赵紫阳逝世１０周年前夕鲍彤叹中国仍不自由民主

(博讯北京时间2015年1月16日 转载)
    赵紫阳逝世１０周年前夕鲍彤叹中国仍不自由民主

    作者 香港特约记者 甄树基
   
    １月１７日便是前中共总书记赵紫阳逝世１０周年忌日，做过他政治秘书的鲍彤叹息中国到了今天仍不自由，仍然没有民主。鲍彤在北京接受香港一家电台的访问时说，中国目前在民主自由方面，不可以说比１９８９年（北京民运）当时差，但仍然是不自由的国家，腐败问题依然严重。他说，如果赵紫阳今天在生，对这个状况会感到惊讶和痛心。
   
    鲍彤对现在的总书记习近平仍有所期望，指望他可以继承父亲习仲勋，设立“保障不同意见法”，让市民有言论自由，这也是赵紫阳的遗愿。他相信，只要有人仍然坚持，六四事件终有一天可以平反。
   
    去年赵紫阳逝世９周年时，位于北京富强胡同赵的故居十分热闹，赵紫阳女婿王志华对香港的记者表示，从早到晚都有人到赵家吊唁致祭，包括北京和香港的市民，气氛明确比之前好。赵紫阳的女儿王雁南表示，一家人为父亲平反的愿望不变。
   
    但当局去年在赵紫阳忌日的当天，却对北京多名民运人士严格监控。学者高瑜表示，她一大早就已经接到派出所的电话，向她打招呼，有事出门派出所有车接送；维权人士胡佳原本计划到赵家吊唁，但一出门已经看到国保的车辆守在门口，而且被一群便衣拦截。
   
    赵紫阳在上世纪８０年代先后出任国务院总理以及中共总书记，期间推动中国发展市场经济、设计政制改革、打击贪污腐败，但在1989年六四事件中，因同情学生并反对武力镇压，招惹包括邓小平、陈云和李先念等所谓中共八老不满而被免去一切职务，并在软禁中度过15年的余生，於2005年病逝。
   
    来源：法广中文网 (博讯 boxun.com)
1162021

年终回顾：2014中国人权状况

2015-01-12 

主持人：陈奎德
座谈人：张博树博士，哥伦比亚大学客座教授


一、2014中国人权恶化状况概览
年初逮捕审讯许志永、丁家喜等公盟的一批骨干，镇压新公民运动
年中5月3日因“2014.北京.六四几年研讨会”而拘押逮捕“五君子”
悍然拘捕高龄异议人士：高瑜、姚监复、铁流……七、八十岁的老人被拘捕，并用电视画面羞辱德高望重的高瑜女士
着名NGO“传知行”和“立人系”（立人村图书馆、立人大学）被全面扼杀，空前打击自由知识分子的公开组织。
徐友渔、浦志强、高瑜、郭玉闪、铁流、郝建、胡石根、刘荻、馀世文、陈卫、夏霖、寇延丁、黄凯平、陈堃、何正军、薛野、柳建树……一连串学者作家被拘押或逮捕
焚书坑儒：明令禁止出版馀英时、徐晓等九位知识人的书，下架存书
拘捕徐晓等极其温和、低调的知识人
批宪政，批普世价值，批“公共知识分子”及“反动知识分子”，悍然与文明世界为敌
辽宁日报公然秘密侦探监视中国大学教师授课，威胁说多数大学教师已经与中共离心离德，企图大规模整肃教育界

从浙江拆教堂开始的对中国基督教的大规模压制和迫害
对香港“雨伞运动”的强硬政策
年底，甚至传来Gmail 在中国被封杀的消息

2014年中国人权状况的恶化表明：当局对老年人、妇女以及长期容忍存在的公益组织非政府组织，对基督教在中国的迅速发展，不再容忍，绝不手软，一律镇压。
明确显示了当局开不同以往的强力镇压的铁腕政策。

二、何以至此？
“三个自信”已成笑柄
“崛起”表象下的内心虚弱？
恐惧经济下行後的政治效应

三、习氏王朝人权高压政策的命运
1、是暂时政策还是长期方针？
2、向毛时代部分回归的前景预测

黔驴技穷，无计可施，在进退失据之际，又重新从垃圾堆里捡回这张膏药皮，披挂上阵了。看来，他们已经没有能力安排自己的後路了，盲人骑瞎马，正在一步步走向无法抗拒的历史深渊。?

http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/zhuanlan/zhongguotoushi/m0111panel-01122015112143.html

法国《查理周刊》惨案引发言论自由限度之争
2015-01-12   



今年1月11日，150万人聚集巴黎，举行法国史上最大规模集会和示威游行，悼念在《查理周刊》编辑部以及其它地方的恐怖袭中遇难的17位死难者，表达对言论自由的支持，抗议恐怖主义暴行。数十个国家的领导人参加了街头游行。有中国官方媒体载文认为，事件说明西方新闻和言论自由的原则正受到冲击。

在刚刚过去的星期天，法国多个城市至少有330万人上街示威，参加者包括44个国家的领袖，他们高举“我是查理”的标语，表达一个共同的声音：“我们不会被恐怖主义击倒”。

法国总统奥朗德表示，“今天巴黎是世界的首都”。他与英国首相卡梅伦、德国总理默克尔、欧盟委员会主席容克、以色列总理内塔尼亚胡、乌克兰总统波罗申科和意大利总理伦齐等多国首脑手挽手、肩并肩地走在游行队伍的最前列。

法国讽刺漫画杂志《查理周刊》编辑部上个星期遭到数名持枪恐怖分子袭击，造成12人死亡的悲剧。《查理周刊》之前刊登了一幅讽刺伊斯兰教先知穆罕默德的漫画。

《查理周刊》的悲剧除了引发全球对极端恐怖分子的谴责之外，也引起了有关言论和新闻自由界限问题的争论。在欧洲，大部分主流媒体力挺《查理周刊》的言论自由出版自由。在美国的主流媒体上，出现了批评《查理周刊》的言论。美国《纽约客》和《纽约时报》都刊载文章，质疑《查理周刊》的做法。

美国纽约城市大学政治学教授夏明认为，讽刺和贬损著名人士和权威人士无疑是言论自由的一种。但在不同的社会环境下，其社会意义完全不同，

“作为一个强势的群体对自己进行搞笑是很有意义的,但对弱势群体进行过度搞笑,对他们的权利和尊严有伤害,所以我们就不能允许.”

夏教授表示，许多在欧洲看起来没有问题的言论和新闻图片在美国却难以为社会接受。他认为，《查理周刊》刊登的内容，在美国很难出现，

“因为法国是天主教和白人社会，他们是强势集团，如果他们对伊斯兰教或者少数族群进行过度贬损，我认为就不太妥当。至少在美国，我们不会这样做。”

英国《金融时报》刊发有关评论，强调对权威的不敬是自由的命脉。文章回顾了欧洲媒体对天主教、基督教，以及政治权威进行嘲讽和贬损的历史，并赞扬这种讽刺幽默艺术是欧洲自由主义的一个基础。

在中国的，社会学者刘先生就此分析说，现代西方文明的崛起和发展与欧洲十17，18世纪质疑和摆脱宗教及政治权威的束缚有很大关系，因此言论自由和新闻自由成为现代文明社会的核心价值。另一方面，欧洲单一民族文化的社会环境和美国、加拿大等多民族移民环境不同，因此言论自由的限度也并不一样，

“最近两百年，（欧洲）一直在对权威进行挑战，他们认为摆脱权威才能有进步，所以言论自由成为现代社会的核心价值。但在美国和加拿大这样的移民国家，因为重视多元文化，所以媒体会非常谨慎。”

有关《查理周刊》事件以及言论自由界限的问题讨论，在中国也出现在一些官方媒体上。中国的刘先生表示，中国官方媒体讨论新闻和言论自由尺度和界限的问题，其实非常可笑，

“中国连言论自由本身都没有，讨论底线和界限就变得非常可笑。”

刘先生也表示，总体上来说，中国官方对言论自由问题比较尴尬，因此官媒对此采取轻描淡写方式。官方新华社和《人民日报》对《查理周刊》事件没有进行深入讨论。但在中国互联网上，网民的讨论相当热烈。

刘先生认为，《查理周刊》悲剧有三个层面的问题：一是暴力恐怖袭击，二是新闻和言论自由界限，第三是文化和文明价值冲突问题。他认为，中国网民的讨论集中在第二和第三点，但反对暴力恐怖袭击也是基本共识，

作为一个讽刺漫画杂志，《查理周刊》讽刺和贬损最多的是天主教和欧洲的政治家。夏明教授认为，作为一个强势文化，自我贬损或许可以被看成是一种艺术和幽默，甚至是自我提高的手段。但对所在社会中的弱势者，使用同样的方法却可能得到相反的效果。

“西方国家和全球主流价值观，言论自由和思想自由是至高无上的，但比如我在美国，我可以骂奥巴马，但我不能骂一个残疾人，就是这样的一个简单的道理。“

（RFA 记者：石山  责编：嘉华）

Hong Kong's Pan-Democratic Lawmakers Stage Walk-Out
2015-01-07   


Pan-democratic lawmakers in Hong Kong raised yellow umbrellas in the city's legislature on Wednesday in protest as the government announced a second round of public consultations on political reforms in the semiautonomous Chinese territory.

Chanting "I want full universal suffrage," the 24 members of the Legislative Council (Legco) opened yellow umbrellas, the symbol of pro-democracy street protests that lasted for more than two months last year, before walking out.

Hong Kong's second-in-command Carrie Lam framed the consultation exercise as a public debate on the constitution of the controversial Beijing-approved election committee, which under an Aug. 31 ruling by China's parliament will vet candidates in the 2017 elections for the city's chief executive.

She said the reform package approved by Beijing would create a "solid foundation" for further reforms, including fully democratic elections for LegCo.

Umbrellas, yellow ones in particular, became the symbol of the Occupy Central movement for fully democratic elections in 2017 after protesters used them to ward off tear gas and pepper spray attacks from riot police on Sept. 28 that brought hundreds of thousands of citizens onto the streets in protest.

The Occupy movement has campaigned for Beijing to withdraw its electoral reform plan, which it calls "fake universal suffrage," and to allow publicly nominated candidates to run for chief executive in 2017.

But Beijing has said any reforms must stick to the Aug. 31 decree, and has slammed international support for the Umbrella Movement, saying that the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration is "void" and that China answers to no one in exercising sovereignty over Hong Kong.




Vow to vote against

Pan-democratic politicians, who hold 24 out of 60 LegCo seats, have vowed to vote against the reform package, which will likely be put to a vote in mid-2015.

Lam said the pan-democrats aren't working in the best interests of Hong Kong's electorate.

"Anyone refusing to participate in the consultation, or even vowing to veto any constitutional development proposal ... is effectively depriving five million eligible voters of their opportunity to elect the chief executive by universal suffrage," she told lawmakers.

"I call on them to show some political courage and wisdom, and play a positive part in this debate, and not to boycott the consultation or the electoral reform package," Lam said.

"If the electoral reform proposals for the 2017 chief executive elections aren't passed, then that will leave no room for a directly elected LegCo in 2020," she said.

"In that case, we would have to wait until 2022 to directly elect the chief executive, and the development of democracy in Hong Kong will be delayed still further."

The Hong Kong government is inviting opinions on how the election committee should be constituted, how nominations should work, and other details.




Call to participate

According to China's National People's Congress (NPC) standing committee, the nominating committee should be based on the same principles as the election committee that voted in current chief executive C.Y. Leung in 2012, incorporating representatives of business, the professions, community groups, and politicians.

There is still some leeway for adjusting the number of members in each sector and exactly who will be allowed to vote for them, Lam said.

Leung on Wednesday also called on pan-democratic politicians to take part in the consultation process.

"It is better to have universal suffrage than not, and moving forward is always better than standing still," Leung said in a statement.

Pan-democratic lawmaker and Labour Party chairman Lee Cheuk-yan hit out at the NPC for "stripping Hong Kong people of their rights," however.

"This second round of consultations is going forward on the basis of the NPC's framework, so actually there is no room to move towards genuine universal suffrage at all," Lee said.

"If Carrie Lam wants to take away people's right to vote, then she should come out and admit the truth," he said.




'Fancy words and spin'

Occupy Central student leader Lester Shum agreed.

"It doesn't matter how much the government and the political establishment try to dress this up in fancy words and spin," Shum told reporters.

"Any electoral reform on the basis of the Aug. 31 decision ... will strangle the hopes of the Hong Kong people for the exercise of their political rights, including the equal right to nominate candidates," Shum said.

"We will be campaigning for LegCo members to veto this reform package," he added.

Fellow Occupy student leader Joshua Wong said that his academic activist group Scholarism is now in the process of collecting views from its student membership, and is spreading its message on Hong Kong's university and college campuses.

One of a handful of Occupy Central protesters who remained near LegCo on Wednesday called consultation process "meaningless."

"This is a waste of time, because they have already made up their minds," the protester, who gave only his surname Lau, told RFA.

"They are saying that the NPC's decision can't be altered at all, and that they don't care at all about the will of the people," he said.

He added: "I think we will be carrying out some more actions, because we are still as dissatisfied as we were before."




'Unhelpful'

But Tam Yiu-chung, chairman of pro-Beijing party the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, said the pan-democrats' attitude was "unhelpful."

"They shouldn't carry out a boycott or other unfortunate actions; I don't think this will help the situation," Tam said.

Retired Chinese diplomat Chen Zuo'er, who headed Beijing's negotiating team ahead of the handover from British colonial rule in 1997, said the consultation process would probably benefit from having been delayed until after the 79-day occupation of major highways in Hong Kong ended last month.

"The majority of Hong Kong's citizens have learned a lesson from the illegal Occupy Central movement, as well as from the reflections of a number of scholars at [China's] National Research Council For Hong Kong and Macau," Chen told reporters.

"[They know now] how Hong Kong should proceed along the road to democracy, and how democracy should be furthered," he said.

Hong Kong police, who made dozens of arrests during the clearance of Occupy sites on the orders of the city's High Court last year, will target 32 core activists from the Occupy movement in a first round of arrests on public order and contempt of court charges, government broadcaster RTHK quoted unnamed sources as saying.

Those on the list include Occupy Central founders Benny Tai, Chan Kin-man and Chu Yiu-ming, as well as outspoken Next Media boss Jimmy Lai, RTHK said.

Reported by Dai Weisen for RFA's Cantonese Service, and by Xin Lin for RFA's Mandarin Service. Translated and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.

Letter of Protest to the US Government on its Diplomatic Stance over the Raising of ROC Flag at the Twin Oaks Estate

http://goo.gl/forms/GispCHG7fH

January 8, 2015

Recently, the communist regime in China protested to the United States over the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office’s raising of the Republic of China’s national flag at the Twin Oaks Estate in Washington, DC, and the US State Department subsequently expressed strong reactions to Taipei, condemning the flag raising incident for violation of the One-China Policy of the US and the long-standing understanding on the unofficial relationship between Taiwan and the US.

We, a group of mainland Chinese with no government ties, hereby protest the US government’s handling of the flag-raising incident!

We believe the “One China” is the Republic of China. The US government’s suppression of the ROC national flag reflected its disregard of the legitimacy of the ROC government and violated international laws and US laws.

It is well known that the internationally recognized territories of China are separated into two political regions—the free one with a democratic government – the Republic of China and an authoritarian one with a communist regime – the People's Republic of China. Among them, the ROC government, prior to 1949, had governed the vast majority of the Chinese territories, led China to glorious victory in the Second World War, adopted a democratic constitution that satisfied the common standards of democracy and protected the human rights, and subsequently carried out democratic elections, obtaining popular legitimacy that is indispensable for a modern democracy. Unfortunately, the rebellion of the Chinese Communist Party have reduced the territories governed by Republic of China’s government to Taiwan and a few other islands, and resulted in many years of martial law in the ROC territories. However, even under the martial law, the people in territories governed by the ROC government still enjoyed much more freedom than those ruled by the communist regime of the PRC. After martial law was lifted, the democratic constitution was once again fully implemented, and the ROC government obtained mandate from the people of its effectively governed territories, achieved peaceful alternations of the governing party, and strengthened the democratic institutions. On the contrary, ever since CCP took control of the mainland of China through rebellion, the regime has been a totalitarian one for over 60 years, which has been ruthlessly violating the human rights, never been democratic, and still denounces constitutionalism. Therefore, we consider the ROC government as the only legitimate government for all the territories of China, whereas the communist regime of PRC is just a band of soviet-originated bandits that rules the mainland of China with brute force.

The US government has diplomatically recognized the communist regime in mainland China on grounds of international politics and US interests, and severed its diplomatic ties with the ROC government as coerced by the communist regime. We have no choice but to accept this fact. At the same time, we must remind the US government that according to the US Congress, the “One-China Policy” concerning Taiwan shall maintain some ambiguity, and Washington, Taipei, and Beijing all have different interpretations of this policy. In other words, the United States recognizes neither the Chinese communist regime’s claims over Taiwan nor Taiwan as a sovereign country. However, the United States has never treated Taiwan as the same as the Republic of China, never explicitly stated “the One China is the People’s Republic of China”, and been rather vague on whether “the One China is the Republic of China.”

After the Chinese communist regime was established in 1949, in the telegram of the first country recognizing the “People’s Republic of China,” the Soviet Union, it was explicitly stated what was being recognized was a new government and not a new country. Since then, most countries and governments recognized the “People’s Republic of China.” In their diplomatic telegraphs declaring the recognitions, some used the language of “legal recognition”, some declared “recognition of the People’s Republic of China as the legitimate government”. The so-called “legal recognition” simply means a recognition of a government as the country’s legal government and does not mean that the Republic of China shall be replaced by the “People’s Republic of China” in the sense of international law, except for the communist regime’s internal propaganda. The communist regime has attempted to portrait the “People’s Republic of China” as the successor of the still-existing Republic of China instead of a new state under international law. This is just the lowly regime’s shameless attempt to take over the highly respected international status of the Republic of China, using the term “China” to blur the difference between the two.

One of the strongest pivots of the claim that “the One China is the People’s Republic of China” is the Resolution 2758 of the United Nations General Assembly. However, as well known to scholars of international law, resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly are internal resolutions and not origins of international law, and hence are not legally binding. This means countries are not compelled to follow the resolutions, regardless of how they voted in the UN General Assembly. Sovereignty of a nation never has to be determined by the UN General Assembly. States and Sovereignties are not under UN's jurisdiction. Mr. Chiang Kai-Shek’s decision to withdraw the Republic of China from the UN has no effect whatsoever on the existence of the Republic of China and the integrity of its sovereignty. UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 didn’t produce a succession of states and not even had the effect of government succession in the sense of international law, because this is not what an internal resolution of the UN General Assembly can resolve.

The Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China was just a diplomatic policy of the US and not a bilateral treaty, and was only signed by the White House without ratification by the US Congress. A group of people in mainland China are planning on retaining legal counsel in the US to petition the US Congress for overturning the Joint Communiqué, to call for a constitutional review, or to litigate in an US federal court against the White House.

We believe western countries have staked their diplomatic policy toward China on the communist regime’s “reform.” However, the “reform” is a scam, through which the regime has transferred China’s national wealth into the hands of a few hundred families of privileges and then out of China, leaving ruins to the Chinese people. We urge western countries to set up an alternative in advance by helping to expand the Republic of China’s space in the international arena, and to get ready for the Chinese people’s glorious restoration the Republic of China in the mainland and democratic unification of the Republic of China over all Chinese lands.

Issued by: Working Council for Restoring ROC in Mainland

On behalf of many supporters in mainland China and throughout the world

[博讯首发,转载请注明出处]- 支持此文作者/记者 (Modified on 2015/1/11) (Modified on 2015/1/11) (博讯 boxun.com)
1360558

“一个中国”就是中华民国——抗议美国政府对“双橡园”升国旗的外交态度


(博讯北京时间2015年1月11日 首发 - 支持此文作者/记者)
    近日，中华民国驻美代表处在华盛顿“双橡园”举行升旗仪式引发中共当局不满而对美国提出抗议，美国国务院也对台北说出重话，表示“双橡园”升旗的做法违反美国的一个中国政策与美台非正式关係的长期谅解。
   
     对此，我们作为大陆人对美国政府提出民间抗议！
   
    我们认为，“一个中国”就是中华民国。美国政府对中华民国国旗的打压，忽视了中华民国政府的合法性，也违反了国际法和美国法。
   
    众所周知，国际公认的中国疆土目前分裂为两个政区：自由地区与专制地区，存在着两个政府：民主政府与专制政府。其中的中华民国政府，曾经治理中国疆土的绝大部分，领导中国赢得了第二次世界大战的胜利，并颁行了符合民主国家标准、保障人民权利的民主宪法，随后举行了全民普选，获得了现代民主国家不可或缺的民意合法性。中共叛乱得势，使中华民国政府的治理范围缩减至台湾和少数外岛，也导致了持续多年的戒严，但即便是在戒严期间，中华民国政府管辖地区的人民也享有远远多于中共统治区的自由。解除戒严之后，中华民国政府再度全面施行了民主宪法，在其有效管辖地区获得人民民意授权并实现了政党轮替，巩固了民主制度。反之，中共发动叛乱、窃据中国大陆之后，厉行极权专制六十馀年，肆无忌惮侵犯人权，从未施行民主宪政，至今仍视宪政为洪水勐兽。所以，我们认为，中华民国政府是中国全部疆土上唯一的合法政府，中共只是依靠暴力对中国大陆行使有效统治的一个外来强盗集团而已。
   
    美国政府出于国际政治和本国利益的考量而对中共当局予以外交承认，并在其要挟下断绝了与中华民国政府的外交关係，我们无奈地接受这一事实，同时也提醒美国政府，贵国国会发表过的报告称，美国关于台湾的“一个中国”政策仍保有一点模煳空间，华盛顿、台北和北京对其内涵也有不同解释。也就是说，美国不承认中共当局对台湾的主张，也不承认“台湾是主权国家”，但美国并没有把台湾等同于中华民国，也没有明白揭示一个中国就是“中华人民共和国”，而是对“一个中国就是中华民国”採取模煳化处理。
   
    1949年中共建政以后，第一个承认“中华人民共和国”的苏联政府的电文中，明确表示承认的是一个新政府，而不是一个新国家。以后，绝大多数国家和政府对“中华人民共和国”的承认，一般在宣佈承认的外交电文中，有的说“法律的承认”，有的则说“承认中华人民共和国为合法政府”。所谓“法律的承认”就是承认为该国家主体的法律上的政府之简称，并没有国际法意义上中华人民共和国取代中华民国的法律意义，除了中共对内的意识形态欺骗之外。中共当局也试图把“中华人民共和国”打扮为既存的中华民国的延续，而不是国际法上的另一个新国家。中共当局用“中华人民共和国”对中华民国鸠占雀巢，用“中国”二字模煳二者，然后侵蚀夺舍。
   
    所谓“一个中国是中华人民共和国”最大支撑点，就是联合国大会2758号决议。可是从联合国大会决议的法律效力来看，国际法学者都知道，联合国大会2758号决议是内部决议，不是国际法的渊源，不具有法律约束力。联合国大会通过的这类决议没有约束力，意味着所有国家都不是必须按照决议去做，与投赞成票、反对票或弃权票无关。国家主权无需联合国大会来决定。国家和主权在联合国之外，不在联合国之内。蒋介石决定中华民国退出联合国，也无关中华民国的存在和主权的完整。联合国2758号决议文并没有产生国家继承，甚至没有产生政府继承的国际法效果，因为这不是联合国大会决议这种内部决议能解决的。
   
    美国和中共当局的建交公报仅仅是美国的外交政策，并不是双边协定，而且只经过白宫签字，没经过国会审议通过。中国大陆一批民间人士正在准备聘请律师，到美国国会要求否定中美建交公报，或者提起宪法审查，到联邦法院控告美国白宫。
   
    我们认为，西方国家把对华外交政策押宝在中共“改革”之上，但“改革”就是一个骗局，把国民财富掠夺到五百家手上然后转移到国外，留一个焦土和动盪的局面给大陆人民。我们敦促西方国家预设后手，扩大中华民国的国际空间，并准备迎接中国大陆人民在大陆对中华民国的光复和中华民国的民主统一。
   
    领衔发起：光复民国（大陆）工作委员会
   
    已签名者：辛灏年、陈永苗、谢丹
   
    民国104年（2015年）1月8日

    签名链接：
    http://goo.gl/forms/GispCHG7fH

The “One China” is the Republic of China-Letter of Protest to the US Government on its Diplomatic Stance over the Raising of ROC Flag at the Twin Oaks Estate

January 8, 2015

Recently, the communist regime in China protested to the United States over the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office’s raising of the Republic of China’s national flag at the Twin Oaks Estate in Washington, DC, and the US State Department subsequently expressed strong reactions to Taipei, condemning the flag raising incident for violation of the One-China Policy of the US and the long-standing understanding on the unofficial relationship between Taiwan and the US.

We, a group of mainland Chinese with no government ties, hereby protest the US government’s handling of the flag-raising incident!

We believe the “One China” is the Republic of China. The US government’s suppression of the ROC national flag reflected its disregard of the legitimacy of the ROC government and violated international laws and US laws.

It is well known that the internationally recognized territories of China are separated into two political regions—the free one with a democratic government – the Republic of China and an authoritarian one with a communist regime – the People's Republic of China. Among them, the ROC government, prior to 1949, had governed the vast majority of the Chinese territories, led China to glorious victory in the Second World War, adopted a democratic constitution that satisfied the common standards of democracy and protected the human rights, and subsequently carried out democratic elections, obtaining popular legitimacy that is indispensable for a modern democracy. Unfortunately, the rebellion of the Chinese Communist Party have reduced the territories governed by Republic of China’s government to Taiwan and a few other islands, and resulted in many years of martial law in the ROC territories. However, even under the martial law, the people in territories governed by the ROC government still enjoyed much more freedom than those ruled by the communist regime of the PRC. After martial law was lifted, the democratic constitution was once again fully implemented, and the ROC government obtained mandate from the people of its effectively governed territories, achieved peaceful alternations of the governing party, and strengthened the democratic institutions. On the contrary, ever since CCP took control of the mainland of China through rebellion, the regime has been a totalitarian one for over 60 years, which has been ruthlessly violating the human rights, never been democratic, and still denounces constitutionalism. Therefore, we consider the ROC government as the only legitimate government for all the territories of China, whereas the communist regime of PRC is just a band of soviet-originated bandits that rules the mainland of China with brute force.

The US government has diplomatically recognized the communist regime in mainland China on grounds of international politics and US interests, and severed its diplomatic ties with the ROC government as coerced by the communist regime. We have no choice but to accept this fact. At the same time, we must remind the US government that according to the US Congress, the “One-China Policy” concerning Taiwan shall maintain some ambiguity, and Washington, Taipei, and Beijing all have different interpretations of this policy. In other words, the United States recognizes neither the Chinese communist regime’s claims over Taiwan nor Taiwan as a sovereign country. However, the United States has never treated Taiwan as the same as the Republic of China, never explicitly stated “the One China is the People’s Republic of China”, and been rather vague on whether “the One China is the Republic of China.”

After the Chinese communist regime was established in 1949, in the telegram of the first country recognizing the “People’s Republic of China,” the Soviet Union, it was explicitly stated what was being recognized was a new government and not a new country. Since then, most countries and governments recognized the “People’s Republic of China.” In their diplomatic telegraphs declaring the recognitions, some used the language of “legal recognition”, some declared “recognition of the People’s Republic of China as the legitimate government”. The so-called “legal recognition” simply means a recognition of a government as the country’s legal government and does not mean that the Republic of China shall be replaced by the “People’s Republic of China” in the sense of international law, except for the communist regime’s internal propaganda. The communist regime has attempted to portrait the “People’s Republic of China” as the successor of the still-existing Republic of China instead of a new state under international law. This is just the lowly regime’s shameless attempt to take over the highly respected international status of the Republic of China, using the term “China” to blur the difference between the two.

One of the strongest pivots of the claim that “the One China is the People’s Republic of China” is the Resolution 2758 of the United Nations General Assembly. However, as well known to scholars of international law, resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly are internal resolutions and not origins of international law, and hence are not legally binding. This means countries are not compelled to follow the resolutions, regardless of how they voted in the UN General Assembly. Sovereignty of a nation never has to be determined by the UN General Assembly. States and Sovereignties are not under UN's jurisdiction. Mr. Chiang Kai-Shek’s decision to withdraw the Republic of China from the UN has no effect whatsoever on the existence of the Republic of China and the integrity of its sovereignty. UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 didn’t produce a succession of states and not even had the effect of government succession in the sense of international law, because this is not what an internal resolution of the UN General Assembly can resolve.

The Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China was just a diplomatic policy of the US and not a bilateral treaty, and was only signed by the White House without ratification by the US Congress. A group of people in mainland China are planning on retaining legal counsel in the US to petition the US Congress for overturning the Joint Communiqué, to call for a constitutional review, or to litigate in an US federal court against the White House.

We believe western countries have staked their diplomatic policy toward China on the communist regime’s “reform.” However, the “reform” is a scam, through which the regime has transferred China’s national wealth into the hands of a few hundred families of privileges and then out of China, leaving ruins to the Chinese people. We urge western countries to set up an alternative in advance by helping to expand the Republic of China’s space in the international arena, and to get ready for the Chinese people’s glorious restoration the Republic of China in the mainland and democratic unification of the Republic of China over all Chinese lands.

Issued by: Working Council for Restoring ROC in Mainland

On behalf of many supporters in mainland China and throughout the world

[博讯首发,转载请注明出处]- 支持此文作者/记者 (Modified on 2015/1/11) (Modified on 2015/1/11) (博讯 boxun.com)
1360558

China Slams 'Western' Press Freedom Amid Solidarity Over Paris Attacks
2015-01-09


China's official media on Friday hit out at "Western" notions of press freedom in the wake of attacks in Paris that left a dozen people dead, sparking a hostage crisis in the French capital.

Wednesday's attacks on the weekly satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo was carried out by gunmen believed to be Islamist militants wanting revenge for the weekly's lampooning of key Islamic figures, including the Prophet Mohammad.

After the shootings, elite French police stormed a printworks and a Jewish supermarket, killing two brothers wanted for the attack and an apparent accomplice who had taken hostages in two separate sieges.

The attacks were a trending topic on China's microblog platforms, and made the comment pages of major media outlets controlled by the China's ruling Communist Party on Friday.

In its Chinese-language edition, the tabloid Global Times newspaper hit out at the use of satire by Western news media.

"Westerners believe that when a small minority of Western media satirize the Islamic prophet, that this is 'freedom of the press,'" the paper said in an editorial on Friday.

"Some people even see the protection of this freedom a Western value."

Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets around the world in the wake of the massacre, holding banners and placards reading "I am Charlie," in support of press freedom.

But the Global Times said many Muslims living in the West "feel that they are neither trusted nor respected."

It said Western politicians were unwilling to "curb" media outlets because of their need to win votes. "Sometimes they even support the media," the paper said.

While the official Xinhua news agency echoed the Chinese government's condemnation of the attacks, it said they had highlighted "issues with France's anti-terrorism and immigration policies in recent years."

French involvement in strikes on Libya and the Islamic State had turned the country into a target for terrorists, while religious extremism has been allowed to flourish under the country's liberal religious freedom policies, it said.

"The specter of terrorism had surfaced in France well before this attack," the article said.




Cartoonists respond

Charlie Hebdo's editor and some of France's best-known political cartoonists were among those killed when masked men armed with automatic rifles burst into an editorial meeting at the weekly's Paris offices on Wednesday.

The global outcry over the killings included a series of cartoons pitting pens and pencils against rifles, in solidarity with the victims of the attack.

Chinese cartoonists added their own responses, depicting a wounded personification of "Liberte," or freedom, as well as references to literary accounts of the July Revolution of 1830, which are studied in Chinese schools and universities.

Political cartoonist Wang Liming, known by his online nickname "Biantai Lajiao" (in English, Perverted Chili Pepper), posted a cartoon in which a masked terrorist mistakes a pen for a weapon.

Wang, who has frequently been targeted by the Chinese authorities for his work, wrote on Twitter: "The worst that can happen to a cartoonist [in China] is a jail sentence, but in France, they can be gunned down and killed for poking fun at a religion."

"Hmm. Perhaps I should thank our precious party one more time for being so gracious as to refrain from killing me," Wang tweeted.




'Demonizing' the West

Journalist Zhu Xinxin, a member of the writers' group Independent Chinese PEN, said the official media was simply looking for excuses to attack the notion of press freedom.

"We have to make a distinction between Islamist terrorists and Muslims," Zhu said. "Most people around the world don't think that Charlie Hebdo overstepped the mark in terms of racism or discrimination against other cultures."

"[This article] really is confusing black with white," he said. "The Global Times often picks on various conflicts and problems in the West and blames them on Western democracy or press freedom."

"They want to use this incident to prove that their own controls on the media are justified, and seize on this issue to demonize press freedom in the West," he said.

Guangzhou-based artist He Guoquan said that while perhaps there was a debate to be had about satire directed at religions, the incident has highlighted the lack of any such freedom in China itself.

"All the media in China are run by the state and controlled to the extent that no dissenting voices can emerge," He said.

"There are two main pillars of human civilization: one is the freedom of expression, and the other is democratic elections," he said.

"They have to be upheld."




Press freedom in China

China led the world in imprisoning journalists in 2014, with a total of 29 behind bars, a Paris-based press freedom group said in a recent annual report.

China, which fell two places to rank 175th in the Reporters Without Borders Global Press Freedom Index in 2014, is also holding 73 netizens, the group said.

Journalists' associations in Hong Kong issued statements condemning the violence.

The Hong Kong Journalists' Association (HKJA), which has highlighted eroding press freedom in Hong Kong amid a series of violent attacks on outspoken journalists in recent years, said it is "shocked and outraged by the incident."

"We hold this attack to be tantamount to the murder of free speech and press freedom," the group said in a statement on its website.

"HKJA reiterates that any form of threat, no matter how deadly, will not deter journalists and others in the fourth estate from defending the freedom of press and free speech as a whole," it said.

Meanwhile, foreign correspondents who gathered in a show of solidarity, holding "Je suis Charlie" placards at a Beijing cafe were carefully watched by Chinese police, the Wall Street Journal reported on its China blog.




'Common enemy'

China on Thursday condemned the attack, describing terrorism as "a common enemy of all mankind."

"Terrorism is a common enemy of all mankind and a common threat to the entire international community," President Xi Jinping was quoted as saying by Xinhua.

Xi, who launched a one-year anti-terror campaign in the troubled northwestern region of Xinjiang last May, said China "stands ready to work with France and other countries ... to safeguard world peace and protect the people of all countries," the report said.

The Xinjiang region, which is home to millions of Turkic-speaking Uyghurs, has seen an upsurge in violence that has left hundreds dead since 2012, and which China has blamed on terrorists and Islamist insurgents seeking to establish an independent state.

But rights groups accuse the Chinese authorities of ethnically targeted violence in the form of police raids on Uyghur households, as well as tight restrictions on the practice of Islam, and curbs on the culture and language of the Uyghur people.

Reported by Yang Fan for RFA's Mandarin Service. Translated and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.

Hong Kong Education System Should be More Patriotic: Chinese Officials
2015-01-08


Chinese officials have hit out at a lack of patriotism in Hong Kong's education system as a major factor behind the city's 79-day Occupy Central pro-democracy movement, in a move that is likely to reignite a heated debate over Beijing's "patriotic education" proposals for schoolchildren in the former British colony.

Former diplomat and government adviser Chen Zuo'er called on Thursday for Hong Kong's education secretary to  be subject to scrutiny from the central government at all times, in a bid to prevent "noxious weeds" from coming through the system.

Chen, who led the Chinese negotiating team ahead of the 1997 handover to Beijing, warned that the secretary for education is "under the supervision of the central government and Hong Kong society at all times," and has sworn to uphold the city's mini-constitution, the Basic Law.

Chen lamented a lack of nationalistic feeling among the semiautonomous territory's young people, blaming the city's school curriculum for failing to take into account issues of "national security and sovereignty."

"Why was the education sector in such a mess during Occupy Central?" Chen asked a youth forum in Beijing.

"How did these young men, who were just toddlers at the handover, turn into those people on the front line brandishing the UK national flag and storming into our military camps and government?"

"It is clear that there have been problems all along with education in Hong Kong," Chen said. "Many people have a distinct lack of national democratic and civic awareness, life goals, and knowledge in geography, history, and culture," he said.




'Noxious weeds'

He called on Hong Kong officials to eradicate "noxious weeds" from the education sector, and to allow "green shoots" to flourish.

The Occupy Central movement has campaigned for Beijing to withdraw its electoral reform plan, which will give the city's five million voters a vote each in the election, but will restrict candidates to just two or three approved by a pro-Beijing committee.

But Beijing has said any reforms must stick to its Aug. 31 decree, and has slammed international support for the Umbrella Movement, saying that the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration on the handover arrangements is "void" and that China answers to no one in exercising sovereignty over Hong Kong.

Hong Kong student groups played a leading role in the Umbrella Movement, which camped out on major roads and intersections amid an ongoing civil disobedience campaign for more than two months beginning on Sept. 28.

In 2013, they came out in force to protest plans to include "patriotic education" and Beijing-approved textbooks in Hong Kong classrooms. The plans have since been shelved.



Beijing is watching

Chan Sik Chee, convenor of the National Education Concern group, said Chen's comments appear to be a warning to education secretary Eddie Ng.

"It's as if he wants to put pressure on by saying 'the central government is watching you,'" she said. "This is going to make parents in Hong Kong very worried indeed."

"Are they saying that because Occupy Central happened, not enough has been done, and that they are going to push this curriculum, or reform it, to change the way people think?"

"That would be unwise, because young people now are even more independent-minded now that they were [before Occupy Central]," she said.

As if to prove her point, Joshua Wong, who heads the academic activist group Scholarism, waylaid Hong Kong's second-in-command Carrie Lam in the corridors of a radio station, criticizing the government's recent summing up of public opinion following the Occupy movement.

"I think you might want to take a look at these assessment criteria for high school students with regard to your public opinion summary," Wong told Lam, proffering a document telling teachers how to mark student assignments in liberal studies disciplines.

"Why would you say in your report that there is a consensus in Hong Kong that people want to proceed with universal suffrage under the framework of the Aug. 31 decision from the National People's Congress (NPC)?"

Lam defended the government's statement, but took the document.




End to academic freedom

Chinese University of Hong Kong sociology professor Chan Kin-man, one of the original three founders of the Occupy movement, said that if Chan's comments are heeded, it could mean the end of academic and other freedoms in the territory.

"People's fight for democracy does not mean they do not love the country," he told Hong Kong's English-language South China Morning Post newspaper.

Chen's comments came after Beijing University law professor Rao Geping, who advises the ruling Chinese Communist Party on Hong Kong affairs, said the city's government should try once again to introduce a system of "national education" into Hong Kong schools.

"Hong Kong hasn't done an ideal job of educating its youth about how to adapt to its status under 'one country, two systems'," Rao told a Hong Kong and Macau studies forum in Beijing on Wednesday, in a reference to the formula under which Hong Kong was handed back to China amid promises of "a high degree of autonomy."

He said the city's young people should be taught about "decolonisation," as its schools have inherited some issues from British colonial rule.

Hong Kong lawmaker Ip Kin-yuen, who represents the education sector in the Legislative Council (LegCo) and heads a major teachers' union, said Chen has no understanding of young people in Hong Kong, however.

"He sees the problem as being that young people aren't passively obedient, but I think the real conflict lies elsewhere, around a political system that Hong Kong people really want to see implemented," Ip said, in a reference to Occupy Central's campaign for public nomination of election candidates in the 2017 poll for chief executive.

"He really doesn't understand the attitudes of young people in Hong Kong," he said.

Reported by Dai Weisen for RFA’s Cantonese Service and Qiao Long for Mandarin Service. Translated and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.

【看中国2014年12月03日讯】(看中国记者周翰音编译报道)据“大赦国际”网12月1日报道，刘萍本是一名中国工厂的工人，因为他人的一次善举，使其转变为反腐活动家。她22岁的女儿廖敏月讲述了她们母女的故事。

刘萍是我的母亲，她是一位善良的普通中国妈妈。

我们非常亲近。大约10年前，我父母离婚了，我选择跟妈妈住在一起。我们从没争吵过，一次也没有。我们以前常常去超市买别人挑剩不要的蔬菜，我从不觉得不好意思。我觉得那是一段温暖而亲切的时光，因为妈妈在我身边。

然而，一个晚上，一切都改变了。那天晚上妈妈为了多赚一点钱，趁着月光在街头摆地摊。因为作为钢铁厂的工人，妈妈月收入只有800人民币。

有闹事者在她的摊位找麻烦，我的叔叔想帮忙，结果被打得头破血流。

地方当局对这件事不管不顾，但有一群律师自愿帮忙解决了这件事，他们没收任何费用。他们的善举让我妈妈开始行动起来，积极提倡工人权利。

在2011年，我读高中的时候，我们的生活再次出现了急剧的变化。

那时，妈妈开始在街上发表演讲，分发传单。为了帮助那些被迫退休的工人，她还尝试以独立候选人的身份参加为当地人大的竞选。她一次离家好几天。

当时有陌生人到我家门口来，现在我意识到他们是便衣警察。我担心我妈妈，特别是每当我联系不到她的时候，因为那通常意味着她遭受了打压。我开始反对她做的一切，并想尽办法阻止她。警方和地方党政官员也想通过我让她停下来。

我不知道她参与了什么活动。她为了保护我，从没告诉我与那些相关的事。而邻居间有传言说我妈妈图谋不轨，我也开始相信那些话了。结果，我和妈妈的关系变得极为紧张。

去年，我妈妈和另外两个反腐败活动家在举行一个小型私人聚会时被逮捕了，他们挂了一条横幅，上面写着：要求政府官员公开自己的资产，如房地产还有投资。在那之后，我对中国共产党丧失了信心，我在网上发表了一封公开信，宣布退出中国共产党。我准备好了面对后果。

我母亲和另外两人被认为是与维权活动家组织的新公民运动有关联。她被判处六年零半个月的有期徒刑，我震怒了。我在网上发表了另一封信，表明自己对中共的深感失望。

在过去的一年里，我一直在反思我先前对母亲维权行动的态度，我为自己试图阻止她而深感内疚。我想到，妈妈以及其他维权运动家所面临的，居然是我们的冷漠和怯懦。

现在我已经可以坦然接受媒体关于妈妈的采访。我的护照被吊销，在以前的工作上还面临着来自政府的压力，但我不害怕因此带来的任何受到伤害。毕竟，我只有这一位母亲。

上帝 (圣经),  狗,  婴儿的眼睛,   只有这３样可以相信 

李平：「香港省长」与「秦城特首」的诞生


请看博讯热点：占领中环
(博讯北京时间2015年1月09日 转载)
    李平更多文章请看李平专栏
     
     


    展望2015年中港两地政治，有网友戏称，最大的变化将来自特别行政区，香港特区淡出政治版图，秦城特区备受瞩目，因为香港回归17年，特首正快步变成省长；北京秦城监狱则相隔17年后，迎来了中共政治局常委级别的特殊首脑，领导人的配置已超过其他特区。虽是调侃，但耐人寻味：「香港省长」与「秦城特首」的诞生，不只时间上巧合，也都是中共高层权斗的结局；而香港特首「省长化」对香港的影响在政改咨询过程中已显露无遗。
   
    中共省部级罪犯、疑犯多关押在北京秦城监狱，现有被判终身监禁的中共前政治局委员、重庆市委书记薄熙来，已移交军事检察院的中央军委前副主席徐才厚，被革职的全国政协副主席苏荣，被开除党籍的中共前政治局常委、中央政法委书记周永康等。周永康还是自1998年1月中共前政治局常委、「四人帮」之一张春桥保外就医后，第一个被关押在秦城监狱的正国级领导人。
   
    秦城特区的党政军领导人可谓济济一堂，远胜最高级领导人只有全国政协副主席的港澳特区。《来自秦城特区的新年贺词》近日在微博、微信热传，网民推出在其中领衔主演的正是周永康、薄熙来、徐才厚和全国政协前副主席令计划、前铁道部部长刘志军等。贺词说，中南海和秦城其实只有一步之遥，「有我们这些大老虎，才能在警示世人的同时，也在娱乐着大众」，2015年的愿望是「天下无虎」。
   
    梁振英没有发布新年贺词，没有公开其新年愿望。但从在港府启动第二轮政改咨询之际，梁振英急急否认放弃寻求连任来看，他的最大心愿应该是立法会能通过政改方案，以便他能在2017年连任特首。只不过，无论立法会是否否决2017年普选方案，届时产生的特首，要么是再经由小圈子选举产生，要么是由北京圈定梁振英等两三个候选人、再由市民投票产生，与内地的省长随时可以由中央指派、空降还有甚么分别？
   
    内地31个省、直辖市、自治区的省长、市长、区主席的产生，通常经三部曲：一是作为投票人的人大代表候选人由当局指定，禁止独立人士参选；二是省长候选人由中央指定；三是投票前当局会强烈要求代表支持，投票时则按地区设票箱，一旦投票结果不如意就要追究责任。以最新的海南省长异动为例，前省长蒋定之因健康原因请辞，中共中央先是任命国家海洋局局长刘赐贵为海南省委常委、副书记，再提名他代省长，然后由海南省人大常委会任命他为副省长、代省长，等下月海南省人大会议举行时再扶正。
   
    在这个过程中，省长候选人无论是庸才还是人才，都与当地选民无关，也毋须向选民发表政纲，没有竞选对手，票数高低只关面子而已。与此类似的是，依全国人大常委会8.31决定产生的香港特首，由于候选人要先经过筛选，即使有竞选对手，也同样由中共中央指定，除非中共的权斗重演2012年的激战并蔓延到香港，否则不会再出现当年梁振英、唐英年那样的泥浆战，港人投票选举的不见得是自己心仪的特首，而肯定是中共指定的省长级人物。
   
    梁振英当年能推翻特首大热人选唐英年，自然是深得中共官场三昧。那些与中共现任最高层作对的内地高官，只能去秦城特区继续享受其优渥生活，结束其政治生命；只有那些紧跟中共现任最高层的人，才有机会在官场步步高升，才有机会随意空降到某个省市担任省长、市长。对梁振英来说，只要把中共的普选落闸决定贯彻到底，就有机会寻求连任，哪管当的是特首还是省长，哪管港人要选特首不选省长。对港人来说，只要向泛民议员清楚表明否决伪普选方案的立场就够了，又何必再陪中共和港府表演政改咨询骚，陪他们玩甚么入闸出闸、首门尾门游戏？
   
    来源：苹果日报 (博讯 boxun.com)
(本文只代表作者或者发稿团体的观点、立场)
4881101

“大尺度低胸装惹恼审查官员”

电视连续剧《武媚娘传奇》在中国停播又复播，“胸多吉少”的说法闹得沸沸扬扬。“明镜在线”认为，中国的卫道士们正在发动一场运动。而《法兰克福汇报》则报道了中国的另一场运动：“同化思想”。
 
（德国之声中文网）"明镜在线"（Spiegel Online）周二（１月６日）发表文章"中国对于性的新一轮恐惧"（Chinas neue Angst vor Sex），话题自然从最近引发轰动的《武媚娘传奇》说起。
"当女王回来的时候，胸部突然不见了。讲述女君主武则天的一部史诗剧成为了这几天中国电视剧领域的一大事件。在圣诞节之前开播后，这部连续剧突然喊停。官方理由是'技术问题'。而真正的原因很快在媒体上传开：唐朝仕女们的大尺度低胸装让审查官员看不下去。'胸部必须小一点'，多家报纸如此引述内部人士的说法。"
电视剧复播之后，人们果然发现所有低胸装的镜头都被处理成了"大头照"。"明镜在线"作者继续写道，最新电影大片"一步之遥"也碰到了麻烦：舞蹈场面中的大腿和臀部特写和"性暗示"也让审查官们非常反感，于是电影在公映之前最后一刻还必须接受"咔嚓一刀"。
 
"目前中国一旦涉及到裸体或性，话题就会马上变得具有爆炸性。去年年初，北京领导层启动了一场规模庞大的打击色情运动，并在圣诞节期间自豪地宣布，销毁了1500万份'非法出版物'。不仅仅是色情内容成为打击对象：突然之间，在卫道士们的眼中，那些公开讨论性的议题，或者更糟糕的是讨论同性恋话题的科学家变得与低胸装同样可疑。"


民间也有"卫道士"

文章作者指出，这些"卫道士"中既有官方机构也有民间组织。比如由7名女士创立的"中国反色情网"，她们宣称目的是为了建设一个"纯洁的社会"。以敢言著称的中国社会学家彭晓辉去年11月在演讲时遭到一名中年妇女泼粪，"中国反道德网"虽然否认成员参与此事，但对攻击行为表示支持。

"在中国，性会再次成为禁忌话题吗？这很难想象。人们确实很少谈论性，这也恰恰是新学家们引发关注的原因所在。但是在过去二三十年里，社会开放度明显增加。中国城市里每几百米就有一个被称为‘成人用品商店'的性专卖店，有顾客盈门的同性恋酒吧，广告牌上到处搔首弄姿。官方禁止的卖淫行为兴旺发展，即便经常是暗藏在发廊和按摩院的外表之下。卫道士们很喜欢把所有这一切都归咎于颓废堕落的西方国家。"


"同化思想"让人联想文化大革命

除了"打击色情"之外，德语媒体还观察到中国正在进行的另一项运动："同化思想"（Die Gleichschaltung des Denkens）。《法兰克福汇报》（Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung）周三（1月7日）以此为题刊登文章对此进行报道。文章称，这场运动最初由《辽宁日报》刊登的所谓学生来信掀起，信中指责有些老师 "在大学课堂上批评中国政治体制，赞扬西方制度"。该报记者据称旁听大学课程后也得出了同样结论。于是教育部门出台规定，要求对大学课程进行视频录像。一些大学教师因为其政治观点而遭到批评甚至解聘。圣诞之后不久，习近平也出面发表讲话，要求高校向学生灌输社会主义核心价值观。
"中国这场新运动的过程让人充满忧虑地联想到文化大革命的年代。当时也是先出现一些小规模的告发行为和个案，然后滚雪球一般在全国引发诽谤和迫害。如同当时一样，大学现在也尤其成为理论家的目标。"
 

文章引述一名北京党内人士称，在习近平领导下，党内左派理论家再次掌握权力和影响力。作者表示，除了管束高校之外，习近平的打击对象还包括记者、学者和律师。
"乐观主义者相信，控制高校、加强马克思主义的尝试注定失败，因为中国已经变得非常多元化。不过党非常认真看待这一尝试。习近平及其圈内人士并没有忘记，党的权力曾在1989年受到大学生的挑战。而且他们看到了香港的例子，去年夏天那里参与'占领运动'的学生和高校教师对抗中国中央政府。"

[本文内容摘编自其他媒体，不代表德国之声观点]

公安明言对手机植入木马监控

(博讯北京时间2015年1月07日 转载)
     
    浙江温州经济技术开发区公安局分局花10万，购买手机木马程式，定时监控智能手机各种通讯。大陆网络人士指，警方透过通讯技术公司，用户在公共场所用无线上网(wifi) 时，各类信息便会上存至当局，完成监控操作，不仅作刑事用途，亦可监控异见人士。(海蓝报道)
     


    温州经济技术开发区官网上月15日发布《关于温州经济技术开发区公安分局采购临机植入设备的结果公示》，其中内容指，该开发区公安局用4.9万元，购入软件专门针对安卓(Android)手机或苹果(iPhone)已越狱手机，可实时监控手机通话、短信和照片等讯息的手机木马，另以10万元购入针对安卓或苹果手机进行接触式植入木马程序的打码器。
   
    熟悉手机技术的北京网络人士游先生指，官方一直都有这个行为，不知为何温州当局不小心公开出来。它上面写的打码器及木马病毒软件供应商，是武汉虹信通讯有限公司，该公司是国资委下属一个基础建设提供网络方案的公司，这间公司比较有问题，售卖产品包括地铁上的wifi及木马软件等，木马病毒可透过APP感染到安卓或苹果手机，他们让用户安装之后，当局能够读取手机上短信、GPS等，当民众再使用它的配套公共wifi时，它可以上存手机各类讯息。
   
    游先生说： 公共wifi的时候，它(木马程序就可以上存你的照片、地址，还有短信、通讯手机类各种信息，包括你的各种敏感信息、操作方式，它都能够读取得到。它这次比较可怕的是透过一个做通讯技术公司来完成自己的操作。
   
    北京异见人士莫之许则认为，在这个体制下，所有人的电话的所有通联信息，他们可以通过营运商拿到，不需要通过木马。该开发区公安局可能为迅速破案，所以才购买木马程式，公安用作刑事用途，监听不需要通过木马。
   
    莫之许说： 因为我们是专政国家，要国家机器和他们的运用方式融为一体，我觉得他们是被冤枉，他们可能用于刑事之类或侦破之用，如果监控，不需要通过木马。
   
    浙江网民秀才江湖指，他觉得没有安全感，手机通话、短信及照片随时都被人盯著，生活在这个国家没有隠私。他认为，警方不仅用在逃犯或刑事案件，他们也用作监控异见人士。
   
    秀才江湖说： 异见人士他们是监控的，曾经警察给我做笔録的时候，他们明目张胆告诉我，你几点钟打过电话给谁，他们都了若指掌，并毫不掩饰自己的监控行为。
   
    另外，大陆官媒人民日报旗下环球时报评论，鼓励中国网民做五毛党，惹起网民争议。该篇由安轩平执笔名为“中国好网民应有哪些标准”的文章，其中内容指，如果在网上说句公道话，或者还胆敢与之理论，马上就以“五毛”帽子相扣，或发动朋友群起攻之。他认为，做一个中国好网民，就是不仅要做“五毛党”，还要做“点赞党”，还要乐做“自干五”，滙集起网民正面声音，传播主流价值观。
   
    湖南网民欧彪峰指，当局这种做法让人丧失独立思考能力，成为独裁政权的宣传机器工具。他们完全违背事实，制造误导舆论。
   
    欧彪峰说： 因为在这种极权之下，如果没有言论自由、没有讯息、没有出版自由，然后从这些方面去误导的话，让更多民众丧失思考，以及判断能力。
   
    广州深圳网友在环球时报讨论区回应指，官家好，网民自然好，这就是逻辑规律，不用作者来洗脑。
   
    河北省石家庄巿网友则指，好网民应该是正能量的积极传播者、建设性的批评者、理性的监督者。
   
    来源：自由亚洲粤语部 (博讯 boxun.com)
692302

Hong Kong Girl Released Under Strict Conditions Over Chalk Scrawl

2014-12-31   



A judge in Hong Kong on Wednesday released a 14-year-old girl sent to a children's home after chalking a flower on the Lennon Wall pro-democracy site, but under strict curfew pending further hearings.

As embattled Hong Kong chief executive Leung Chun-ying presided with his family over the city's annual New Year countdown and fireworks display over the iconic Victoria Harbor, the girl, who has become known as Chalk Girl on social media, has been barred from leaving her home unaccompanied as a condition of her release, her lawyer said.

The would-be protester had chalked two flowers around a sticky-taped umbrella, symbol of the 79-day "Umbrella Movement" that occupied key highways and intersections in the semiautonomous Chinese city amid calls for fully democratic elections.

Her drawing sparked a rash of copycat chalk-drawing protests across Hong Kong, where police actions to clear protesters and an inflexible approach from local officials and the ruling Chinese Communist Party in Beijing have left public anger simmering since protest sites were cleared earlier this month.

Under the conditions of her release, the girl must continue her studies and observe a curfew between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., as well as ensure she never leaves the house unaccompanied by her father, sister or a social worker.




Appeal hearing

The decision came after an emergency hearing of an appeal against the referral to a children's home under child protection laws lodged by top barrister and Democratic Party founding chairman Martin Lee.

The academic activist group Scholarism set up an online petition in protest at her detention and the continuing threat of separation from her father on Thursday.

The girl's detention in a children's home sparked visits from members of Hong Kong's Legislative Council (LegCo) earlier on Wednesday, as well as a public outcry among concerned citizens and accusations of "white terror" leveled at police and government.

A spokesperson for Hong Kong's Justice Department said the child protection order had been applied for by police and been granted by the court.

A spokesperson for the Social Welfare department said only that the girl had "received appropriate care" while she was in the children's home.





Second detention

The girl's Dec. 23 detention under a child protection order is the second to be reported in connection with the Occupy Central movement.

In November, police detained arrested a 14-year-old boy during the clearance of a protest site in Kowloon. He has been allowed to stay with his parents while awaiting a hearing scheduled for Jan. 12.

Neither child has been charged with any crime, but their parents' ability to offer an adequate home is now under assessment by the authorities.

Umbrella-wielding protesters clustered among the regular crowds on Wednesday as Hong Kong began its countdown celebrations to usher in the New Year.

A post by Umbrella Movement protesters on Facebook called on pro-democracy movement followers to gather at 2 p.m. to protest the 14-year-old's detention.

"We want to show this power-crazed administration...that we stand with this 14-year-old girl," the post said.

It called on protesters to scribble chalk flowers and stick Post-it notes in protest at what it called an "abuse of power" by Hong Kong's police force.

Police are expecting some 380,000 people to turn out as crowds gather to usher in 2015, and hoping to forestall "walkabout" style democracy protests which have taken the place of the occupation sites in recent weeks.

Umbrellas, yellow ones in particular, became the symbol of the Occupy Central movement for fully democratic elections in 2017 after protesters used them to ward off tear gas and pepper spray attacks from riot police on Sept. 28, bringing hundreds of thousands of citizens out onto the streets in protest over police action in the days that followed.

The Occupy movement has campaigned for Beijing to withdraw its electoral reform plan, which it says is "fake universal suffrage," and allow publicly nominated candidates to run for chief executive in 2017.

An Aug. 31 decision by China's parliament, the National People's Congress (NPC), decreed that while all 5 million of Hong Kong's voters will cast ballots in the 2017 poll, they may only choose between two or three candidates vetted by a Beijing-backed election committee.

Beijing has also criticized international support for the Occupy Central protests, saying that the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration is "void" and that China answers to no one in exercising sovereignty over Hong Kong.

Reported by Dai Weisen for RFA's Cantonese Service. Translated and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.

香港政改僵局难破 特首普选日期未卜

请看博讯热点：占领中环
(博讯北京时间2015年1月08日 转载)
     
   
    香港政改僵局难破 特首普选日期未卜

   
    林郑月娥到香港立法会宣读咨询文件声明时，27名立法会民主派议员撑起黄色雨伞离场抗议。
   
    香港特区政府1月7日宣布启动第二轮政改咨询。香港政务司司长林郑月娥在立法会宣读的公众咨询的四项议题表明，不会对中国人大就特首选举产生办法的“落闸”决定提出任何挑战。
   
    林郑月娥今天在立法会作出宣布前，香港特首梁振英昨日已经明确表示，希望市民根据《基本法》与中国人大常委会的政改《决定》，以合法、理性、务实方式达成共识，让香港500多万选民有机会一人一票选出特首。
   
    “北京说了算”
   
    香港政务司司长林郑月娥的话更直白：“任何要改变北京的决定的想法都是不现实的”。
   
    林郑月娥到香港立法会宣读咨询文件声明时，27名立法会民主派议员撑起黄色雨伞离场抗议，他们集体离场时高呼“我要真普选”，并表明将否决政府提交的政改方案。
   
    相对于第一轮5个月的政改咨询，第二轮咨询只有两个月左右。香港时事评论员，现任香港中文大学政治与行政学系副教授马岳对BBC中文网分析说，第二轮咨询结果与第一轮不大可能会有任何实质变化。
   
    马岳副教授说，中国人大“落闸”后，留下的空间非常小，咨询结果可以预料，因此香港公众也不会有很大兴趣参与咨询。
   
    “推卸责任”
   
    香港泛民阵营已多次表明，如果没有“真普选”，宁可不要公民投票。
   
    政改方案要在立法会获得通过，必须得到三分之二的多数。立法会的70位议员中，泛民主派议员占了27位，以现在双方的事态，政改方案难以通过。
   
    香港时政评论员马岳说，没有看到港府通过妥协改变反对派议员立场的努力或可能性。因为北京定下的选举框架没有给港府留下妥协的余地。
   
    27票否决是可以预料的，因此达不到三分之二多数导致政改方案搁浅也是可以预料的。那么，明知会触礁，港府为什么还要一味推进呢？
   
    马岳认为，港府没有选择，因为步调是北京定下的。现在已经可以看到，港府已经在做政改方案通不过后的政治铺垫。马岳说，特区政府看来已经做好了将责任推给民主派的准备。他们可以说，普选我已经给你了，是泛民的否决让你得不到。看来几个月后特区政府会以这样的说辞向香港选民交待。
   
    香港特首梁振英的表态似乎已经印证了马岳的分析。他呼吁泛民阵营不要否决政改方案，否则“会剥夺香港公民的投票权”。
   
    香港政改僵局难破 特首普选日期未卜


   
    香港的动荡不稳定将会因政改方案的被否决而持续和加剧。香港年轻一代受到“占中”抗议的鼓舞，行动也可能更加激烈。
   
    “特首变数”
   
    梁振英承认，如果方案不能获得通过，“香港的民主进程将被推迟、、、到2022年”。
   
    如果政改方案搁浅，2017年的香港特首将仍按2012年的选举办法产生。 但是，马岳副教授分析说，这并不意味着梁振英一定会当选连任。
   
    马岳认为，北京对梁振英的表现并不满意，下届香港特首北京“换马”也未可知。
   
    但马岳说，可以肯定的一点是，香港的动荡不稳定将会因政改方案的被否决而持续和加剧。这不仅是政治上的，港人在民生问题上的不满也会更强烈的表现出来。香港年轻一代受到“占中”抗议的鼓舞，行动也可能更加激烈。
   
    来源：BBC (博讯 boxun.com)
1940224

中宣部为什么会成为藏污纳垢之地？
(博讯北京时间2015年1月01日 首发 - 支持此文作者/记者)
     习王掀起的反腐风暴席卷党政军各部门与各省各区各市，但大家都注意到唯独宣传部门却至今没有高官落马，是因为宣传部门干净，独善其身，还是其他原因？博讯记者钟伟光在北京为你独家披露：原因是中宣部是中国各部委中最腐败最邪恶的机构，用“藏污纳垢之地”来描述的话，一点也不为过。
   
     为了让大家清楚是怎么回事，不妨请各位打开国内新闻门户网站的新闻页面，点开最近涉及到中宣部领导，例如刚刚宣布由国新办主任、中宣部副部长之职调到新华社的蔡名照那条新闻，然后打开涉及到其他部委领导的新闻，然后再打开有关习近平的新闻，看看这几类新闻后面的网民更贴。大家会发现一个有趣的现象：全中国所有部门与级别的官员，只有中宣部的蔡名照这类人享受了同习近平一样的新闻评论待遇，从“网友”跟帖你会看到，网友对其他的领导的评价跟帖都是有赞有贬，有表扬有批评，还有暗中讽刺，唯独对习近平和蔡名照几乎是清一色的“支持”、“支持好领导”，“拥护为人民做事的好领导习近平（蔡名照）”。


   
    各位看到这里应该已经明白了，习近平上台两年，打老虎拍苍蝇确实得到了相当部分网民的支持，加上各大网站管理员对网友针对最高领导人的评价审查删帖比较严，可蔡名照级别并不高，只不过一位部级干部，又没有任何实际工作成绩，为什么也享受到习近平的待遇？超越了各大政治局常委包括李克强、王岐山？原因很简单，他作为宣传部副部长，这些年做的最重要工作，就是对自己，对宣传部门的宣传，对任何针对宣传部门的不利声音，经行严厉打击。而正是宣传部门的这种特权，才使得宣传部门成了任何批评都没有，更免于过去十几年互联网监督的死角，也自然让宣传部门成了最黑暗的机构。
   
    过去多年，尤其是互联网时代到来后，虽然中共一直控制比较严，但网民还是能够通过各种途径，对中共各部门进行批评，甚至起到了一定的”监督“作用，例如发改委，铁道部，教育部，文化部、外交部、公安部等等，到后来连维稳办都可以提出一些意见了，可是，大家翻遍网络和各大媒体都看不到哪怕一句对宣传部门的意见。新浪一位新闻主管透露，胡温时代可以批评胡温，习近平时代可以暗讽李克强，暗示不喜欢习近平，但绝对不能有一点点损及宣传部门领导们的，宣传部门的领导才是中国真正的皇帝，得罪他们，咱网站就得遭殃。实际上，据熟悉国内舆论内情的人透露，在每年关闭的几万网站中，其中大部分都是因为一篇文章甚至一句两句话讽刺、批评的宣传部而遭到厄运的。
   
    正是在这种情况下，宣传部门成了中国唯一没有任何一句杂音的部门，也自然成了藏污纳垢之地据知悉内情人士透露，宣传部门的主管，更不用说宣传部长如蔡名照之流的，贪污受贿不说，还经常以管宣传为名图利，蔡名照之类的利用大外宣贪污受贿绝对超过目前被抓的任何一位部级干部，蔡名照直系亲属中有六位在美国，估计这两年转移的赃款就高达2亿人民币。蔡名照等宣传部长级别的，情妇一大堆，还经常接受下面媒体与央视送妃子进贡。
   
    众所周知，在习近平接班后，宣传部门试图垄断对习近平思路的解释权，不乏故意歪曲与曲解。从习近平打的事件，到对习近平中国梦率先进行引起民众反感的解释，处处与习作对。直到习近平收拾了桀骜不是的政法口与石油帮，宣传部门才稍微老实点，但依然对习的反腐抱观望与怀疑的态度，并在多项外宣上与习近平作对。两年下来，宣传部门几乎没有搞出一篇真正理解与正确解读习近平的文章，不能不说对做了这么多事的习近平在民众中声望的下降要负一定责任。到后来，支持习近平的改革班子不得不另组宣传班子，包括频发文章的”国平“，都不属于宣传部门领导。
   
    宣传部门的特权与腐败，使得他们对习近平的改革有一种天生的恐惧。网络的兴起，让中国有一定的言论空间，网民利用这个空间，对政府献言献策，批评讽刺，虽然不中听，但对中国政府改革，国家进步还是有不可估量的作用。但宣传部门本身依仗自己的职能，不依法管理舆论，任意删除文章，关闭网站，实际上不但抹黑这届政府，而且也让他们可以通过暗中的操作，达到自己的目的。就拿主管外宣的蔡名照来说，他曾经秘密指使大外宣控制的海外媒体，”不宜过度宣传习近平的反腐“，”对习主席的宣传要严格根据宣传部的指示精神”，表面看这个降温也没有错，但据笔者了解，在蔡名照直接干涉下，一些支持习近平的媒体，包括一些看好习近平的网民，竟然遭到了封杀。连这些人都感觉到很无厘头。
   
    目前蔡名照已经召回了两名在美国的直系亲属，但蔡名照这些年通过大外宣贪污腐败的钱财并没有主动上交，包括蔡名照的几名情妇，目前虽然已经被秘密“断绝往来”，但还是被两名知情人上报到中纪委。蔡名照只是宣传部门腐败的一角，习近平要想真正得到民众为他“点赞”，首先得打掉在盘踞在宣传部门的大老虎。 [博讯首发,转载请注明出处]- 支持此文作者/记者(博讯 boxun.com)
2701850

中宣部为什么会成为藏污纳垢之地？
(博讯北京时间2015年1月01日 首发 - 支持此文作者/记者)

     习王掀起的反腐风暴席卷党政军各部门与各省各区各市，但大家都注意到唯独宣传部门却至今没有高官落马，是因为宣传部门干净，独善其身，还是其他原因？博讯记者钟伟光在北京为你独家披露：原因是中宣部是中国各部委中最腐败最邪恶的机构，用“藏污纳垢之地”来描述的话，一点也不为过。
   
     为了让大家清楚是怎么回事，不妨请各位打开国内新闻门户网站的新闻页面，点开最近涉及到中宣部领导，例如刚刚宣布由国新办主任、中宣部副部长之职调到新华社的蔡名照那条新闻，然后打开涉及到其他部委领导的新闻，然后再打开有关习近平的新闻，看看这几类新闻后面的网民更贴。大家会发现一个有趣的现象：全中国所有部门与级别的官员，只有中宣部的蔡名照这类人享受了同习近平一样的新闻评论待遇，从“网友”跟帖你会看到，网友对其他的领导的评价跟帖都是有赞有贬，有表扬有批评，还有暗中讽刺，唯独对习近平和蔡名照几乎是清一色的“支持”、“支持好领导”，“拥护为人民做事的好领导习近平（蔡名照）”。


   
    各位看到这里应该已经明白了，习近平上台两年，打老虎拍苍蝇确实得到了相当部分网民的支持，加上各大网站管理员对网友针对最高领导人的评价审查删帖比较严，可蔡名照级别并不高，只不过一位部级干部，又没有任何实际工作成绩，为什么也享受到习近平的待遇？超越了各大政治局常委包括李克强、王岐山？原因很简单，他作为宣传部副部长，这些年做的最重要工作，就是对自己，对宣传部门的宣传，对任何针对宣传部门的不利声音，经行严厉打击。而正是宣传部门的这种特权，才使得宣传部门成了任何批评都没有，更免于过去十几年互联网监督的死角，也自然让宣传部门成了最黑暗的机构。
   
    过去多年，尤其是互联网时代到来后，虽然中共一直控制比较严，但网民还是能够通过各种途径，对中共各部门进行批评，甚至起到了一定的”监督“作用，例如发改委，铁道部，教育部，文化部、外交部、公安部等等，到后来连维稳办都可以提出一些意见了，可是，大家翻遍网络和各大媒体都看不到哪怕一句对宣传部门的意见。新浪一位新闻主管透露，胡温时代可以批评胡温，习近平时代可以暗讽李克强，暗示不喜欢习近平，但绝对不能有一点点损及宣传部门领导们的，宣传部门的领导才是中国真正的皇帝，得罪他们，咱网站就得遭殃。实际上，据熟悉国内舆论内情的人透露，在每年关闭的几万网站中，其中大部分都是因为一篇文章甚至一句两句话讽刺、批评的宣传部而遭到厄运的。
   
    正是在这种情况下，宣传部门成了中国唯一没有任何一句杂音的部门，也自然成了藏污纳垢之地据知悉内情人士透露，宣传部门的主管，更不用说宣传部长如蔡名照之流的，贪污受贿不说，还经常以管宣传为名图利，蔡名照之类的利用大外宣贪污受贿绝对超过目前被抓的任何一位部级干部，蔡名照直系亲属中有六位在美国，估计这两年转移的赃款就高达2亿人民币。蔡名照等宣传部长级别的，情妇一大堆，还经常接受下面媒体与央视送妃子进贡。
   
    众所周知，在习近平接班后，宣传部门试图垄断对习近平思路的解释权，不乏故意歪曲与曲解。从习近平打的事件，到对习近平中国梦率先进行引起民众反感的解释，处处与习作对。直到习近平收拾了桀骜不是的政法口与石油帮，宣传部门才稍微老实点，但依然对习的反腐抱观望与怀疑的态度，并在多项外宣上与习近平作对。两年下来，宣传部门几乎没有搞出一篇真正理解与正确解读习近平的文章，不能不说对做了这么多事的习近平在民众中声望的下降要负一定责任。到后来，支持习近平的改革班子不得不另组宣传班子，包括频发文章的”国平“，都不属于宣传部门领导。
   
    宣传部门的特权与腐败，使得他们对习近平的改革有一种天生的恐惧。网络的兴起，让中国有一定的言论空间，网民利用这个空间，对政府献言献策，批评讽刺，虽然不中听，但对中国政府改革，国家进步还是有不可估量的作用。但宣传部门本身依仗自己的职能，不依法管理舆论，任意删除文章，关闭网站，实际上不但抹黑这届政府，而且也让他们可以通过暗中的操作，达到自己的目的。就拿主管外宣的蔡名照来说，他曾经秘密指使大外宣控制的海外媒体，”不宜过度宣传习近平的反腐“，”对习主席的宣传要严格根据宣传部的指示精神”，表面看这个降温也没有错，但据笔者了解，在蔡名照直接干涉下，一些支持习近平的媒体，包括一些看好习近平的网民，竟然遭到了封杀。连这些人都感觉到很无厘头。
   
    目前蔡名照已经召回了两名在美国的直系亲属，但蔡名照这些年通过大外宣贪污腐败的钱财并没有主动上交，包括蔡名照的几名情妇，目前虽然已经被秘密“断绝往来”，但还是被两名知情人上报到中纪委。蔡名照只是宣传部门腐败的一角，习近平要想真正得到民众为他“点赞”，首先得打掉在盘踞在宣传部门的大老虎。 [博讯首发,转载请注明出处]- 支持此文作者/记者(博讯 boxun.com)
2701850

曾在金钟发言 台牙医禁踏足港澳


请看博讯热点：占领中环
(博讯北京时间2015年1月03日 转载)
     
    曾在金钟发言 台牙医禁踏足港澳

    ■台湾牙医史书华被拒绝入境澳门，立即被遣返台湾。互联网
   
    「雨伞运动」暴露了当权者无所不用其极打压参与运动人士。台湾一名牙医去年10月曾经来港现身金钟占领区并上台发言，前日在网上申请来港被拒，昨转飞澳门同样被拒入境，被实时遣返。
   
    台湾牙医史书华曾参与去年占领台湾立法院的太阳花学运，去年10月中，他曾成功抵港，其间到过金钟占领区，并上大台发言鼓励群众。前日，史在其facebook上载一张浏览香港政府一站通网站办理台湾居民预办入境登记但登记失败的图片，并留言「香港不让我入境了」。其后他又留言称「这就是民主~上回去香港上台讲了一下话，就被香港禁止入境了」。
   
    史昨日飞抵澳门，落机后被当局带进一个房间问话约一小时，其后被拒绝入境，理由是「阻止对内部保安稳定构成威胁的非本地居民进入澳门」，立即被遣返台湾。本报曾尝试联络史但未获回复。
   
    占中男义工入澳门碰壁
   
    港府发言人回复称，不评论个别个案或公开个别个案的数据，保安局或入境处并无一份所谓一概禁止入境人士的「黑名单」，在审批入境申请时，会根据现行法例及入境政策作出批准或拒绝入境的决定，个别旅客如过往曾获批准或被拒绝入境，不表示日后必定再获批准或被拒入境。
   
    另外，一名占中男义工日前偕同妻儿，从外地打算经澳门返香港，却被澳门当局以他「危害澳门安全」为由拒绝他入境，他须携同妻儿原路折返。该义工自称并非511被捕或自首人士，又不属任何政党或团体，从不会以中、英文全名示人，质疑有人有系统地混入抗争人士当中搜集数据，但扬言不会退缩，会继续抗争。
   
    来源：苹果日报 (博讯 boxun.com)
4171002

戴耀廷：「雨伞时代」下的香港民主运动


请看博讯热点：占领中环
(博讯北京时间2015年1月03日 转载)


    雨伞运动标志着香港已进入一个新时代，香港民主运动也进入一个新阶段。过去三十年，香港民主运动以议会、街头合法行动如集会、游行、谈判、公投等方法，到了雨伞运动就进化至以大型的公民抗命行动占领马路，去争取尽早落实真普选。虽然目标仍未达成，但雨伞运动已改变香港社会以至香港每一个人，故也自然影响未来香港民主运动的形态。
   
     「雨伞时代」下的香港社会有几个特点：


   
    一、多元的时代：再没有单一的权力单位、价值系统、政治领袖能把社会的多元本质铲平、压抑，多元的思想、价值以至行为自然地浮面。
   
    二、横向的时代：权力架构及社会关系不再接受是由上而下，但也不一定要是由下而上，因人与人之间的关系愈益对等，故关系是更加横向而非纵向。
   
    三、自主的时代：每一个人都拥有自己的一套想法，而每一个人也有足够的能力去以自己的方法去实践理念。
   
    四、网络的时代：每一个个体并不是割裂的，他们仍会以另一种形态联系起来。人与人之间会建立起互相重迭的网络，而在网络的关系中，没有由上而下带领群众的领袖，而是不同的个体成为网络的一个点与其他个体相互结连起来。积极的参与者扮演的角色是把网络成员紧密联系起来的统筹者。
   
    「雨伞时代」未必一定会发展成一个对立的时代，但若不好好处理其多元、横向、自主及网络特性，却会令不同意见者走向对立面的机会增加，故有变成对立的时代的潜在危机。为了避免这情况出现，在筹划「雨伞时代」下的民主运动，必须小心应对「雨伞时代」的这几个特性。
   
    我相信「雨伞时代」下的民主运动应包含以下这些元素：
   
    一、约章：有需要有两套约章。第一套只包括一些包容度高的原则，目的是让认同民主运动精神的人共同拥抱一些大家都会支持的信念。第二套是充分发挥多元的特性，由不同群体就着他们所关注的公共政策范畴草拟政策及行动纲领，合组成社会约章的草拟稿。
   
    二、民主商讨：就着社会约章的草拟稿，可筹组各类型的商讨会议，让来自不同背景的公民发表也聆听其他公民的意见。在促导员协助下，看能否就社会约章的内容达成初步的共识。经过充分的商讨后，收集及整合不同的意见，订定社会约章的最终稿。
   
    三、公民授权：透过民间全民投票，让所有公民表达是否支持这社会约章成为民主管治香港的基本依据。
   
    四、分布式实践：要实践约章，可充分发挥「雨伞时代」多元、自主及网络的特性，由各个群体按着其本身的特点，自行设计实践的范畴、场所及方法。
   
    五、统筹性组织：因网络中的各个群体都有其本身的自主性，故香港民主运动仍需要有组织，但并不需要严密的架构，而主要是负责信息发放及统筹的工作，好让各群体按其特性自主地筹划工作时，可与其他拥抱同样信念的群体相互配合行动。这将更有利于发挥「雨伞时代」的特性。
   
    来源：香港《信报》 (博讯 boxun.com)

放屁！！！ 脸书CEO想facebook进入大陆, 舔菊的举措而已, SB