the govenment, the Church, the charitable organisations. Some family members emigrated to Taiwan, and survived the poverty. They built the new Taiwan with the Chiang's. With the coming of Li Deng Hui, however, all was gone.
What is wealth to us? What is liberty when your life is at stake?
Some family members stayed in China Mainland. They got thrown into jail during the cultural revolution. Now they are free as you could imagine, flying around the world with kids studying and emigrating abroad.
Who are we to judge what the future will hold?
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/16 下午 05:56:13
|
|
|
我個人對於向外國借勢反23的做法萬二分反對 - 這種'寧贈朋友,莫予家奴'的前清封建政府所用的手法,認真教人齒冷.
如果香港獨立是要借助外國勢力,那麼請不要預我一份.不要忘記:老共再衰一千陪也是咱們中國人自己種出來的猧 - 解鈴還需系鈴人.
我對於當依拉克,阿富汗式的'有人送給你人權'人民的興趣是負數的.
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/18 下午 06:56:56
|
|
|
Dear Josemaria
Yeah, I agree with you. Like I said before, my grandfather had been a Major General in the Nationalist Army prior to the collapse of the Nationalist Government in the mainland. He witnessed all the political turbulence in China since the Japanese invasion. During the civil war, he saw many people becoming more and more discontented with the then ruling party. These people organized protests, demonstrations, and strike in an attempt to force the Nationalist government to reform and stop the civil war. When Chiang Kai-shek stubbornly refused, the crowds turned their back on the Nationalists and joined Mao's movement in the hope that the Communists can save China. After 4 years of economic distress and bloodshed, the CCP "liberalized" the country. The people were jubilant and many believed that China was on the road to democracy and prosperity under the CCP rule. But it all turned out to be a false dawn. Some of my grandparents' family members believed in Mao's revolution and opted for staying in China after the civil war. They were to be accused of ripping off the peasants and put into jail later in the "class struggle".
So, who can really judge? Who can say that we will definitely be better off if the HK democrats score an ultimate victory in the political struggle against the central government? Who knows for sure that they won't be a Chiang Kai-shek or a Mao Tse-tung? Mao had repeatedly said that he would bring freedom and democracy to the Chinese people. But what actually happened when he reigned? Did he introduce a truly democratic system as he claimed? Remember, the CCP regime was perceived to be extremely promising in its early days. So was the Nationalist regime in the mid-20's.
Even in some countries that have a so-called democratic system in place, their leaders still exhibit dictatorship. Just look at what President George W. Bush of United States has done and you'll see what I mean....
I also like the analogy in Jin Yong's "Lu Din Ji". Politicians go after the "deer"; the deer are "destinted to get slaughtered" no matter which party wins the power struggle. In our present situation, we need to consider if we are really willing to get ourselves deeply involved in the power struggle between the democrats and the central government, especially when the consequences can be very severe (maybe a replica of the Tiananmen incident). Even if the democrats win, we might still end up getting a dictator (e.g. Mao) or a dictator in disguise (see the US).
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/19 上午 02:51:42
|
|
|
Cecil:
同意閣下所說教會毋須跟法輪功劃上等號﹐我一向也如此認為(閣下跟Josemaria的理由更為充份﹐關於法輪大法是由CPG中分裂出來的敵對分子所組成﹐我之前並不知情)。然而﹐主流思想大都不太接受這觀念。相信背後的主要原因還是對共產黨及特區政府極不信任。我認識的教友﹐差不多全部都一面倒的傾向激烈反對的一邊。好像那位說聖母軍已在50年代在大陸被取締的教友﹐無論跟他怎樣理性的談論﹐也是徒傷害彼此間的友情﹔他最終也不會接受他眼中的“另類”觀點。
我有一種感覺﹐就是現在我們已深深陷入一場政治鬥爭之中。民主派會提昇他們的訴求﹐要求中央把權力放出來。問題是民主派跟中央在“普選”方面的認知有分別。民主派要求的是西方民主政制的地方普選﹔中央要求在普選下仍能透過提名機制來控制特首的人選。跟中央玩權力鬥爭很麻煩﹐一處理不善就會很危險。我覺得有很多人仍未感覺到危險的存在。
香港獨立﹖這不會是民主黨裡一些人的hidden agenda吧﹖
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/21 上午 10:34:58
|
|
|
今天閱報,某政棍又說英揆不該不見他云云。
這些動作反映了甚麼？英揆又𤔡何要見他？
昨日法輪功又集會示了威，他們今次的甜頭得了不少，有消息指七、一當日有人派錢予老弱巿民上街，姑妄而言姑且信之而矣。不過，港人反共情緒悠來已久，中央以為用一、二之術可以擺平，也實在小窺了問題的嚴重性。
香港一個有台獨,彊獨,法輪獨,港獨活躍的地方,相信好戲還未序幕!
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/21 下午 03:37:45
|
|
|
要有效地爭取民主,進退之際的節奏是需要有高度技巧.
向外國找'包爺'施壓這一招絕不高明,是神風式自殺行為.
'反T大聯盟'不知進退,一味噓特首落台,那些鑽牛角尖的'學者'們情願'搏一鋪'玉石俱焚,也是項莊舞劍的另類代表.
教友中也不否如此hysterical的份子,所以,香港危機的形成,錯綜複雜,本由一些政府狀棍們亂丟書包,由死仕愚忠的命官低招硬推而起,卻弄出個憲政危機,又豈非平庸的T特所及?
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2003/7/21 下午 06:18:56
|
|
|
I like the article by 王金友last week in "The Sun":"香港危機的起因". To quote some good passages -
"自從今年初， 政府公布廿三條國家安全立法諮詢文件,並且不斷以保安局長拼死命推銷......三個多月以來，因為不是專家立法，由幾位文學士、英国舊法衞士、香港殖民地法律旗手，以 '最古老’的[普通法和舊合同格式，拼湊出一部疊床架屋、盤根錯節、文字不通的所謂國安法草案條例。一公布，法律界嘩然、專家學者嘩然，絕大多數港人看不懂，更加吵吵嚷嚷。更且,保安局長,民建聯這一批左派保皇黨,為了強迫立法會通過......不惜以蠻橫,跋扈,剛愎,諷刺以及嘲笑的口吻說三道四......"
I couldn't help laughing me head off on this one.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/21 下午 06:28:22
|
|
|
"以 '最古老’的普通法和舊合同格式，拼湊出一部疊床架屋、盤根錯節、文字不通的所謂國安法草案條例。一公布，法律界嘩然、專家學者嘩然，絕大多數港人看不懂，更加吵吵嚷嚷。"
當初跟夏神父談到這份夾硬上臺的傢伙,馬上知道是某部門的另一滑鐵盧大作.中央不知知道了,會有何感想?
沒有這樣能耐,免強下來,自招其辱事少,猧港央民事丈！
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/7/21 下午 09:28:24
|
|
|
剛在一個台灣討論區中看到網友對當地現行的民主制度的抱怨。我一向也有留意台灣的政局﹐對當地在現行所謂民主制度下的政治生態(包括政客公開玩弄權術､為爭取選票而無所不用其極､以及不斷向敵對派系扣歪曲事實的政治帽子等等)相當感冒。有香港立法會議員說香港應向台灣的民主政制學習﹐我對此強烈的不同意。我並非不認同民主政制﹐但如果要香港去冒引發憲政危機､中央干預甚或天安門事件重演的危險去引入「台灣式的民主」﹐我唯有說我是完全的反對。
如果香港人決定去冒前述的那些危險去爭取一個西方的民主政制﹐就要確保這個民主政制並不是如台灣(甚至美國)的那樣表面化。要爭的話就要爭取一個有一定深度的民主政制﹐一個表面化的民主政制不單不值得我們冒險去爭取﹐而這樣的制度很可能會導致假民主的獨裁者上台。這在歷史上是有先例﹐而現時世界上也有此等人物。
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/22 下午 03:15:21
|
|
|
數年前我拜讀過霍韜晦先生一些對民主看法的文章,在'公教報'也發文提出過來討論.
大概而言,同意霍老所說的,制度是死,人是活,沒有好的人沒有好的制度,所以凡制度也以人為本,以人心為主導.
我覺得這說法很有宗教的意味,也很合乎基督福音的精神,只是,今日教會內不少弟兄以制度為神明,以民主代基督,也曾使我大惑不解!
好像布殊那般的bare majority,算甚麼?有人說(貓姐)你們可以vote him down. Well, he did not got the majority vote in the first place. However, his family members 'manipulated' the SYSTEM and he got the 'throne', and killed and killed and killed non-stop.
民主制度不是保證． 耶穌的福音才是保證．ａｍｅｎ．
連霍老不是基督徒的學者，也點出所謂民主制度的幾大死穴，（１）選後貨不對瓣；（２）政變容易卻對社會民生不能保障；（３）以多取勝不等於公平公正；以大多數作準只能豎立平面化的價值；等等，其餘的我現下也一時間記不起來了．（見”世紀之思”２０００版）
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2003/7/24 下午 04:18:24
|
|
|
Amidst threats and struggles, the Secretary for Security steps down.
Her tactics in promulgating Art. 23 were wrong, but who would have succeeded in the first place? Before Mrs. IP leaves office, I would offer her the song “The Last Rose of Summer” by Thomas Moore (18th c.), the lyrics which depicts her ever so aptly:-
"’TIS the last rose of summer
Left blooming alone;
All her lovely companions
Are faded and gone;
No flower of her kindred,
No rosebud is nigh,
To reflect back her blushes,
To give sigh for sigh.
I’ll not leave thee, thou lone one!
To pine on the stem;
Since the lovely are sleeping,
Go, sleep thou with them.
Thus kindly I scatter
Thy leaves o’er the bed,
Where thy mates of the garden
Lie scentless and dead.
So soon may I follow,
When friendships decay,
And from Love’s shining circle
The gems drop away. 20
When true hearts lie withered
And fond ones are flown,
Oh! who would inhabit
This bleak world alone?”
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/25 下午 04:17:29
|
|
|
本港的傳媒公審可說冠絕全球,葉太這樣的絕種官員,可能真是the last rose.
湯顯明前日在垃會就好和味咯.
|
|
大黃傻貓GARFIELD
|
Posted -
2003/7/27 上午 01:34:45
|
|
|
葉劉是能幹﹐可是她只是一個迷戀權力的奴才。她對董唯命是從﹐不管惡法是如何侵犯人權﹐不惜扭曲民意﹐把民意彙編裡面﹐大律師公會意見變為“不能分類”。
也居然把小學生文章當意見編入為贊成意見﹗
更加離譜﹐是後來修訂其中一個﹐是警察入屋搜查﹐居然從由法官批准變了保安局批准﹐把法治踐踏。
她辭職後﹐如果瀟灑的揮手離開﹐我還可以佩服她一點 -- 現在她高調上京接受話別､接受左派歡送﹐證明她要權力﹐不惜踐踏人權。
她才幹或者是公務員裡面好的一批﹐但是良心､對于人權､自由､民主､法治﹐她不理會 -- 為自己仕途﹐這些可以犧牲﹗
我要口豬做保安局局長也不要她。
|
|
大黃傻貓GARFIELD
|
Posted -
2003/7/27 上午 01:36:04
|
|
|
Cecil﹐我忍不住問你﹐你認為葉劉在民意彙編裡面﹐她是不是騙子﹖
|
|
大黃傻貓GARFIELD
|
Posted -
2003/7/27 上午 01:41:24
|
|
|
死蠢的CECIL。我說的優勢是香港的優勢。
香港可以在自由空氣制度下﹐為國內天主教和教會做些事情。
一旦23條立法按之前條文通過﹐你想象下後果。
你以為天主教只是狹窄的為怕自己取締而反對嗎﹖
如果天主教會沒有被取締的威脅﹐難道香港取締其他宗教就應該﹖
政客隱謀是一件事 -- 民主選舉立法會和特首是市民權利﹐一旦市民能夠掌握這個權利﹐你還怕什麼政客﹖
你們是什麼人﹖反對民主､說因為怕被政客利用就犧牲全部香港人利益﹖﹖﹖
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/28 上午 10:41:17
|
|
|
呵哈,鄙人從來未說過應該立廿三條,請看清楚!
我不能認同的,是不少人 - 真的不少 - 拿這課題來為反而反.
盲目的人呀!
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/7/28 上午 11:09:46
|
|
|
這位葉太是不是騙子?
我看機會倒不大.不過,她是連自己也給騙了,卻還死撐,這是最可能的事,所以她下台,是十分合理的結局.
她給誰人騙?有一半是給她自己 - 太過自信近乎盲目.反對的人中,當然也有甚多盲目之人,正是盲鬥盲,可幸中央領導人未完全盲,沒有將蒼蠅拍一下子拍將下來......甚至,任得你們港燦們自講治港吧......
當然,香港太平盛世是一去不返的了.嗚呼.
十月一號百萬人上街可期也.
|
