關於 we should never surrender ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

Possessed by Auntie Hua ｜Lee Yee

“I have always possessed the worst malice when speculating about the Chinese people,” said Lu Xun. It has almost been a century since Lu Xun said this. Is it still the case, or is it even worse? The modern version needs no more “speculations” that there have been too much evidence and universally applicable inferences.

Carrie Lam talked about the sanctions from the US and reiterated that she has no assets in the US. She said, “I am not eager to go to the US, and I just laugh it off and snort with contempt at the so-called sanctions against myself as they are neither reasonable nor logical.”

Those who truly love the country and the party should put aside personal interest considerations, even if they have assets in the US, even if they yearn for the US, they must do what they should do for the interests of the party-state. As such, why do some who have assets in the US or yearn for the US not able to laugh it off, but instead put their personal interests above the implementation of the CCP’s will? Or should they be prepared for sanctions as soon as possible?

"Snort with contempt"? Such scorn towards the US sanctions. But what if not only the US, but also the UK joins the sanctions? A few days ago, in "A Laowai’s [foreigner's] view of China" video, Alicia Kearns, a member of the Parliament of the UK and a member of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, talked about her views on the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law and the sanctions against Carrie Lam and other officials. She said, "I really hope we can see the sanctions against the CCP, they are the group of people who have committed the most appalling human rights violations in the world." When Carrie Lam was asked two days ago whether her family members hold British passports, she said that her family members are those who need her protection the most. Therefore she refused to discuss anything about them. Why can’t she “snort with contempt” at the possible sanctions by the UK?

Carrie Lam said that whether it is the National Security Law or the postponement of the elections, the decisions were "based on the interests of the Hong Kong people": "I don't understand at all. Why will a local leader carry out local duties within her country be sanctioned by foreign governments? I really don’t know the grounds and the logic behind this.”

Many countries have already repeated clearly the reasons behind but being the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, she still does not understand. Has she been possessed by Auntie Hua [Chinese Auntie]? Other reasons aside, just take how various countries have now suspended their extradition agreements with Hong Kong. When these agreements were signed, Hong Kong law clearly stated that the arrangement for the surrender of fugitive offenders is not applicable to "any other part of the People’s Republic of China". This means the offenders in Hong Kong will not be extradited to any other part of China, but the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law changed everything. Article 56 states that criminals who violate the National Security Law can be investigated by the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the CPG in the HKSAR and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate can exercise the prosecutorial power, while the Supreme People’s Court can exercise the judicial power. The situation is now different from when the agreements were signed, so it is reasonable to terminate the agreement when no choices are left. However, there are two kinds of logic in the world, one is logic and the other one is the Chinese logic. What Carrie Lam follows is Chinese logic.

In response to the Western sanctions against her, Carrie Lam claimed that "justice lies in the hearts of the people". She also said that the postponement of the LegCo election was primarily for the health of the public, without political considerations, and not from the fear of losing the election. She believed that the foundation of public opinion for the postponement of the election was solid. Praise the Lord if she hadn't mentioned the public opinion, because even God would even laugh at the absurdity. According to the latest public opinion survey published on July 28, Carrie Lam’s approval rate was only 18%, the disapproval rate was 72%, and the net rating was negative 54%, which was a record low. With such a rating, she is able to talk about "the hearts of the people" and "foundation of the public opinion " with no embarrassment and without blushing!

Earlier, there have been rumors from the leaders of the pro-Beijing camp, and coupled with the high voter turnout rate from the pro-democracy primaries, only mentally-challenged would believe Carrie Lam that the postponement of the election for one year is for the sake of the health of the people. There is a saying in the British TV series "Yes Minister": "Never believe anything until it has been officially denied." Now Carrie Lam denied both political considerations and the fear of losing - something the people can finally believe to be true.

Carrie Lam’s big moves in the consecutive days and her Auntie Hua style rhetoric have made Hong Kong citizens understand more reversely what the “Special Atrocious region government” has done: Why are only Xinjiang and Hong Kong the two places in China with the epidemic outbreaks? Borders are not closed so to introduce the Chinese laboratories, and build the Fangcang hospital. During the period from February to May, more than 200,000 people were exempted from quarantine, bringing new levels of severity to the epidemic, and therefore the election is postponed for one year due to the epidemic. Are these all scripted? Some netizens reminded that in 2015, Xinjiang Uyghurs randomly assaulted 13 people brutally at Guangzhou train station. In the same year, Xinjiang's "re-education camps" surfaced.

Hong Kong has accelerated towards one system. According to Lu Xun, there's never "the worst" and only “worsening”.

黃浩銘：

//法官閣下，我能夠參與雨傘運動，爭取民主，實是毫無悔意，畢生榮幸。我已花了最青春的10年在社會運動上，假若我有80歲，我仍有50年可以與港人同行，繼續奮鬥。要是法官不信，且即管以刑罰來考驗我的意志，試煉我的決心，希望我的戰友們在我囚禁的時候，可以激發愛心，勉勵行善，更加有勇氣和力量作個真誠的人對抗謊言治國的中共政權。

　　「希望在於人民，改變始於抗爭」，唯有透過群眾力量，直接行動，才能改變社會。8年前如是，今日亦如是。但願港人堅定不移，爭取民主，打倒特權，彰顯公義。自由萬歲！民主社會主義萬歲！願公義和慈愛的　主耶穌基督與我同在，與法官先生同在，與香港人同在！//

希望在於人民　改變始於抗爭
—雨傘運動公眾妨擾案陳情書

陳法官仲衡閣下：

　　自2011年你審理只有23歲的我，追問時任特首曾蔭權知否米貴涉擾亂公眾秩序的案件距今已有8年。在命運的安排下，我再次站在你面前，只是當你讀到這封陳情書的時候，我已經不是當年被你宣判無罪釋放的年青人，而是一個準備迎接第三次入獄的積犯。然而，今天我不是尋求你的憐憫，而是希望道明我參與雨傘運動，公民抗命的緣由，讓法官閣下可以從我的動機及行為來給予合理判刑。

　　8年以來，我們的崗位稍有轉變，但香港的變化更大，充滿爭議的各個大白象基建均已落成，更多旅客走訪社區，似是一片繁華景象，但同時，更多窮人住在劏房，更多群眾走上街頭，亦有更多我們愛惜的年青人進入監牢。從前我們認為香港不會發生的事，都一一在這8年間發生了。當我8年前站在你面前那一刻，我們都不會想像得到香港人可被挾持返大陸，亦想像不到原來有一天大陸的執法人員可在香港某地方正當執法，更想像不到中共政府除了透過人大釋法外，還可藉著「一言九鼎」的人大決定，甚至中央公函來決定香港人的前途命運和收緊憲制權利。

爭取民主的本意

　　民主只是口號嗎？當年，我痛罵無視100萬窮人及30萬貧窮長者利益，卻慶祝不知辛亥革命本意的前行政長官曾蔭權，並要求設立全民退休保障，廢除強積金，因此首次被捕被控。但時至今日，香港仍然有過百萬貧窮人口，超過30萬貧窮長者，貧富懸殊及房屋短缺的問題愈加嚴重。2014年，我見過一位75歲的伯伯跪在立法會公聽會向時任勞工及福利局局長張建宗下跪，懇求政府不要拆遷古洞石仔嶺安老院。2019年，我又見到一位67歲執紙皮維生的婆婆在立法會公聽會哭訴難以找工作，現任勞工及福利局局長羅致光竟然叫她找勞工處。為何官員如此冷酷無情？為何我們的意見均未能影響政府施政？歸根結柢，就是因為香港人沒有真正的選擇，喪失本來應有制訂政策及監督的權力！

　　所謂民主，就是人民當家作主。任何施政，應當由人民倡議監督，公義分配，改善公共服務，使得貧者脫貧，富者節約。今日香港，顧全大陸，官商勾結，貧富懸殊，耗資千億的大白象跨境基建接踵而來，但當遇見護士猝死，教師自殺，老人下跪，政府政策就只有小修小補，小恩小惠，試問如何服眾？由1966年蘇守忠、盧麒公民抗命反對天星小輪加價，乃至1967年暴動及1989年中國愛國民主運動，甚至2003年反廿三條大遊行，無不是因政權專政，政策傾斜，分配不公，引致大規模民眾反抗。2014年雨傘運動的起點，亦是如此。

　　多年來，港人爭取民主，為求有公義分配，有尊嚴生活，有自主空間，但我們得到的是甚麼？1984年，中英兩國簽署《聯合聲明》前夕，前中共總書記趙紫陽曾回覆香港大學學生會要求「民主治港，普選特首」的訴求，清楚承諾「你們所說的『民主治港』是理所當然的」。當時，不少港人信以為真，誤以為回歸之後可得民主，但自1989年六四血腥鎮壓及2003年50萬人反對《廿三條》立法大遊行後，中共圖窮匕現，在2004年透過人大釋法收緊政制改革程序，並粗暴地決定2007及2008不會普選行政長官及立法會。自此，完全不民主的中國立法機關－全國人民代表大會常務委員會掌控香港人的命運福祉，人大釋法及人大決定可以隨時隨地配合極權政府的主張，命令香港法庭跟從，打壓香港的民主和法治。

　　2014年8月31日，是歷史的轉捩點。儘管多少溫和學者苦苦規勸，中共仍以6月的＜一國兩制白皮書＞為基礎，展示全面管治權的氣派，包括法官閣下在內，都要屈從愛國之說。在《8‧31人大決定》之後，中共完全暴露其假民主假普選的面目，其時，我們認為對抗方法就只有公民抗命。

公民抗命的起點

　　違法就是罪惡嗎？我們違法，稱之為「公民抗命」，就是公民憑良心為公眾利益，以非暴力形式不服從法律命令，以求改變不義制度或法律。終審法院非常任法官賀輔明（Leonard Hoffmann）勳爵曾在英國著名案例 R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 136 案提出：「發自良知的公民抗命，有着悠久及光榮的傳統。那些因着信念認為法律及政府行為是不義而違法的人，歷史很多時候都證明他們是正確的……能包容這種抗爭或示威，是文明社會的印記。」

　　終審法院在最近的公民廣場案（Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung (2018) 21 HKCFAR 35）亦道明「公民抗命」的概念可獲肯定（該案判詞第70至72段）。因此，亦印證我等9人及其他公民抗命者並非可以一般「違法犯事」來解釋及施刑。港人以一般遊行示威爭取民主30年，無論從殖民年代乃至特區年代，皆無顯著改進，今日以更進步主張，公民抗命爭取民主，正如印度、南非、波蘭等對抗強權，實在無可厚非。誠然，堵塞主要幹道，影響民眾上班下課，實非我所願，但回想過來，中共及特區政府多年來豈不更堵塞香港民主之路，妨擾公眾獲得真正的發聲機會？

　　如果我是公民抗命，又何以不認罪承擔刑責？2014年12月，警方以成文法「出席未經批准集結」及「煽動參與未經批准集結」在村口將我逮捕。2017年3月，警方改以普通法「煽惑他人作出公眾妨擾」及「煽惑他人煽惑公眾妨擾」提控。正如戴耀廷先生在其結案陳詞引述英國劍橋大學法學教授 John R. Spencer 提及以普通法提訴的問題：「近年差不多所有以『公眾妨擾罪』來起訴的案件，都出現以下兩種情況的其中一個：一、當被告人的行為是觸犯了成文法律，通常懲罰是輕微的，檢控官想要以一支更大或額外的棒子去打他；二、當被告人的行為看來是明顯完全不涉及刑事責任的，檢控官找不到其他罪名可控訴他」，無獨有偶，前終審法院常任法官鄧楨在其2018年退休致詞提及：「普通法同樣可被用作欺壓的工具。它是一種變化多端的權力，除非妥善地運用人權法加以適當控制，否則可被不當使用。」如今看來，所言非虛。

　　今我遭控二罪，必定據理力爭，冀借助法官閣下明智判決推翻檢控不義，但法庭定讞，我自當承擔刑責，絕無怨言，以成全公民抗命之道。

試問誰還未覺醒

　　我是刻意求刑標榜自己，讓年青人跟從走進監獄大門嗎？我反覆推敲這個問題。然而，我的答案是，正正是希望後輩不用像我此般走進牢獄，我更要無懼怕地爭取人們所當得的。縱使今日面對強權，惡法將至，烏雲密佈，我依然一如既往，毋忘初衷地認為真普選才是港人獲得真正自由之路。任何一個聲稱為下一代福祉者，理應為後輩爭取自由平等的選擇權利，讓他們能自立成長，辨明是非，而非家長式管控思想，讓下一代淪為生財工具，朝廷鷹犬。

　　主耶穌基督說：「我確確實實地告訴你們：一粒麥子如果不落在地裡死去，它仍然是一粒；如果死了，就結出很多子粒來。（《約翰福音》第12章24節）」沒有犧牲，沒有收穫。故然，我不希望年青人跟我一樣要踏上公民抗命之路，承受牢獄之苦，但我請教所有智慧之士，既然舉牌示威遊行均已無顯其效，公民抗命和平抗爭為何不是能令政權受壓求變之策？若非偌大群眾運動，梁振英豈不仍安坐其位？

　　刑罰於我而言，無情可求，唯一我心中所想，就是希望法庭能顧念75歲的朱耀明牧師年事已高，望以非監禁方式處之，讓港人瞥見法庭對良心公民抗命者寬容一面。美國法哲學家羅納德‧德沃金（Ronald Dworkin）在1968年論及公民抗命時（On Not Prosecuting Civil Disobedience），不但認為法庭應給予公民抗命者寬鬆刑罰，甚至應不予起訴。事實上，終審法院非常任法官賀輔明在2014年12月4日，即雨傘運動尾聲（已發生大規模堵路多日），佔中三子自首之後一日，接受《蘋果日報》及《南華早報》訪問時提到「抗爭者及掌權者均未有逾越公民抗命的『遊戲規則』，抗爭活動並沒有損害香港法治」，更進一步提到「一旦他們被判有罪，應該從輕發落，認為這是傳統，因為自首的公民不是邪惡的人」，由此，我期盼法庭將有人道的判刑。

　　法官閣下，我能夠參與雨傘運動，爭取民主，實是毫無悔意，畢生榮幸。我已花了最青春的10年在社會運動上，假若我有80歲，我仍有50年可以與港人同行，繼續奮鬥。要是法官不信，且即管以刑罰來考驗我的意志，試煉我的決心，希望我的戰友們在我囚禁的時候，可以激發愛心，勉勵行善，更加有勇氣和力量作個真誠的人對抗謊言治國的中共政權。

　　「希望在於人民，改變始於抗爭」，唯有透過群眾力量，直接行動，才能改變社會。8年前如是，今日亦如是。但願港人堅定不移，爭取民主，打倒特權，彰顯公義。自由萬歲！民主社會主義萬歲！

　　願公義和慈愛的　主耶穌基督與我同在，與法官先生同在，與香港人同在！

社會民主連線副主席、雨傘運動案第八被告
黃浩銘
二零一九年四月九日

Hope lies in the people
Changes come from resistance
- Umbrella Movement Public Nuisance Case Statement

Your Honour Judge Johnny Chan,

It has been 8 years since I have met you in court. You were the judge to my case on disorder in public places. It was in 2011 and I was only 23 years old. I chased after the then Chief Executive Mr. Donald Tsang and asked if he knew the price of rice and whether he understood the struggles of the poor. Fate has brought us here again, I am before you once again, but I am no longer the young man who was acquitted. When you are reading this statement, I am a “recidivist”, ready to be sent to prison for the third time. However, I do not seek your mercy today, but wish to explain the reasons for my participation in the Umbrella Movement and civil disobedience, so that your honour can give a reasonable sentence through understanding my motives and actions.

Our positions have slightly altered in the past 8 years, but not as great as the changes that took place in Hong Kong. The controversial big white elephant infrastructures were completed. More tourists are visiting, making Hong Kong a bustling city. At the same time, however, more poor people are living in sub-divided flats, more people are forced to the street to protest, more young people are sent to jail. Things we wouldn’t have imagined 8 years are now happening in Hong Kong. When I was before you 8 years ago, we would not have imagined Hong Kong people could be kidnapped by the Chinese authority to Mainland China. We wouldn’t have imagined that one day, the Mainland law enforcement officers could perform their duties in Hong Kong. We wouldn’t have imagined, not only could the Community Chinese government interpret our law, but they could decide on our future and tightened the rule on constitutional rights through the National People’s Congress Decision.

The Original Intention

Is democracy just a slogan? 8 years ago, I criticised the then Chief Executive Mr. Donald Tsang for ignoring the interests of 1 million poor people and 300,000 elderly. I scolded him for celebrating the 1911 Revolution without understanding its preliminary belief. I called for the establishment of universal retirement protection and the abolition of MPF, and was arrested for the first time. Yet, there are still over a million poor people in Hong Kong today, with more than 300,000 of poor elderly. The disparity between the rich and the poor and housing problem have only become worsen.

In 2014, I witnessed a 75-year-old man kneeling before the Secretary for Labour and Welfare Mr. Matthew Cheung Kin-Chung at a public hearing in the Legislative Council. The old man begged the government not to demolish the elderly home in Kwu Tung Dills Corner. In 2019, a 67-year-old woman, who scavenges for cardboards to make a living, cried during the Legislative Council public hearing. She cried because it was impossible for her to get a job. The Secretary for Labour and Welfare Mr. Law Chi-Kwong simply told her to ask for help in the Labour Department. Why are the government officials so callous? Why have our opinions failed to affect the government’s administration? The root of the problem is that Hong Kong people do not have real choices, we have been deprived of the power to supervise the government and to formulate policies.

What is democracy? Democracy means people are the masters. Any policies should be supervised by the people, the society’s resources should be justly distributed to improve the public services, so that the poor is no longer in poverty. However, in today’s Hong Kong, the focus is on the Mainland China, there is collusion between the government and the businesses, there is a great disparity between the rich and the poor, and multi-billion-dollar big white elephant cross-border infrastructure are built one after another. Nurses die from overexertion at work, teachers commit suicide and old man kneels to beg for what he deserves. Yet, the government policies were only minor repairs here and there, giving small treats and favours to the people. How can you win the support of the people? From the civil disobedience movement in 1966 by So Sau-chung and Lo Kei against the increase of Star Ferry fare, until the 1967 riots and 1989 China Patriotic Democratic Movement, even the 2003 march against the purported legistlation of Article 23, they were all due to the political dictatorship, imbalance policies as well as unfair distribution of public resources. It is for these reasons that led to large scale protests. It is for the same reason that the 2014 Umbrella Movement started.

For so many years, Hong Kong people have been fighting for democracy. We demand a just allocation, a life with dignity and space of freedom. However, what do we get in return? On the eve of the signing of the Joint Declaration in 1984, the then premier of the Communist Chinese government Zhao Ziyang in his reply to the demand for democracy and universal suffrage by the University of Hong Kong Student Council clearly promised that ‘what you referred to, namely “rule Hong Kong by democracy” is a matter that goes without saying.’ At the time, a lot of Hong Kong people believed it. They thought they would have democracy after the handover. However, since the bloody suppression on 4th June 1989 and the 500,000 people demonstration against Article 23 in 2003, the plot of the Chinese communist revealed itself. They decided by force through the NPC interpretation in 2004 that there would be no universal suffrage of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council in 2007 and 2008. Since then, the undemocratic authority of NPC kept a tight grip on the destiny of Hong Kong people. NPC’s interpretation and decisions can be deployed anytime when convenient to assist the propaganda of the authoritative government, forcing the hands of the Hong Kong court and suppressing Hong Kong democracy and the rule of law.

31st August 2014 was a turning point in history. No matter how the moderate scholars tried to persuade it from happening, the Community Chinese government has used the One Country Two System White Paper in June as the foundation and forced its way down onto the people. Even your honour was among them, succumbed to the so called patriotism. After the 8.31 Decision of the National People’s Congress, the plot of the Communist Chinese government has revealed itself, the Chinese government has been lying to the Hong Kong people, they never intended to give Hong Kong genuine universal suffrage. At that time, we believed that civil disobedience was inevitable and was the only way out.

The Starting Point of Civil Disobedience

Is breaking the law sinful? We broke the law with a cause, as “civil disobedience” is the refusal to comply with certain laws considered unjust, as a peaceful form of political protest in the interest of the public to change the unjust system or law. Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal Honourable Leonard Hoffman stated in the well-known R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 136 case that, “civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometime vindicated by history. It is the mark of a civilised community that it can accommodate protests and demonstrations of this kind.”

The recent decision by the Court of Appeal concerning the Civic Square outside the government headquarter（Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung (2018) 21 HKCFAR 35) also confirmed the idea of civil disobedience(paragraphs 70-72 of the judgment refer). This , therefore, confirmed that myself and the other 8 defendants as well as other civil disobedience protestors, should not be understood as “breaking the law” in its general circumstances, nor should our sentencing be weighted against the usual standard. Hong Kong people have been fighting for democracy through protest for 30 years already, whether it was during the times of colonial British rule or during the special administrative region, there has been no improvement. Today, we fought for democracy, just as the fights for freedom and democracy in India, South Africa and Poland, and civil disobedience is inevitable. It is true that we did not want to block the roads or affect Hong Kong citizens attending to work or school. But on reflection, didn’t the Communist Chinese and Special Administrative governments block our road to democracy and interfere with our rights to speak up?

If what I did was in the name of civil disobedience, why should I defend my case and not bear the criminal responsibility? In December 2014, the police made use of the statutory offences of “attending unauthorised assembly and inciting participation in unauthorised assembly” and arrested me at the village I live in. In March 2017, the police amended their charges to common law offences of “incitement to commit public nuisance and incitement to incite public nuisance”. As Mr. Benny Tai said in his closing submissions, quoting law professor of Cambridge University John R. Spencer on common law charges, “...almost all the prosecutions for public nuisance in recent years seem to have taken place in one of two situations: first, where the defendant’s behaviour amounted to a statutory offence, typically punishable with a small penalty, and the prosecutor wanted a bigger or extra stick to beat him with, and secondly, where the defendant’s behaviour was not obviously criminal at all and the prosecutor could think of nothing else to charge him with.” Coincidentally, the then Court of Appeal Honourable Mr Justice Robert Tang Kwok-ching stated in his retirement speech in 2018 that, “Common law can be used oppressively. It is protean power, unless adequately controlled by the proper application of human rights law, can be misused.” What he said has become true today.

Faced with 2 charges, I am going to stand by reasons and my principles, in order to assist the Court to overturn an unjust prosecution. However, should the court find me guilty, I shall bear the criminal responsibility. I have no qualm or regrets, in fulfilment of my chosen path of civil disobedience.

Who has not yet awoken?

I do reflect as to whether I am simply seeking a criminal sentence in order to make a point, or to encourage other young men to follow my footsteps into the gates of the prison. I have reflected upon this repeatedly. However, my answer is that, I am doing this precisely because I do not wish to see other young men following my suit into the prison. Because of this, I need to fight for what is ours fearlessly. Although today we are confronted by an oppressive authority, the looming legislation of unjust laws and a clouded future, I shall be as I always am: relentless maintaining my stance that a real election is the path to freedom for Hong Kong people. Anyone who claims to be acting in the interest of the next generation should fight for a free and equal choice for their youths. This is in order for them to learn to be independent, to be able to tell rights from wrongs. There should be no paternal thinking, simply teaching the next generation to be slaves of money and accessories to the oppressor.

My Lord Jesus Christ has said: ‘Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. (Book of John 12:24.) Without sacrifice, there is no reward. I don’t wish to see any more young men having to join the path of civil disobedience as I did, and to pay the price as I did. However, I ask this of all men and women of wisdom: if peaceful demonstration in the old fashioned way has lost its effectiveness and was simply ignored, why is peaceful civil disobedience not a good way to bring about change whilst one is being oppressed? If not for this crowd movement, C Y Leung would still be sitting comfortably on the throne.

I have no mitigation to submit. I only wish that the Court would spare Reverend Chu, who is an elderly of 75 years of age. I pray that a non-custodial sentence may be passed for Reverend Chu. I hope that the Court will have leniency and mercy for Reverend Chu. I refer to the work of the American legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin in 1968, namely: ‘On Not Prosecuting Civil Disobedience’. He opined that, not only should the Court allow leniency to civil disobedience participants, but also should they not be prosecuted. In fact, Lord Hoffmann NPJ of the CFA stated the following in an interview with Apple Daily and South China Morning Post on 4th December 2014 (which was at the end of the Umbrella Movement, a day before the surrender of the 3 initiators of the Occupy Central Movement): ‘In any civilised society, there is room for people making political points by civil disobedience.’ ‘These are not wicked people.’ Civil disobedience had ‘an old tradition’ in the common law world. ‘When it comes to punishment, the court should take into account their personal convictions.’ In light of this, I hope the Court shall pass a humane sentence.

Your honour, I have no regret for participating in the Umbrella Movement and the fight for democracy. It was an honour of a lifetime. I have spent the best 10 years of my youth in social movements. If I can live up to 80-year-old, I would still have 50 years to walk alongside the people of Hong Kong, to continue the fight. If this is in doubt, please test my will against the whips of criminal punishment. I shall take this as a trial of my determination. I only hope that my brothers and sisters-in-arms can be inspired whilst I am imprisoned, to do goods and encourage others. I hope they shall have further courage and strength to be honest men and women, to fight against the lies of the ruling Chinese Communist authority.

“Hope lies in the hands of the people, change starts from resistance.’ It’s only through the power of the people and direct action that the society can be changed. This was so 8 years ago. This is still the case today. May the will of the people of Hong Kong be firm and determined, to fight for democracy, overthrow the privileged, and let justice be done. All hail for freedom! All hail for democratic socialism!

May justice and peace of my Lord Jesus Christ be with me, with your Honour and with the People of Hong Kong!

Vice President of the League of Social Democrats,
the 8th Defendant of the Umbrella Movement Case

Raphael Wong Ho Ming
10th April 2019

票投李卓人，票投香港人！

致香港家書 A letter to Hong Kong
(Please scroll down for English)

親愛的香港人：

背負著大家的期望，我受命代替劉小麗參加九龍西的補選。這是一場非常艱難的選戰，是希望與喪志的對決。

雨傘運動之後，政府進行政治檢控，年輕人成為政治犯，六名議員的議席被褫奪，香港人言論、表達自由日漸消失，人權、法治進一步受到衝擊，政府管治能力下跌，斷送香港高度自治，威權壓境，很多朋友為此沮喪、變得無力。

關心社會的年輕人被打擊，有人對民主派失望，有人退下火線，甚至連票都不想投。其實我與大家一樣，為香港沉淪而痛心，但懷憂不能喪志，要守護香港，我們就必須重新振作！

我們要爭的何止一個議席，更要爭一口氣！

為了這個目標，在今次選舉中，各黨派與民間團體空前團結，我們走遍九龍西 27 條屋邨，逐家逐戶拜訪；我們在社區毅行，每一步都帶著希望和實踐的精神；我們的義工在區內貼數以萬計的海報，但大家未必見到，因為夜裡就被撕走，大量宣傳橫額也被破壞。不過義工們沒有放棄！希望大家也是。

面對明裡暗裡的攻擊，我必須告訴大家，有輸掉這次選舉的可能。但我懇請大家不要失望、不要氣餒。自從 89 年六四事件後，我在北京被拘禁，親歷民主運動的挫折，到 90 年代爭取全面直選、集體談判權；回歸後，2003 年反對 23 條立法、反高鐵、反國教等抗爭，還有多次工運；我與香港人一起走過高山低谷，同喜同悲，小勝不驕，挫敗也不放棄，只要有我能盡力的地方，我就撐到底！

各位朋友，我們還有很多仗要打，阻擋 23 條立法，阻擋大陸式貪腐侵蝕香港，阻擋向中共進行利益輸送的一萬億「明日大嶼」﹔我們還有很多帳要算︰沙中線工程失誤、標準工時、全民退休保障。我們能在議會多一席，就多一分力量。

我們短期內未必可以改變目前形勢，但最重要有打不死精神，香港這個家是我們的，只要團結，你的一票就能向威權政府還以顏色，為香港重燃希望！

念念不忘，必有迴響。有一口氣，點一盞燈。燈在人在。

李卓人
2018 年 11 月 24 日

===

A Letter to Hong Kong

24 November 2018

Dear Hongkongers,

Carrying the people’s hope, I am entrusted with the mission to run in the Kowloon West by-election on behalf of Lau Siu-lai. This is a very difficult election – a battle between hope and despair.

After the Umbrella Movement, the government started its political persecution: young people became political prisoners, six legislators’ seats were stripped away. Hong Kong people’s freedom of expression is disappearing day by day. Human rights and rule of law are under threat. The government is losing its governance ability and giving away the high level of autonomy we were once promised. The dawn of a draconian government made us feel depressed and powerless.

Seeing the crackdown on the young people who care about society, some feel disappointed with the democrats, some choose to leave the front line, some don’t even want to vote. As much as everyone else, I grieved for Hong Kong’s fall. But we can’t lose our ambition despite the worries. To save Hong Kong, we will have to pull ourselves together!

What we are fighting for is beyond a seat in the LegCo, we are also fighting for our dignity!

To achieve this goal, the political parties and civil society work in solidarity in this election. We visited every household in 27 public housing estates. We walked through communities, putting the spirit of hope into our every step. Our volunteers put up tens of thousands of posters in the area, but you may not have seen them because they were taken down at night, in addition to the destruction of tens of thousands promotional banners. But our volunteers did not give up! We hope you won’t give up either.

Facing attacks all around, I have to tell you that we might lose this election. But I hope that you won’t lose hope, you won’t be beaten down. During the Tiananmen massacre in 1989, I was detained in Beijing and experienced the frustration of the democratic movement. In the 90s, I fought for universal suffrage, and collective bargaining power. After the handover, I participated in the struggle against the legislation for Article 23 in 2003, the express railway, and “national education”. I also supported the labour movement. I walked side by side with the Hong Kong people, through ups and downs. Together, we shared the happiness and sadness. We aren’t arrogant when we win, we aren’t discouraged when we lose. Anywhere I can help, I will always be there!

To my fellow friends, we still have a lot of fights ahead: the fight against Article 23, the fight against mainland corruption in Hong Kong, the fight against the trillion-dollar Artificial Island for transferring benefits to CCP. We still have a lot of injustice unaddressed: the Shatin-Central Link scandal, standard working hours, universal pension. If we have one more seat in the legislature, we will have a little more power.

We may not be able to alter the current situation in the short term. But we should have the spirit to never surrender. Hong Kong is our home. If we stand in solidarity, your vote is a rebuke to the authoritarian government, lighting the hope for Hong Kong!

Keep faith, someday the world will respond. Each of us lights a candle. Where there is light, there is hope.

李卓人
Lee Cheuk-yan

===

【李卓人告急頭像下載】 http://bit.ly/2DTzAws

#1125記得投票　#3號李卓人
#為下一代　#背水一戰
#選舉廣告

【報名做義工】 bit.ly/LeeCheukYan2018
【組隊入信箱】 goo.gl/54XeVT
【捐款支持李卓人】 leecheukyan.org/donation

#Suboi #Kimmese #IKnow
I Know (Tôi Biết) là một ca khúc mới nhất đánh dấu sự kết hợp thú vị của hai nữ rapper nổi tiếng đến từ hai miền Bắc Nam, Kimmese và Suboi.
--------
FOLLOW Suboi
☆ Facebook: http://Facebook.com/suboimusic
☆ Instagram: http://Instagram.com/justsuboi
☆ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/officialSUBOI
-----------
I KNOW

Official Digital Release. Exclusive on MusicFaces.vn
Sáng tác: Suboi
Music: Vagno Chandara
-----------
LYRIC:

Yea, hey
You know it's Suboi and Kim on the same track baby
Yea, you know what we gonna say to you boy
Yo, Now lets go V

(Verse1)
Boy, chill, no deal
How could you try to compare like its real
Because I never play, I never say that i can be your lady
Never say i will
Don't feel bad about it, you see
You and me we've been hanging around like Tom n Jerry
Laugh a lot of laughs
Smile a lot of smiles
Fight a lot of fights
I even cried a lot of tears (so, so)
So whats happening here?
Telling me you wanna hear i say i want you as my man
I said yea you're my guy, but i cant lie
Im sorry but i can't let you step into my life you know
I got a man and he's so fine
We've been friends together like "homies" back then
And then a lot of things seperated us, yes
A lot of rumours misunderstanded us
Now we're here.

(Hook)
And I know
We could never be the same again
But you aint got nothing like my man
And you just cant understand
(Dont think the same way again)
And i know ....

(Verse2: Kim)
I could be, the very first girl
That rocks your world
And you are somewhere in my heart
You know we should not be apart
But I gatta make this clear, you know i
I never wanna come across the line no
Telling you one thing that we should think of this
Friends could be forever
(understand) Love could stop whenever
So lets sit down together, chill together
We'll be the best like this im telling ya

(Hook)

(Bridge)
Its over so naturally
Cuz i aint the one the one you want me to be
(So boy do you remember ...
I told you about love and surrender ...)
Now, everybody say lets go back, back
You and me, baby we are goin back, back
We will be the best if we go back, back
We go back, back
Go back, back

(Hook x2)

We'll be ok If you just do my way
We'll be ok If you just do my way
And when you do it my way, you know
We're gonna be Ok ...
Yea
---------
Suboi is a Vietnamese female rapper and this is her Official Youtube channel.
Đây là kênh Youtube chính thức của Suboi
Các bạn đăng ký kênh và bấm chuông để theo dõi những video mới từ Suboi
Click for subscribe: http://metub.net/suboi
----------
☆ Vui lòng không reupload video của Suboi
☆ Mọi vấn đề liên quan đến bản quyền vui lòng email tới support@metub.net

hey ya.....it's my version of Kissing A Fool.....
hope ya'll like it.....feel free to leave some comments.....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kissing A Fool

You are far
When I could have been your star
You listened to people
Who scared you to death
And from my heart
Strange that you were strong enough
To even make a start
You'll never find
Peace of mind
Till you listen to your heart

Chorus:
People
You can never change the way they feel
Better let them do just what they will
For they will
If you let them
Steal your heart from you
People
Will always make a lover feel a fool
But you knew I loved you
We could have shown them all
We should have seen love through

Fooled me with the tears in your eyes
Covered me with kisses and lies
So far
But please don't take my heart

You are far
I'm never gonna be your star
I'll pick up the pieces
to mend my heart
strange that I was wrong enough
to think you'd love me too
You must have been kissing a fool
I said you must have been kissing a fool

Chorus

But remember this
Every other kiss
That you'll ever give
Long as we both live
when you need the hand of another man
one you really can surrender with
I will wait for you
like I always do
there's something there
that can't compare with any other

You are far
When I could have been your star
You listened to people
Who scared you to death
And from my heart
Strange that I was wrong enough
To think you'd love me too
You must have been kissing a fool
You must have been kissing a fool