本帖最後由 jimmychauck 於 2023/8/1 08:17 編輯
回覆 144# leefeng
一個廿零歳學生妹唔識答你，你中共以為自己好醒啱晒？你條爛屍都未識答我分析沖生條7頭啦。
1. they do more than retaliate?
no,
7.21 police colluded with triad gangs to attack mass crowds, the first real terrorist attack in Hong Kong
8.31 armed police indiscriminately attacked citizens unarmed and showing no threat in Price Edward station, without issuing any warning nor arrest nor suspicion of any criminal activities, including a 12 year old boy.
and a lesser known incident, 8.31 afternoon, at kowloon bay MTR station, small flock of black-clothed demonstrators quickly dispersed, narrowly escaping a team of armed police. The armed police arrived emmpty handed, hitting metal wall panels with thrustration because they did not get to beat up demonstrators, that my friend, was a narrow escape of another terror attack by police on citizens.
10.1 police shot an unarmed student with actual bullet in the chest
and it was well known that polices at the early era of the anti-extradition movement, hid their identification number during actions, refused to show or display warrants, have duplicated identification numbers, have rediculously long and complex identification numbers for the simple reason of trying to conceal their own identity to avoid any responsibility for wrong action. And until four years from now, none had public declined that they are any of those beating up citizens legally nor excercising excesscive brutality, and none have helped identified any others that did so.
By concealing their own identity, and agreeing silently to that practice, all polices have forfeited their presummed innocence of not having carried out those illegal or brutal actions.
Now quoting 2 events of molotov cocktail and stabbing attack against police station and police, happening on 10.20 and early november, and a makeshift bomb placed 2m away from a police car, saying that they are more than retaliation? is simply a wrong statement.
2. justification for attack actions?
there is no legal justification, simply none. Yet there is even less justification to what the police had done in 7.21, 8.31, 10.1 and all other police brutallity cases. And it had been 4 years since all those events, no police had had any accountability or faced any trial. If you demand accountability or justification from ordinary people before from constitutional government, it simply shows you are a hypocrit.
And they are not random violence, as stated above in answer 1.
3. out of control? who can control them?
the responsibility to bring peace and stability to a place, lies with the governing body. With the local majority angrily demanding reasonable resolutions, a.k.a the 5 demands. Its the government responbility to give in to the demands, thats the only way to control it. The anger is induced by government action, it is absurd and irresponsibility to ask the population to control it.
4. maintain almost Chinese Communist part unity?
This is simply stigmatization. The anti-extradition movement had always been a crowd initiated decentralized movement, with no one political party nor figure able to control the opinion and action of the majority. This bottom up structure is nothing to be compared with the authortarian top-down Chinese community party harmony maintained by force. The bottom line was only "no condemnation", there is always public debate, argument and critizing within the anti-extratidion movement itself, the motto was "hiking like brothers, do your own part", not getting in the way of each others.
either the reportor has extremely poor understanding of what happened in Hong Kong, or he is simply asking the questions from a CCP narrative.
5. who can stop it?
no one but the government, which refused to do so, as explained above
the reporter is right, no body in the group can stop it.
and you can't help but notice the reporter simply interrupts the interviewee before she finishes, how professional of this reporter!!!
6. violent actions causing errosion of international support?
you leefeng fxxk tard CCP pawn scrutinize international support day in day out, accusing yellow ribbons of 勾結外國勢力 collusion with foreign forces？？ and now yellow ribbons losing international support is a concern to you?
internation support is simply tactic to achieve what the yellow ribbons want and not at all a justification of what is right or wrong.
while your video uploads at 2019-11-13, the 2019 district council election held on 11-24 saw the pro-movement camp winning 86% of all the seats, international support or not, the local support was blattenly clear, and you can try to argue with that.
7. hong kong judicary as an independent body enjoying considerable respect and being undermined by protestors?
This reputation, CCP already completely blew and swept it under the rug after introducing national security law bypassing all local legislation procedures. I need say no more. CCP screwed it up itself.
8. Joey Siu and leaders cannot stop violent protestors, that used mafia style intimidation?
Yes they cannot, they are induced by police violence, according to BBC, these violences only became apparent after 7.21, showing the exact cause. And neither did any government official or police high ranks succeeded or even attempted to discourage, stop, condemn nor made accountable mafia polices excercising brutality. We even have leaked video showing police officers in air-conditioned canteen laughing and cheering at sight of protestor crowds running away from tear gases, and high rank police such as Li Kwai Wah publicly defending police use of the dehumanizing word "cockroach" to describe protestors.
not to bore you, already explained above only the government can stop this which it refused to.
9. "what your father do is disgusting", adult harrasing daughter of police?
if angry protestors expressing this opinion to a child is harrasing, I simply don't know what it constitutes to when police attack university aged students with armaments, as if they have no parents.
to reiterate, all the violence was induced by the government, and we have saw no sign of them trying to stop it by giving in to any demands nor any show of will to negotiate.
10. the rule of law trashed?
Oh yes it is trashed, but no protestors can do it, you simply think too much of them, CCP did it.
not to mention Hong Kong is simply disguising its rule by law with its self-proclaimed "rule of law"
11. breaking the law to protect the law does not add up?
Only if the laws written were produced in a widely accepted legislation procedure, this statement stands. To speak of this to a majority crowd with no legal means on itself to impose changes to the law except at the mercy of the soverign government, this statement is meaningless. Prodemocracy camp had been consistently gaining majority vote numbers yet minority constitutional seats, and all voted legislators has no right to submit legal bills, all being controlled by a biased election system skewed towards the favour of CCP, not to mention CCP also failed to fulfil its promise of having the 3rd Chief Executive being selected by a universal referendum.
12. who would offer compromises on behalf of all the protestors?
uhhuh, if this is a difficult question to answer, or it is difficult to find one single body to be able to do that, and it is,
it simply shows that this is completely populace initiated movement, with no foreign interference, no foreign government are able to have a say on this. Completely trashing the CCP narrative of "this is being stirred up by USA, dah" You CCP fxxk tard pawn simply failed to recognize you have fell into hole you dug yourself.
No one is responsible to offer compromise, the single responsibility lies with the government to give offer as a mean to disperse the crowd, which it failed and refused to.
13. Carrie Lam had give in to all 5 demands?
such a blatten lie
13.a. independent investigation
Joey Siu answered, I have nothing to add
13.b why give amnesty?
4 years of history have proved, up until now, not a single police had been charged, numerous protestors had been charged
Amnesty is the only way out as a part of this political event, the event in essence of itself political. Amnesty itself does not rely on justification but sole discretion of the Chief Executive, and he / she will have to answer politically to that action.
Oh by the way, the way we see it now? all the polices had been granted amnesty, hooray!
13.b.bonus 很不客氣地打斷，正式採訪中極為罕見<==中國新聞社原文字幕。
正正顯該記者如何的不專業。
14. don't you have the responbility to find a way to preseve and strengthen what we already have?
The fuck kind of question is that? what have the 2 million Hong Kong people been doing in that 5 months? the protest started just to prevent the errosion of the judicary independence of Hong Kong by opening of an extration loop hole allowing China judicary system to take any individual person to trial in China by the CCP judicary system.
15. Joey Siu (or any other pan democratic leader) not able to open peaceful dialogue?
Name any instance the government trying to open a meaningful peaceful dialogue in 2019, a dialogue is between two party and not amongst one self. We can certainly name you that once in 2014, which came before the forceful crackdown that followed, from the same person, which, basically is also another cause of the 2019 anti-extradition movement, the deeply sowed discontent amongst the general populace 5 years ago.
again, it is always the responbility of the government, to throw out offerings.
16. Joseph Cheng saying that yellow ribbons are becoming rigid, cannot change bla bla bla
Joseph Cheng simply doesn't represent all, as you Mr reporter had tried so hard to press on that fact, which seemed to also believe in it.
Joey Siu already stated clearly, for 5 months, the government had showed no sincerity at all, the crowd shall only become increasingly rigid, and that again, shall all be the fault of the government.
17. violence violence violence!!!
Okay, police go arrest them and take political responbility. Well, we never saw government official in China nor Hong Kong took any anyway.
Simply deeply hypocritic to ask constitionally powerless people to take responbility to condemn violent actions induced by government sowing disconent amongst the populace, while steering clear of any government accountability.
18. interrupting the interviewee again? "you simply attack those who do not support you"
yeah, professional journalist.
What Joey Siu was trying to say was, or I will say now is, the businesses are vested interests in the current (then) government soverignship, they voted in the skewed election system to keep the government in power in exchange for economic gain by government inclined towards them. Bloods are on their hands on this battle for democracy and they have no way to steer clear of it.
And it is clear that all "ordinary citizens" being attacked strongly support CCP the oppressor, simply deeply unwise for them to express this infront of an angry crowd.
violence violence violence!!! Okay, police go arrest them and take political responbility. (loop)
19. district council election 2019
histroy told what the people supported (zip). |
2023/7/26 14:51
| 
