關於 based in hong kong中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【拜登Town Hall談中國】​
​
美國總統拜登2月17日參加了由CNN主辦的一場Town Hall（市政廳討論/辯論）。市政廳討論這種型式在美國非常常見，就是由政治人物直接面對群眾，回答問題。許多國會議員都會定期在自己的選區舉辦這樣子的會議，親自回答選民的問題（但由於疫情，從去年開始許多都改採線上進行了）。在台灣似乎較少有這種公開的辯論或討論機會。​
​
在這場Town Hall當中，拜登談到疫情、最低工資、政黨輪替後的狀況等等，也談到中國及人權議題。而其中和台灣最相關的，當屬他被主持人問到關於中國的人權問題，而他揭露自己和中國領導人習近平過往的談話內容。不過，他在這場講話的狀況並不是很好，有很多地方講不太清楚或口誤，所以在推特上也引起了猜話（？）大作戰。​
​
➤ 白宮逐字稿：https://reurl.cc/NXqLom​
➤ 中國問題片段：https://reurl.cc/0DE49A​
➤ 文字報導：https://reurl.cc/zbApYN​
​
台灣這邊在網路上也已經有很多片段流傳，不過在內容的解讀上似乎有許多不完整之處。這裡有一篇 Translation Matters 翻譯有要緊 的翻譯詳解，推薦大家參考：https://reurl.cc/V38Y7y 。​
​
以下是我們的看法，​
​
他回答跟習近平談話內容的那段，大致上講的有三個重點：​
​
１. 拜登認為習近平做為中國的領導者，跟歷屆領導者一樣，認為中國在歷史上是西方的受害者，而中國必須使用強力的控制來統治，這樣才能夠反映中國價值；​
​
２. 做為一個美國的領導人，拜登理解習近平所認為的這種反映中國價值的統治方式，因為美國的領導人也必須反映他所認為的美國價值；​
​
３. 美國仍然會像過去一樣，持續地在國際上扮演維護人權的角色，尤其是聯合國相關機構。中國方面一直都想要當世界老大，但假設違反人權原則的話，不太可能做到，中國將會面臨反作用力（repercussions），而習近平也知道這點。​
​
上述的內容中，尤以第二點引發許多爭論，因為除了出現明顯重大的口誤以外，語塞以及不流暢的發言也讓人難以理解部分內容，以下我們附上該段的原文，並試著針對此段中的兩項爭議做梳理。​
​
So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China. ​ And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that.​
​
I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States. ​ And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it. ​ Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow. ​
​
But my point was that […] And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic, they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. ​ How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?​
​
🔹 新疆人權議題與文化相對論​
​
許多人在看這段時，把「so the idea I’m not going to speak out against …」（句１：我沒有要對 … 發聲反對的這個想法）和「Culturally, there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow」（句２：文化上，不同國家期待領導人要遵守的常規不同）做連結，認為這是在替中國在新疆的行為，用「不同文化的常規」開脫。​
​
這樣的說法其實是有點過度解讀。如果看過原段落的影片，拜登在句１尾段吃了螺絲，然後忘了回來講上一句話的結尾就接著講下句。如果照逐字稿的字面上翻譯，的確會變成他「沒有」要對中國在新疆、香港、台灣的作為發聲，但這就會完全變成前言不對後語，因為他在此的前一句才說「如果不能反映美國的價值，沒有一個美國總統能繼續坐在總統位上」。比較合理的解讀是，他該句末忘了加像是「… is impossible」之類的語氣，也就是其實他原本要講的是「要我對 … 不發聲的這個想法是不可能的」。這樣一來，後句的「he said he gets it」（習近平說他了解）也能順接，因為這段的旨意是拜登在向習近平闡述美國總統必須得為美國價值挺身。​
​
句２的解讀其實是延續這整段的旨意，提到不同文化下對其領導人的期待也有所不同。這裡除了再一次回應前述美國總統必須反映美國價值精神外，也順便呼應了更前面一點他說習近平的中心原則就是認為中國必須統一且高度地控制，並常以此作為他許多作為的理由。如果各位繼續往後讀，拜登接著說他當時就認為中國會結束一胎化政策，因為他們很排外（xenophobic），不讓外人進來；在這樣的情況下，未來的勞動力將無法維持經濟成長。​
​
我們可以看得出來，這幾個段落都是圍繞著美中領導階層在文化價值上的差異。不過要注意的是，這裡即便闡述了「美中雙方照自己的文化去做事」的脈絡，但是【並沒有】說要去尊重或是接受對方的做法。所以如果要對這段談話下一個註解，其實就是美中雙方的「文明衝突」。​
​
至於對於中國在新疆人權侵犯的態度，拜登自己、他的國務卿布林肯都已經用「種族滅絕」（genocide）來描述，這其實已經是很明確的表態了，因為種族滅絕在國際上的定義是沒有辦法簡單用文化相對論來帶過的。一個是現在具有政策宣示性的聲明，一個是他闡述多年前與習近平的對話內容，哪一個比較能夠作為未來美國相關政策的預測工具，相信大家都知道該怎麼解讀。​
​
🔹 結束一中政策？​
​
另一個引起爭議的是在剛剛提到的句１中，講到了要結束一中政策：「so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he's doing in Hong Kong … and Taiwan, trying to end the One-China policy by making it forceful …」。​
​
這裡蠻明顯是口誤，因為這幾句的主詞都是習近平（he），而習近平怎麼可能會去結束「一中政策」（One China Policy）？中國只有「一中原則」（One China Priciple），沒有一中政策。支持是口誤的另一個線索是，在這之後拜登第二次說到一中政策時，他句子都還沒說完，就立刻改口成「一胎化政策」（One Child Policy）。根據這幾個段落都在強調雙方在人權、民主價值上的差異，以及拜登過去一年以來的許多公開發言都有痴 … 吃螺絲的狀況，這裡講錯話的可能性是很高的。​
​
▍感想​
​
如果把這樣的談話跟先前的幾個重要談話來對照，例如「兩國關係建立在公平、對等與尊重主權的基礎上」、「美中文明有巨大的差異」這樣的文句，其實美國理解中國的方式有許多基本相同的元素在（大家猜猜看這是誰說的）。我們先前也有說過，美國兩大黨的外交政策觀點其實是很類似的，但大家在辯論的重點在於手段的使用。​
​
最重要的問題一直都是：中共高層（尤其習近平）真的會知道違反人權的後果嗎？美國該如何確保中共須要付出的代價？拜登在這場Town Hall當中並沒有詳細說明，因為他認為這是很複雜的事情，不打算在這個場合用短短幾分鐘來講。​
​
大家就繼續看所謂面對中國的「全政府途徑」（whole-of-government approach）會怎麼發展下去吧！​
​
​
✨ 觀測站推特：https://twitter.com/ustaiwanwatch​
✨ 贊助觀測站：https://ustaiwanwatch.soci.vip/

【After Winning Majority in LegCo: Beijing's Crackdown May Trigger International Intervention】

***感謝Hong Kong Columns - Translated，將我早前撰寫『議會過半想像：以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」』長文（https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.313299448762570/2887650867994069/）翻譯成英文，鼓勵國際社會關注立會選舉一旦過半的沙盤推演，在最惡劣形勢下的制衡策略。***

中文精簡版本：https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/

Hongkongers have experienced our revolution for over half a year. They no longer take a consequentialist view to the effectiveness of their movement as they did years ago, or waste time second-guessing the intentions and background of fellow activists. Following the defensive battles at CUHK and PolyU, November’s District Council election saw a great victory of unity. More marvellous is the union between peaceful and “valiant” protesters.

In the process of resisting tyranny, the people have realised that one cannot prioritize one strategy over another. This is also how the common goal of “35+” came into being—the hope that we will win over half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) this September, such that the political spectrum that represents the majority of Hongkongers is able to gain control of legislative decisions. The political clout of Hongkongers will increase if 35 or more seats are successfully secured on our side. It is certainly one vital step to achieve the five demands within the system.

The possibility of realizing legislative majority

Technically it is not unrealistic to win a majority even under the current undemocratic system. Back in the 2016 LegCo election, we already won 30 seats. In addition to the District Council (First) functional constituency seat that is already in the pocket of the pan-democrats, as long as the candidates in Kowloon East and New Territories West do not start infighting again, we could safely secure 33 seats based on the number of pan-dem votes in 2016.

The other 3 seats required to achieve a majority depend on democrats’ breakthrough among the functional constituencies by dispersing the resources of the Liaison Office. They also count on whether the turnout this September could exceed 71.2% — that of last year’s District Council elections. Some of the factors that could affect the turnout include: will the epidemic persist into the summer? Will there be potential violent repression of protests in the 2 weeks preceding the election? Will Hong Kong-US relations be affected by the downturn of the global economy?

Therefore, the ambition of “35+” is to be prioritised by the resistance as both a means and an end. I have already expressed my support for an intra-party primary at the coordination meeting. In the meantime, it is pleasing to see the ongoing debates reaching a consensus of maximising the seats among geographical constituencies in the upcoming election.

Whilst enthusiastic coordination, we should also assess the post-election landscape and gauge Beijing’s reactions: if we do not reach 35 seats, Hong Kong will be subject to tighter control and more severe repression by China; but if the democratic parties successfully form a majority in LegCo, CCP’s fears of a “constitutional crisis” would become imminent. Hence, the key questions are how the Pan-Democrats should deal with the volatile political situation in Hong Kong and how they are going to meet Beijing’s charge head-on.

Watching out for Beijing’s dismissal of LegCo after reaching majority

To take back control of LegCo such that it faithfully reflects the majority’s principles and needs is the definition of a healthy democracy. Recently, however, DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung has warned that the plan of the Pan-Dems to “usurp power” in the LegCo would only lead to Beijing’s forceful disqualification of certain members or the interpretation of the Basic Law. This proves that winning a majority in LegCo is not only a popular conception but also a realistic challenge that would get on the nerves of Beijing. Could Beijing accept a President James To in LegCo? These unknown variables must be addressed upon achieving a majority.

While there is no telltale sign as to Beijing’s exact strategy, we are already familiar with the way CCP manipulated the Basic Law in the past 4 years. Having experienced three waves of disqualifications in LegCo, twice kicked out of LegCo with my team, and thrice locked up in jail, I have no false hopes of an easy compromise from Beijing: they would not let Pan-Dems control LegCo for half a year and wait (as is the proper procedure) until after having negatived the Budget to dissolve the legislature, and thereby giving them an easy victory in the re-elections. The greater the Pan-Dems threaten Beijing’s rule in Hong Kong, the more likely that it will trigger Beijing’s repression.

Since the disqualification and arrest of lawmakers have already become “normalised”, one can even imagine the police stepping into the LegCo building to force Pan-Dems into voting. Neither is it beyond our imagination to expect the CCP to kick out all 70 lawmakers in a fit of rage and replace them with a provisional LegCo “2.0” [HKCT note: The first was from 25 Jan 1997 to 30 Jun 1998]. To depend on a majority that could lead to a chapter of a “new testament” for One Country, Two Systems is perhaps what many elites long for, but they are overly optimistic:for a ticket to the promised land will not be available at the Chief Executive election campaign a year and a half later.

Admittedly, the Pan-Dems cannot unilaterally initiate “Laam-chaau” [HKCT note: mostly translated into “scorched-earth” mentality or “mutual destruction”; some even translated into “If I burn, you burn with us”]. The most they can do is to force a standstill of the government, and not for long the LegCo will have been eliminated from the equation to make the wheels turn again. It all leaves the plan of “Negativing the motion → Dissolving LegCo → Re-election after re-election → the stepping down of Carrie Lam” merely as overly positive speculation, probably resulting from their overestimate of CCP's capacity for rational calculation. The Pan-Dems must guard their frontlines and recognise what the biggest threat from Hong Kong to China could be. In this case, should LegCo sessions be disrupted or suspended, the Pan-Dems would have to be well prepared to surmount the expected obstacles and prevent the disqualification crisis 4 years ago—a Catch-22 indeed.

Productive tension from global intervention: Using Laam-chaau against the CCP

What aggravates the CCP the most is the potential threat to Hong Kong’s unique status as the one and only “separate customs territory”. Any miscalculation will compromise its role as the Chinese economy’s “white gloves”. Imagine if CCP were to disqualify all 70 elected lawmakers and convene a meeting north of the Shenzhen River to pass a resolution to Hong Kong’s affairs (much like the Provisional Legislative Council “1.0" in 1997), how great will the shock be in a world with an effective Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act? However hard it is to predict the future one thing is certain: With the US presidential election just around the corner, blows to the separation of powers would not be tolerated, and the West would necessarily effect countermeasures against the Hong Kong government.

Beijing has been relying upon Hong Kong to navigate the international community for decades. While clamping down on the political freedom of the cosmopolitan city, Beijing desires to maintain the financial centre’s economic freedom. Hence, we started lobbying for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act four years ago, and today we are determined to promote “Laam-chaau” on an international scale.

The will of the voters must be reflected in an election. If a “35+” legislature were to be dismissed and replaced, such flagrant violation of democracy would assuredly cause a greater backlash than the infamous extradition bill. Knowing what the reality ahead of us could be, we have to combine our election and international strategies to oppose the placement of a 35+ LegCo with an “Emergency Legislative Council 2.0”, to advance an international “Laam-chaau” to Hong Kong’s status as “separate customs territory”. Only then will we stand a chance to resist the regime and to realise the five demands.

Adjusting our mindset: Overcoming the “constitutional crisis” to reach a resolution

Upon the realization of the “35+” LegCo, it is expected that the CCP will launch a devastating counterattack. The Pan-Dems should not expect LegCo to run normally; neither can the lawmakers realise their governing blueprints they have for Hong Kong. Rather, candidates will be able to compete against one another with visions of a liberated Hong Kong through popular vote. Bringing this point up has nothing to do with undermining the common goal of reaching a majority in LegCo, but rather channels the battle of LegCo to positive use upon the rule of law’s death and a “constitutional crisis” ahead. Knowing that Hongkongers have nothing to fall back on, all Pan-Dems should not miss the only way to the realization of “35+”.

Thus, be they partisans, nonpartisans, incumbent politicians, amateur politicians, or the civil society as a whole – if we stay in the political discourse of 2016 and continue to perpetuate old stereotypes, that is to deal with the divisions on the pan-democratic camp by favouring the most “local” faction; to consider only resource allocation and self-aggrandizement as the purpose of a LegCo campaign; to ignore how potential lawmakers are fitted to what specific roles; to turn a blind eye to the journey of resistance since last summer (extending indefinitely into the future)—They would lead as astray and cost us lose a precious opportunity for change by winning a 35+ majority.

The extent to which the pan-democrats can stay united in light of the political atmosphere since last summer is another problem that our side must to address. Before the watershed moment of 12th June 2019, many democratic delegates were trapped in the mentality of needing to “preserve people’s livelihood”, “be content of what we have accomplished”, and other strategies that favours stability. As the government refuses to heed to the five demands, whether the democrats, especially those in the functional constituencies, have the political will to go all-in is the real difficult question that confronts us in the upcoming LegCo election.

All in all, if “35+” cannot be realised, it is unsurprising to see LegCo being more heavily suppressed in the next 4 years; even if "35+" is achieved, it is questionable whether the pan-democrats are able to weather multiple attacks, verbal or physical, from the regime (judging from its power in the last four years) and utilise the international Laam-chaau strategy against the displacement of LegCo. Adhering to the motto of “we fight on, each in his own way”, I can only hope that Hongkongers in elections, street confrontations and international front can reconcile with each other, so that we may collectively compel the government to yield to our demands in the next six months. It is only by reaching a resolution before a real constitutional crisis that we can combat the institutional violence of the regime and not be devoured by it.

https://hkcolumn.blogspot.com/2020/04/joshua-wong-after-winning-majority-in.html?fbclid=IwAR216gf53pG_j9JOpDfr2GItvjLfrFSekKTPzoEs3-s9KBqvPEwz865P8vw

後補，發出此帖文後，收到一位讀者的訊息，稱「無國界醫生」在捐款人通訊電郵裡，有提及他們做過的事情，為公平起見，在這裡也轉載一下，大家自行解讀。

注：以下係節錄，在「無國界醫生」的臉書及其網站都找不到，Google 也找不到，如果是真，他們也算是終於為香港做了應做的事。

「An MSF emergency team arrived in Hong Kong at the end of January to start a new project. Their focus is community engagement with vulnerable people, for example those more at risk of developing severe infection such as the elderly. It also includes those who are less likely to have access to important medical information, such as the socio-economically disadvantaged. This activity is similar to the services MSF provided in Hong Kong during the SARS outbreak in 2003.

Our teams have already conducted sessions with street cleaners, refugees and asylum seekers, and the visually impaired in recent weeks. Through face-to-face sessions, our team is able to share up-to-date, evidence-based medical information, but are also there to listen and answer the many questions people may have. We are also providing psychological first aid with simple coping mechanisms that can help manage the stress and anxiety a new outbreak brings. You may have seen that global supplies of medical protective equipment are stretched thin. MSF is sending one tonne of Personal Protective Equipment to Hong Kong St. John Ambulance. The staff are transporting high-risk cases, and therefore, it is important to ensure that they have the specialised protection they need to work safely.

MSF is also shipping specialised medical protective equipment to Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital in the capital city of Hubei province in mainland China, the epicentre of the outbreak. Weighing 3.5 tonnes, these supplies are being dispatched from MSF Supply in Brussels, Belgium through the Hubei Charity Federation to reach the hospital where they are very much needed.」

「無國界醫生應對2019冠狀病毒病（COVID-19）的工作

過去一個月，有關2019冠狀病毒病（COVID-19）的新聞是全球關注的焦點。我們希望您一切安好，身體健康，並想藉此機會向您介紹無國界醫生應對這種新疫症的最新消息。

無國界醫生一支緊急救援隊伍於一月底抵達香港展開新項目，主要是接觸社區內的脆弱人群，如長者等較容易出現嚴重感染，以及較難獲得重要醫療資訊的人，包括基層人士。2003年香港爆發嚴重急性呼吸系統綜合症（又稱沙士或非典型肺炎）時，無國界醫生也曾進行類似的工作。

這兩周，我們分別與街道清潔工、難民和尋求庇護者以及視障人士進行健康教育對談，分享最新的實證醫療資訊，同時聆聽和解答他們的疑問。我們也通過心理急救，協助人們掌握簡單的技巧，以應對疫情帶來的壓力和焦慮。

您可能也知道，全球的醫療防護裝備供應相當緊張。無國界醫生正運送一噸個人防護裝備到港，捐贈予香港聖約翰救護機構。該機構的人員有機會接送懷疑感染患者，因此，確保他們能有專門保護安全地工作，是非常重要的。

此外，無國界醫生正運送專門的防護裝備到疫情最嚴重的湖北省內的武漢市金銀潭醫院。這批重3.5噸的醫療物資，已從無國界醫生位於比利時布魯塞爾的物資供應中心出發，將透過湖北省慈善總會送往急需有關醫療物資的武漢市金銀潭醫院。

您可以按此進入我們的網頁，瀏覽有關防疫措施的影片和 COVID-19 的醫學資訊。我們將在這個專頁定期更新我們的應對工作，以及實用的健康教育資訊。我們希望這些資訊有助您在這段期間，照顧好自己和摯親好友。

祝
一切安好

無國界醫生（香港）」

———

以下是原帖內容：

我純粹有少少好奇，到底這幾個星期，那個很有國界的「無國界醫生」，有沒有為危難中的香港，做了些甚麼？

於是我上他們的 Facebook 看看，中文版的專頁，十一月以來就沒有更新。再訪其網站，見到這篇文章： https://www.msf.org/msf-update-2019-ncov-coronavirus-outbre…

有呢段： An MSF team is being sent to Hong Kong with an initial focus on health education for vulnerable groups, such as the elderly and other at-risk groups. （無國界醫生的一支隊伍，正被派往香港，最初的工作重點，是為弱社群，如老人和其他高風險的人士，提供健康教育。）

其實而家香港醫護及社區，最需要個人防護物資，唔係對高危人士的健康教育講座。醫療連 PPE 都無，但都唔見 MSF 有乜嘢行動，只係提及 2003 年，捐咗四十箱醫療保護物資畀醫管局。2003 年，2003 年，2003 年⋯⋯

要強調，捐款畀 NGO，唔係交易，唔係買賣，更唔等同買保險，你捐咗款，唔代表對方要為你做事情。

但想一下，從去年到今天，香港人以前幫過嘅國際大型 NGO，又有幾多會喺香港危難之際，對香港伸出援手，而唔係單純當你係提款機？

人道危機，唔出聲。

醫療危機，唔幫手。

係啊，確實幾失望。

注：呢張相，係 MSF 喺 2003 年影嘅，佢哋 2003 年時，送咗 40 盒醫療物資畀醫管局，來自佢哋個網站。

#龍逸軒 #點心放題 #黑咪vlog #九龍酒店

?好消息！有另一個Online Luxury Fashion網站??FWRD (https://bit.ly/36ulIWO)而家做緊另一個好正既promotion??佢哋都有好多品牌同埋包郵㗎！我係下面link埋幾件推介俾你哋，你哋快啲去望下啦～
 
‼️Promotion Details:-
活動時間 (香港時間) 10/5 20:00 - 10/11 23:59
FWRD (https://bit.ly/36ulIWO)中文站4週年慶：買得多慳得多?低至 7 折?
?Check Out嗰陣用code：RSFWRD4U (SALE嘅產品都用得架)
優惠code適用地區: 僅限於遞送到中國大陸, 香港, 台灣, 和澳門的訂單
買滿 US$750 ??85折
買滿 US$1,000 ??8折
買滿 US$1,500 ??75折
買滿 US$2,000 →??7折
 
黑咪推介單品:-
1. Golden Goose Sneakers: https://bit.ly/30s0LrE
2. Valentino Small Supervee Shoulder Bag: https://bit.ly/30uTpnd
3. Off White Logo Regular Crewneck Sweatshirt: https://bit.ly/33qr4R6
4. Loewe Puzzle Bags: https://bit.ly/36un97E
5. Isabel Marant Etoile Milly Sweatshirt: https://bit.ly/34i26Tb
6. Manolo Blahnik: https://bit.ly/2GoKahw

Brand Exclusion：Asics Platinum, 19-69, adidas Originals, Aēsop, Byredo, Bottega Venetta, Cire Trudon, Comme des Garçons Play, Diptyque, Gucci, Malin+Goetz, Puma Select, Régime des Fleurs, The North Face, Vans Vault.

Follow Me:-
? My Instagram: @iamhakme
? My Facebook: www.facebook.com/hakmebeauty
? Blog: www.hakmebeauty.com
? Weibo: https://www.weibo.com/iamhakme
? 小紅書: http://bit.ly/2W2LcSx
? Shop My Looks: https://goxi.ps/iamhakme

Restaurant Information:
九龍酒店龍逸軒
Open Rice Link: https://bit.ly/2Snfwri
地址: 尖沙咀彌敦道19-21號九龍酒店2樓

Follow Hakme Beauty:-
?黑咪店地址: https://www.hakmebeauty.com/store-locations/
?黑咪店路線圖: http://bit.ly/2W3pUZr
?黑咪店Online: https://shop.hakmebeauty.com
?黑咪店Instagram: @hakmebeauty
?黑咪店Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/hakmebeautyltd/

************************************************************************************

Disclaimer: This video is created and edited by my team. All the content are my own thoughts. As always, all opinions are based on my experience and honesty. Products are either purchased by me or for those which are sent by PR are marked with an “*”. For any collaboration with brands which involves monetary payment, an indication will be in the video so that you are aware of the collaboration. Some of the links used above might be affiliate links and please be aware that I will earn a % of commission if you decide to buy through the affiliate links.

Meditation | 冥想

【Ujjayi Breath Pranayama】
Ujjayi Pranayama, victorious breath, is the breathing exercise which is common in yoga practice, helps you to concentrate in yourself.

【勝利呼吸法】
常用的瑜伽呼吸法。通過控制你的呼吸與意念，並隨時提醒自己專注於當下。

-----

木 木 ? FOREST & STILL
www.instagram.com/forestandstill

-----

SUBSCRIBE! https://www.youtube.com/CharlotteInWhite

【BLOG】 https://www.charlotteinwhite.com
【Instagram】 https://www.instagram.com/charlottein...
【Facebook】 https://www.facebook.com/charlotteinw...
【Contact】charzcharlotte@gmail.com

Music by Mighty Meditation - Tides - https://thmatc.co/?l=AD3D457E

Marina about China/HK’s situation:

China ~ is going to go to globalism - that’s what they say, and they are also going to have two riots, it’s going to be right in front of people’s faces. Chinese, they say, are not to be messed with. Their culture that are big in pride and when they are being attacked, they will fight, especially the section of Hong Kong because there was more opening, more freedom, more freedom of thinking, they were not suppressed. This is the reason why the stuff that is happening from Hong Kong, you don’t see in another region because the other regions were suppressed through the regime, whatever that was, Hong Kong was almost like a free-thinking, almost like England, and that’s why when you try to suppress the consciousness that was free, they’re much more aware of what’s really happening because of the information and this is the reason why it’s happening from there, from there, it’s going to be like a snowball for the entire country, it’s exposure and showing the pure evil of communism, socialism is not really socialism. it’s communism and fascism , those three are connected to each other, they say. And it’s just the “interlocking”, they are talking about interlocking bylaws that are implemented very sneakily they say in a governmental structure, not only through China, but including through the government of the US. And they say pay very close attention to California. because their “bylaws” that were interlocking with that type of regime, this was based on agendas for global control, this was not based on agenda for serenity and sovereignty to US. This was based on a global agenda. This bylaws - so anybody that looks at California, and what’s happening there, you’re going to see it.

we should watch her channel on her website - Freedom Awakening

The platform of the codes of the matrix are on track, the new modality of the increasing of the frequency already coming through the fields, so escalation will happen because the more the frequency is spinning in the quantum structure more people who is with balance or off balance is going to come information so don’t be surprised when you see all these fights that is happening and all these manipulation is happening because it’s somebody’s else’s survival even if it’s coming from completely different way of thinking. Again not a judgement for anybody but we should just be patient and do your research. Do research on Freedom Awakening in my sub channel of the Harmonic Reactor, there is a Freedom Awakening channel, scroll down, you are going to see it and one after the other your have proofs and the commentaries and whistleblowers that talk about stuff that I already know to be true from my reality, I do not post or support something that I am not already done. I post stuff that I am 100% sure that I got information on that already. Otherwise you will not see them posted.

Marina關於中國/香港的情況：

中國〜將走向全球化 - 這就是他們 (他們指The Council of Nine）所說的，他們也將發生兩次騷亂。他們說，中國人不應該被搞砸。他們為自己的文化自豪，當他們受到攻擊時，他們會戰鬥，特別是香港的部分，因為有更多的開放，更多的自由，更多的思想自由，他們沒有受到壓制。這就是為什麼香港發生的事情，你沒有在另一個地區看到因為其他地區被政權壓制，無論如何，香港幾乎像一個自由思想，幾乎像英國，這就是為什麼當你試圖壓制自由的意識時，他們會更加意識到由於信息而發生的事情，這就是為什麼它從那裡發生的原因，從那裡開始，它就像一個雪球整個國家，它暴露並表現出共產主義的純粹邪惡，社會主義並不是真正的社會主義。他們說，這是共產主義和法西斯主義，這三者是相互聯繫的。它只是“互聯”，他們談論的是互聯章程，他們在政府結構中非常狡猾地實施，不僅通過中國，而且包括通過美國政府。他們說要非常關注加州。因為他們的“章程”與這種政權相互聯繫，這是基於全球控制的議程，這不是基於對美國的寧靜和主權議程。這是基於全球議程。這條章程 - 任何看過加利福尼亞的人，以及那裡發生的事情，你都會看到它。
。

The Harmonic Reactor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKaW-6KuhVvEIX-oRG7cBZQ


網址：https://www.5MinutesMaster.com
Medium：https://medium.com/@5minutesmaster
facebook：https://bit.ly/2QYmNyE