這才是有理性的討論,戴耀廷和范徐麗泰, 協恩中學好嘢, 校長

tuicho

ninetenfortytwo 發表於 2013-7-11 00:34
你好似冇睇清楚我d post，我冇話佔中係公義，不過反政府嘅行動好多時都犯法，公義同犯唔犯法係冇關係嘅。 ...

我個人覺得要反政府唔係一定要做犯法行為
政府如果出一些政策係錯誤,我都會反對

tuicho

ninetenfortytwo 發表於 2013-7-11 00:58
你反對，佢睬你都傻，所以咪有d人會有激烈嘅行動囉，激烈嘅行動未必能達到目的，但無奈、無望會觸發呢d行 ...

佢地遊行反政府,我覺得係佢地既自由
我唔覺得有乜理由反對佢地遊行
但我反對佢地遊遊下衝出馬路
妨礙其他交通使用者
我亦反對佢地破壞人支持政府既商店
你有你遊行反對
人地有人地支持
何必要做這些行為
民主自由係咁既咩

jj99

理性地有計劃地叫孩子去犯法！
害了下一代，心地很邪惡！！

lbtjo

playerboy 發表於 2013-7-10 16:43
回應 lbtjo #35 的帖子

Since you mention what is the two queries?  The US had already dispute on thi ...

US had disputed to HK that HK had never asked for clarification from the US side!? !? You never read news.

You only focused on the extradition law in the US but dare not to touch the issue that they had issued a wrong warrant. In addition, you mentioned that the US issued a “warrant” to arrest Snowden but you did not expect HK to issue a warrant to catch a criminal. What a good standard?

playerboy

回應 lbtjo #67 的帖子

Look, I already mention that by extradition law, Hong Kong will not issue an warrant.  Let me put this in step by step in layman term to understand extradition law.  If you think this is wrong, please show me the other way
Let use country X, Y and the person as A

1) A is suspect a crime in country X
2) As A is not trial in X yet, the court will not issue a court order (everyone is innocent until proven guilt), however the police department will issue a warrant arrest.
3) A fled to country Y
4) Country X request country Y to extradition (provide that they have an extradition agreement) base on Warrant Arrest issue by country X.
5) Now, do you think country Y will issue a court order/warrant arrest?  No, because it is base on warrant arrest by country  X.  Country Y will not issue a warrant because the crime is not committed in country Y.

Please get your facts right on extradition law before proceed on.  Unless, you think that there are different standard when deal with different person that are suppose to extradite.  Please name me an extradition in the whole world till date that was rejected due this is "so call reason".  

As far as all the International extradition, this is the first time in International history that such thing happen (like what you expect, both party need to issue warrant or even a court order).  There are cases that extradition are rejected due to no extradition agreement between 2 countries (this is how Russia reject the US request at the moment), base on Humanity ground, base on political ground.

Instead of going round about, would appreciate if you could provide point to point in layman term on how extradition law should work from your understand.   

lbtjo

回應 playerboy #68 的帖子

You drive to another area again. Answer the question that I have mentioned many times before.

If the document from US is not clear, does they need to clarify?

lbtjo

ninetenfortytwo 發表於 2013-7-10 22:04
你話佔中係罪行，孫中山推翻滿清唔係罪行，但孫中山的確係犯咗滿清嘅律法喎！而孫中山自己亦都知道推翻滿 ...

發起人都承認,佔中當然是罪行。我幾時話孫中山沒有犯滿清嘅律法？你再看我的論點吧。

斯諾登當然是犯了美國法律。我同情他,但他不是我心中的英雄。甘地，曼德拉都是當地的民族英雄。

斯諾登把美國的不公義暴露出來，他不應該逃走。就直接接受法庭的裁決。在法庭上把美國的不公義在所有人面前表露出來。雖然，我也懷疑他在美國能否得到公平的審判,但他一走，某程度上,已經讓事件蒙上陰影。

佔中是拿香港的經濟作籌碼，在違法的前提下癱瘓中環。這比打劫銀行來劫富濟貧來得更差！

playerboy

回應 lbtjo #69 的帖子

What is the area that is unclear?  Let me put it this way, this is the first time that happen in the entire history of extradition.  Be careful on what you wish, since Hong Kong had started this, in the future any national that have extradition agreement with Hong Kong can do the same thing to Hong Kong when Hong Kong request for extradition for a criminal (and hopefully, I won't see the same person who think that it is right now start to complain).

The point is base on the extradition agreement between US and Hong Kong.  Hong Kong have the right to refuse base on political ground.  (this clause is inside the agreement)  Which I don't understand why don't they use it, instead trying to come out some dumb reason.  Go on read up some overseas comment (not US if you think it is unfair) but other countries.  Many are also questioning this.

And please you have yet to provide on what is your understanding of extradition law, as I mention this debate cannot go on until there is a common ground which is the extradition law.

On which part do I drive to another area, I had state clearly how the extradition law work and this cases clearly, the Hong Kong is not following.

lbtjo

playerboy 發表於 2013-7-11 10:08
回應 lbtjo #67 的帖子

Look, I already mention that by extradition law, Hong Kong will not issue an  ...

Russia did not arrest Snowden not because of no extradition agreement between the two countries. Snowden has not entered Russia.  

playerboy

回應 lbtjo #72 的帖子

Wrong, I think you need to brush up your law, if not we cannot continue this debate.  As long as one is in transit area, he is consider entering the country.  Unless you are telling me that if I commit a crime in Hong Kong airport transit area I cannot be trial in Hong Kong because I did not enter Hong Kong.

This is what is being say - Putin said that Russia doesn’t have an extradition agreement with the U.S. and thus wouldn’t meet the U.S. request.

jjwest365

lbtjo 發表於 2013-7-9 10:31
協恩校長有問題。其實協恩校長的做法與以下情況沒多大分別。

協恩校長請來了計畫打劫銀行的匪徒來解釋打劫 ...

C兄你對中央一再違反基本法，沒有按時間表在香港特區突行普選特首有何看法呢？

jjwest365

首石頭 發表於 2013-7-9 10:59
回應 controllboy #1 的帖子

協恩校長請不要做（唯成功論者）， 佔中一定係犯法！ 知法犯法罪加一等！ 內 ...

你們可能已忘記5，6十年代人們為什麼逃到香港？
現在中國的執政黨（不是中國），在過去二十年只是變得越來越貪污，這就是香港應該學習的典範嗎？
在你眼中，現在的中國官員可能都是清廉的父母官?

首石頭

回應 jjwest365 #75 的帖子

師兄或者諗偏左， 而家係講緊合法否？  明知犯法自己要去做，帮你唔到！  如果你D仔女被人聳擁去做， 閣下又該如何？  讀書是辯是非，明道理吧？  人之患不去作育英才而叫D 剛十八去試法，你忍心咩？