與大家分享我與政法班同學關於白皮書的討論：
T:-Junius, 完全不能認同你的回應。特首，司法人員也好，普通市民也好，應否愛國，要國家以白皮書來規定嗎？愛國是個人情感，若國家作為令人驕傲，港人自然會愛國，不用法律、教育來灌輸。
T:-白皮書令人反感，是因為其對一國兩制下了官方的新演繹，令港人覺得，現有的基本權利，隨時可被收回，真普選亦無望。
T:-Junius, rightful thinking reasonable lawyers, 更應該為港人想想，我們要一國兩制，或一國控制？
我:-Pls read article 12 of the basic law too. The high degree of autonomy HKSAR comes directly under the central people’s government!
我:-Besides, loving your country is a citizen’s obligation, isn’t it?
N:-大部份人不會拒絕愛國吧，但要愛共產黨統治下的中國。
我:-In HK, it is not exactly the same! You are given the right of freedom of association under article 27
我:-Which part of the WP is repugnant to you?
我:-No one says you have to love the communists? Even if she was your wife…..!
A;-My dad is a communist. And i love him the most
我:-Talking about the CE and the principal officials and the two CJ of SAR are required to be Chinese without the right of abode in overseas. Pls read articles 61, 90.
T:-the entire WP, Junius! Why create new interpretations, which is mere politics repressing freedom in HK, from the basic law? What will HK become even without the whitebook?
T:-Junius, we all know what the basic law says. Now the whitebook is a visible hand trying to change hk ppl’s understanding of the rights we now have
我:-It is not a new interpretation at all, at least not by the NPCSC. It is merely a report released by the CPG. It is a background cheering chorus for Premier Li to visit UK in commemorating the 30th anniversary of the Sino bristish Joint Declaration!
我:-Read the WP, it iterates the independence of the judiciary in HK more than 5 times. It stipulates the facts and figures as to how the CPG upholding her promises and honoring her deeds for the last 17 years. If it should jeopardize HK, which is certainly (not) her intention, what she needs to do is just to shut off the main water supplies from dongjian!
我:-“not her intention”
T:-shutting off supplies from mainland, that is what the whitebook has implied, if hk ppl do not ‘behave’ the way CPG wants.
我:-As a lawyer or lawyer to be, we think and argue with a case with reason and facts rather than speculation! don’t worry too much!
T:-the facts are, we are losing freedom day by day, that has happened and is happening!
我:-Which freedom you are talking about that is being lost?
T:-Freedom to choose our government, freedom to democracy
T:-Freedom even to watch a new tv channel
T:-Freedom even to talk abt June 4 in District Council
T:-Freedom to choosing a Legco that represent the ppl, without small circles
我:-Isn’t that true that we are to have a direct election for the CE by 2017 provided the 5-step reform procedures are done?
Apart from the exiting 5 local TV channels we have, we also have access to over a hundred from the satellite let alone the web TV over a thousand. With one short, it is incredible to say that one’s freedom is hindered or deprived. That reminds me of an analogy of attending a buffet bar in Peninsula Hotel which provides a variety of choices including abalone but without calviar, can I criticise it not qualifying a buffet!
T:-Junius, u might feel free because u are already privileged, no offence
T:-direct election only after filtering of candidates by beijing? Can u even call it free?
我:-I would have thought the pan dem is almost in control of the Legco by exercising an effective vetoing function. HK is so lucky to have both you and me in dialogue freely which does not to a certain extent exist in the states!
A:-You both are great
我:-Now, pls excuse me for taking a break for doing something that I am obliged to do, ie to serve my clients!
我:-Will come back to share and exchange our views further later on
A:-You both are great
我:-I enjoy it thoroughly. With you all together to speak out fearlessly, we walk the walk of democracy!
T:-Good discussion Junius
我:-Sign off now!
我:-Really!
——————————————————
I wish to share the discussion I had with classmates regarding the white book as follows: –
T:-I can not completely agree with your reply. Neither the Chief Executive、judicial officials nor ordinary citizens should be regulated by the white book as patriotism is a personal feeling. If the country is strong enough to make us proud, Hong Kong citizens will naturally feel patriotic and it is not something that can be regulated by law or education.
T:-The white book is repugnant as it has the updated official explanation on the “one country two systems” policy which threatens our basic rights and true universal suffrage.
T:-有著合理思辨能力的律師們，we should really think more what Hong Kong people may want. “One country two systems” or “Chinese control”?
我:- 請查閱基本法第12條，香港的高度自治權直接來自中央人民政府。
我:-另外，愛國是市民的職責。
N:- Most of us will not resist on patriotic but not under the ruling of Communist Party.
我:-在香港，與內地不同，我們享有集會及遊行示威的權利。（來源於基本法27條）
我:-你反感白皮書的哪一段？
我:-沒有人讓你去愛中國共產黨，即使她是你的太太！
A:-我父親是中國共產黨員，但我最愛他。
我:-香港行政長官、政府主要官員、兩位高等法院法官都需要是沒有外國居留權的中國人。請參閱基本法61及90條。
T:-白皮書的全部內容。為什麼要創設新的解釋？這是對自由的政治壓迫。若沒有白皮書，香港會變成怎樣？
T:- Junius, 我們都知道基本法的內容。現在，白皮書是一隻無形的手試圖改變香港人民現時對權利的理解。
我:-這根本不是一個新的解釋，至少不是來自與人大常委會的解釋，這僅是國務院新聞辦發佈的。是以最近李鵬總理訪問英國為背景，紀念簽訂中英聯合聲明30年。
我:-請細讀白皮書，文中至少5次強調香港司法獨立。它寫明事實以及數字表明政府是如何信守諾言保持香港不變。若說一份白皮書威脅香港，這根本不是它的意圖，她要做的僅是關閉dongjian主流聲音。
我:-” 不是它的意圖。 “
T:-若香港人不按照中央的意思去做，中央將關閉來自中國大陸的任何供應/援助，這是白皮書隱含的內容，
我:-作為一名律師或將要成為一名律師，我們認為案件的關鍵在於理據及事實而不是猜測。不要擔心太多！
T:- 事實是，我們在日漸失去自由，歷史上出現過而且現在正在發生。
我:-你說的是哪種自由?
T:-選擇政府的自由、選擇民主的自由。
T:-選擇電視頻道的自由。
T:-甚至是在議會中言論六四事件的自由。
T:-在沒有小圈子的情況下，選擇立法會代表人員的自由。
我:-在2017年直接選舉行政長官，我們不是有5步的改革嗎？
除了5個本地電視頻道，我們能收到超過一百個台，更不用說超過一千個頻道的網路電視。僅僅是一個短處，就說一個人的自由受到阻礙或剝奪，這是很不可思議事情。這讓我想起去半島酒店的自助餐，提供多種選擇，包括鮑魚，但沒有魚子醬，我可以說它不符合自助餐的要求嗎？
T:- Junius, 請不要介意我這麼說，你或許認為自由因為你已經享有特權。
T:-直選是被北京篩選候選人過後才進行的，你可以說這是自由嗎？
我:-我還以為pan dem通過行使有效的否決功能幾乎控制了立法會。香港是如此的幸運，有你和我的交流，這不是到了某種程度的自由嗎！
A:-你們都很棒！
我:-現在，請原諒我休息一會去做我不得不做的事情，就是服務於我的客戶！
我:-會回來繼續和你們交流。
我:-我很享受。與大家一起站出來說話而無所畏懼，走向民主！
T:-很好的討論，Junius.
我:-下線了！
我:-真的！