關於 治亂世用重典 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【#Patreon堅離地國際日報🇦🇫】塔利班始創人之一兼監獄最高負責人杜拉比（Mullah Nooruddin Turabi）早前受訪時表示，過去塔利班統治時的處決和斬手等刑罰會再度執行，並指在保安管治上「非常有需要」，似乎他們依然相信「治亂世用重典」。當時說是否會公開用刑，則仍在研究當中，似乎是要和不同勢力討價還價。還記得那位以開明形象自居的塔利班發言人，曾說用石頭處決通姦者可能不會再出現，也說《可蘭經》沒有明確規定必須如此。現在看來塔利班的「依法」，總可以從沙利亞法找到依據，這一套「搬龍門術」，我們也早就見識過了......

⏺全文見Patreon
https://www.patreon.com/posts/56693005
▶️美國當年點解出兵阿富汗？
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGHg6Md8OTQ

毋忘五大訴求　公民抗命有理
—10‧20九龍遊行陳情書
（案件編號：DCCC 535/2020）

——————————————————
「毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中」
撐阿銘，即訂閱Patreon：
patreon.com/raphaelwong
—————————————————

胡法官雅文閣下：

　　2012年，我第一次站在法庭上承認違反「公安惡法」，述說對普選的盼望，批評公安惡法不義，並因公民抗命的緣故，甘心樂意接受刑罰。當年我說，如果小圈子選舉沒有被廢除，惡法沒有消失，我依然會一如故我，公民抗命，並且我相信將會有更多學生和市民加入這個行列。想不到時至今日，普選仍然遙遙無期，我亦再次被帶到法庭接受審判，但只是短短７年，已經有數十萬計的群眾公民抗命，反對暴政。今日，我承認違反「未經批准的政府」所訂立「未經批准的惡法」之下的「未經批准集結」罪，我不打算尋求法庭的憐憫，但請容許我佔用法庭些微時間陳情，讓法庭在判刑前有全面考慮。

暴力之濫觴

　　在整個反修例運動如火如荼之際，我正承擔另一宗公民抗命案件的刑責。雖然身在獄中，但仍然心繫手足。我在獄中電視機前見證6月9日、6月16日及8月18日三次百萬港人大遊行，幾多熱愛和平的港人冒天雨冒彈雨走上街頭，抗議不義惡法，今日關於10月20日的案件，亦是如此。可能有人會問，政府已在6月暫緩修例，更在9月正式撤回修例，我等仍然繼續示威，豈非無理取鬧？我相信法官閣下肯定聽過「遲來的正義並非正義」（Justice delayed is justice denied）這句格言。當過百萬群眾走上街頭，和平表達不滿的時候，林鄭政府沒有理睬，反而獨行獨斷，粗暴踐踏港人的意願，結果製造出後來連綿不絕的爭拗，甚至你死我活的對抗。經歷眾多衝突痛苦之後，所謂暫緩撤回，已經微不足道，我們只是更加清楚：沒有民主，就連基本人權都不會擁有！

　　在本案之中，雖然我們都沒有鼓動或作出暴力行為，但根據早前8‧18及10‧1兩宗案件，相信在控方及法庭眼中，案發當日的暴力事件仍然可以算在我們頭上，如此，我有必要問：如果香港有一個公平正義的普及選舉，人民可以在立法會直接否決他們不認可的法律，試問2019年的暴力衝突可以從何而來呢？如果我們眼見的暴力是如此十惡不赦，那麼我們又如何看待百萬人遊行後仍然堅持推行惡法的制度暴力呢？如果我們不能接受人民暴力反抗，那麼我們是否更加不能對更巨大更壓逼的制度暴力沈默不言？真正且經常發生的暴力，是漠視人民訴求的暴力，是踐踏人民意見的暴力，是剝奪人民表達權利的暴力。真正憎恨暴力，痛恨暴力的人，不可能一方面指摘暴力反抗，又容忍制度暴力。如果我需要承擔和平遊行引發出來的暴力事件的刑責，那麼誰應該承擔施政失敗所引發出來的社會騷亂的罪責呢？

社會之病根

　　對於法庭而言，可能2019年所發生的事情只是一場社會騷亂，務必追究違法者個人責任。然而，治亂治其本源，醫病醫其病根，我雖然公民抗命，刻意違法，控方把我帶上法庭，但我卻不應被理解為一個「犯罪個體」。2019年所發生的事情，並不是我一個人或我們這幾位被告可以促成，社會問題的癥結不是「犯罪份子」本身，而是「犯罪原因」。我明白「治亂世用重典」的道理，但如果「殺雞儆猴」是解決方法，就不會在2016年發生旺角騷亂及2017年上訴庭對示威者施以重刑後，2019年仍然會爆發出更大規模的暴力反抗。

如果不希望社會動亂，就必須正本清源，逐步落實「五大訴求」，從根本上改革，挽回民心。2019年反修例運動，其實只是2014年雨傘運動的延續而已，縱使法庭可能認為兩個運動皆是「一股歪風」所引起，但我必須澄清，兩個運動的核心就是追求民主普選，人民當家作主。在2019年11月24日區議會選舉這個最類近全民普選的選舉中，接近300萬人投票，民主派大勝，奪得17個區議會主導權，這就是整個反修例運動的民意，民意就是反對政府決策，反對制度暴力，反對推行惡法，不容爭辯，不辯自明。我們作為礦場裡的金絲雀，多次提醒政府撤回修法，並從根本上改革制度，而在10月20日的九龍遊行當然是反映民意的平台契機。如今，法庭對我們施加重刑，其實只不過是懲罰民意，將金絲雀困在鳥籠之內，甚至扼殺於鼓掌之中，窒礙表達自由。

堅持之重要

　　大運動過後的大鎮壓，使我們失去《蘋果日報》，失去教協，失去民陣，不少民主派領袖以及曾為運動付出的手足戰友都囚於獄中，不少曾經熱情投入運動的朋友亦因《國安法》的威脅轉為低調，新聞自由示威自由日漸萎縮，公民社會受到沈重打擊，我亦失去不少摯友，有感傷孤獨的時候，但我仍然相信，2019年香港人的信念，以及所展現人類的光輝持久未變。我不會忘記百萬人民冒雨捱熱抗拒暴政，抵制惡法，展現我們眾志成城；我不會忘記人潮紅海，讓道救護車，展現我們文明精神；我不會忘記年青志士直接行動反對苛政，捨身成仁，展現我們膽色勇氣；我不會忘記銀髮一族走上街頭保護年青人，展現我們彼此關懷；我不會忘記「五大訴求」，不會忘記2019年區議會選舉，展現我們有理有節。

　　法官閣下，我對於當日的所作所為，不感羞恥，毫無悔意。我能夠在出獄後與群眾同行一路，與戰友同繫一獄，實是莫大榮幸。若法治失去民主基石，將使法庭無奈地接受專制政權所訂立解釋的法律限制，隨時變成政治工具掃除異見，因此爭取民主普選，建設真正法治，追求公平正義，仍然是我的理想。在這條路上，如有必要，我仍然會公民抗命，正如終審法院海外非常任法官賀輔明（Lord Hoffmann）所言，發自良知的公民抗命有悠久及光榮的傳統，歷史將證明我們是正確的。我期望，曾與我一起遊行抗命的手足戰友要堅持信念，在艱難歲月裡毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中。

　　最後，如9年前一樣，我想借用美國民權領袖馬丁路德金牧師的一番話對我們的反對者說：「我們將以自己忍受苦難的能力，來較量你們製造苦難的能力。我們將用我們靈魂的力量，來抵禦你們物質的暴力。對我們做你們想做的事吧，我們仍然愛你們。我們不能憑良心服從你們不公正的法律，因為拒惡與為善一樣是道德責任。將我們送入監獄吧，我們仍然愛你們。」（We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.）

　　願慈愛的主耶穌賜我們平安，與我和我一家同在，與法官閣下同在，與香港人同在。沒有暴徒，只有暴政；五大訴求，缺一不可！願榮耀歸上帝，榮光歸人民！

第五被告
黃浩銘
二零二一年八月十九日

Lest we forget the five demands: civil disobedience is morally justified
- Statement on 10‧20 Kowloon Rally
(Case No.: DCCC 535/2020)

Your Honour Judge Woodcock

In 2012, I stood before the court and admitted to violating the "Public Security Evil Law". I expressed my hope for universal suffrage, criticized the evil law as unjust, and willingly accepted the penalty for civil disobedience. Back then, I said that if the small-circle election had not been abolished and the draconian law had not disappeared, I would still be as determined as I was, and I believe that more students and citizens would join this movement. Today, universal suffrage is still a long way off, and I have been brought before the court again for trial. But in just seven years, hundreds of thousands of people have already risen up in civil disobedience against tyranny. Today, I plead guilty to "unauthorised assembly" under an unapproved evil law enacted by an unauthorised government. I do not intend to seek the court's mercy, but please allow me to take up a little time in court to present my case so that the court can consider all aspects before sentencing me.

The roots of violence

At the time when the whole anti-extradition law movement was in full-swing, I was taking responsibility for another civil disobedience case. Although I was in prison, my heart was still with the people. I witnessed the three million-person rallies on 9 June, 16 June and 18 August on television in prison, when many peace-loving people took to the streets despite the rain and bullets, to protest against unjust laws. Some people may ask, "The Government has already suspended the legislative amendments in June and formally withdrew the bill in September, but we are still demonstrating, are we not being unreasonable?" I am sure your Honour has heard of the adage "Justice delayed is justice denied". When more than a million people took to the streets to express their discontent peacefully, the Lam administration ignored them and instead acted arbitrarily, brutally trampling on the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, resulting in endless arguments and even confrontations. After so many conflicts and painful experiences, the so-called moratorium is no longer meaningful. We only know better: without democracy, we cannot even have basic human rights!

In this case, although we did not instigate or commit acts of violence, I believe that in the eyes of the prosecution and the court, the violence on the day of the incident can still be counted against us, based on the August 18 and October 1 case. And now I must ask - If Hong Kong had a fair and just universal election, and the public could directly veto laws they did not approve of at the Legislative Council, then how could the violent clashes of 2019 have come about? If the violence we see is so heinous, how do we feel about the institutional violence that insists on the imposition of draconian laws even after millions of people have taken to the streets? If we cannot accept violent rebellion, how can we remain silent in the face of even greater and more oppressive institutional violence? The true and frequent violence is the kind of violence that ignores people's demands, that tramples on their opinions, that deprives them of their right to express themselves. People who truly hate violence and abhor it cannot accuse violent resistance on the one hand and tolerate institutional violence on the other. If I have to bear the criminal responsibility for the violence caused by the peaceful demonstration, then who should bear the criminal responsibility for the social unrest caused by failed administration?

The roots of society's problems

From a court's point of view, it may be that what happened in 2019 was just a series of social unrest, and that those who broke the law must be held personally accountable. What happened in 2019 was not something that I alone or the defendants could have made possible, and the crux of the social problem was not the 'criminals' but the 'causes of crime'. I understand the concept of " applying severe punishment to a troubled world", but if "decimation" was really the solution, there would not have been more violent rebellions in 2019 after the Mongkok "riot" in 2016 and the heavy sentences handed down to protesters by the Court of Appeal in 2017.

If we do not want social unrest, we must get to the root of the problem and implement the "five demands" step by step, so as to achieve fundamental reforms and win back the hearts of the people. 2019's anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014's Umbrella Movement, and even though the court may think that both movements are caused by a "perverse wind", I must clarify that the core of both movements is the pursuit of democracy and universal suffrage, and the people being the masters of their own house. In the District Council election on 24 November 2019, which is the closest thing to universal suffrage, nearly 3 million people voted, and the democratic camp won a huge victory, winning majority in 17 District Councils. As canaries in the monetary coal mine, we have repeatedly reminded the government to withdraw the extradition bill and fundamentally reform the system, and the march in Kowloon on 20 October was certainly an opportunity to reflect public opinion. Now, by imposing heavy penalties on us, the court is only punishing public opinion, trapping the canaries in a birdcage, or even stifling them in the palm of their hands, suffocating the freedom of expression.

The importance of persistence

As a result of the crackdown after the mass movement, we lost Apple Daily, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union, and the Civil Human Rights Front. Many of our democratic leaders and comrades who had contributed to the movement were imprisoned, and many of our friends who had been passionately involved in the movement had been forced to lay low under the threat of the National Security Law. I still believe that the faith of Hong Kong people and the glory of humanity seen in 2019 will remain unchanged. I will never forget the millions of people who braved the rain and the heat to resist tyranny and evil laws, demonstrating our unity of purpose; I will never forget the crowds of people who gave way to ambulances, demonstrating our civility; I will never forget the young people who sacrificed their lives, demonstrating our courage and bravery; I will never forget the silver-haired who took to the streets to protect the youth, demonstrating our care for each other; I will never forget the "five demands" and the 2019 District Council election, demonstrating our rationality and decency.

Your Honour, I have nothing to be ashamed of and no remorse for what I did on that day. It is my great honour to be in prison with my comrades and to be able to walk with the public after my release. If the rule of law were to lose its democratic foundation, the courts would have no choice but to accept the legal restrictions set by the autocratic regime and become a political tool to eliminate dissent at any time. As Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent overseas judge of the Court of Final Appeal, said, civil disobedience from the conscience has a long and honourable tradition, and history will prove us right. I hope that my comrades in arms who walked with me in protests will keep their faith and live in love and truth in the midst of this difficult time.

Finally, as I did nine years ago, I would like to say something to those who oppose us, borrowing the words of American civil rights leader Reverend Martin Luther King: "We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you."

Peace be with me and my family, with Your Honour, and with the people of Hong Kong. There are no thugs, only tyranny; five demands, not one less! To god be the glory and to people be the glory!

The Fifth Defendant
Wong Ho Ming
19 August 2021

親愛的大家晚安啊～早上聽bilibili，刷到一群教培行業離職員工的自白。

大致上這件事的順序：

1.大陸改革開放至今，第一波在社會發展中取得較好位置的人，靠的是＂第一波＂下海經商或恢復大學聯考。

2.因為唸書好取得優勢的人，希望孩子也有好的發展，因此超級重視教育

3.家長們的積極行動包含：

A.希望孩子念好的學校->
買學區房，幾千萬買一個40年老公寓，俗稱老破小
（你就理解成，在台灣花四千萬買南機場公寓，沒裝潢還沒電梯，樓下是夜市，附近皆市井與長輩）

B.希望孩子有好的成績->
提早教育，上各種校外培訓
（大陸叫＂雞娃＂，台灣叫＂補習＂）

C.希望孩子有好的發展->
高考沒考好或無學籍，走國際教育路線->
花大價錢研究各國學校，衍生大量留學服務機構＋代購＋海外房產
（為了孩子專門陪讀，爸爸在大陸工作，媽媽在泰國買房專門陪讀）

4.這事兒發展十年，本來還沒人管，但在2020疫情促使線上培訓瘋長，甚至作到美國上市後，政府管控了

5.政府管控就是一刀切，政策包含
A.不准補習
B.培訓機構需為非營利機構，不准花錢做營銷買流量
C.取消學區房對口政策（花大錢買學區房，以前能兌換S卡，現在要從SABC卡池裡抽啦）

6.培訓機構紛紛關門，大公司片片裁員，從業者群群求生

大概就是這樣吧～

感想？

1.不知道在大陸做培訓的朋友怎麼樣了？
已經與家長建立長期私人聯繫的人大概不要緊，可能生意更紅火了XD
私下補課嘛～肯定會有的啊！

2.熟悉的政府一刀切！
在大陸，什麼紅火了就會迎來一紙禁令，泡沫涼涼。
我短暫的十年，依序看過

A.遊戲
市場過熱，亂象叢生，要申請牌照才能發遊戲；
大公司不好過，小公司倒閉或做海外求生。

我離開遊戲業的時候發生的～

B.電視盒
好像是下令電視盒裡不能任意安裝APK，影視要過審之類的。
立馬電視盒降溫。

我做電視盒時發生的事XD

C.文化內容
這個是一直在持續，但我走的那年更嚴格；
好像是說編輯要持證上崗，審核要嚴格按照某某尺度，主編被請去局子好多次，全面下架很多作品。

我最後在大陸，做網文時發生的事。

上面是我親身經歷的～而身邊發生的也有很多，比如說：

短視頻：品牌不準露出，血腥跟臉打馬賽克
金融：P2P暴雷後的監管，海外資金管制
地產：資格嚴控，購屋與建房的貸款雙收緊
教培：就上面說的，簡單地說就是不準賺錢啦

管得嚴嗎？是管得嚴啊～
但背後還有兩層意義

1.治亂世用重典，有錢的地方才有江湖
好東西-->高需求-->錢-->江湖-->梟雄-->亂世

好東西是好，錢是真錢，亂是真亂！
某種方面來說，人活上一遭能在亂世裡掙過栽過，也不白活啦

2.管控的背後都是方針
大方向：生育率，二三四線城市發展，發展內需

礙著我的都得治，幫著我的都得捧！

大概就是這樣吧～畫重點：

1.壓制：過熱迎來壓制，要進熱門行業，請早撈早跑
2.好東西：不是好東西，為何會過熱？
3.政策：多生孩子，回鄉發展，錢都留在境內花

以上...好像大叔在寫政論喔XD

香港今日社論2021年04月24日(100蚊獅子頭)
https://youtu.be/93Kf_oz4Omw

請各網友支持巴打台
巴打台購物網址
https://badatoy.com/shop/
巴打台Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/badatoyhk/
巴打台Youtube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmc27Xd9EBFnc2QsayzA12g
----------------------
明報社評
美國召開全球應對氣候變化峰會，總統拜登帶頭宣布提高減少碳排放目標，各國領袖也當仁不讓，紛紛作出積極承諾，這對人類社會來說，令人看到應對氣候變化問題的曙光，喜事一樁。美國和很多其他國家也表明，應對氣候變化需要全球合作，惟出現一些「雜音」，諸如美國國家情報總監海恩斯說，氣候議題是外交關係的核心，應該將國家安全因素納入一併考慮。若然美國在應對氣候變化問題將中國列為外交對壘的對象，則是憾事一樁，不過也不會影響中國按本身的條件完成自行制定的目標。

蘋果頭條
鄭中基今晚在中環海濱活動空間舉行自駕演唱會「WEE are Ronald Cheng Drive in Ultra 鄭中基自駕演唱會2021」。由於今次是香港首個自駕演唱會，故就算一車四人、售價$6,000車輛套票亦於開賣時以「光速」售罄。車輛觀眾位在會場最前排位置，其後方是觀眾座位，大會表示頭場有116架車入場。現場所見，頭排車位有多款名車，包括有多架價值約460萬的法拉利458 Spider、價值約390萬的法拉利430 Scuderia，亦有俗稱「大牛」、車價約670萬的林寶堅尼Aventador，同時更有一架超過600萬、全球限量500部的麥拿侖675LT Spider。

東方正論
治亂世，用重典。持續逾年的反修例黑色暴亂，絕對是香港由亂入大亂的分水嶺，法庭理應對涉案暴徒嚴懲不貸，無奈事與願違，別說重罰，放生更不在少數。在這樣的背景下，法庭昨日對涉及管有近一公斤炸藥的香港民族陣綫成員重判入獄12年，便可謂極少數刑責相稱、大快人心的裁決。現年29歲的盧溢燊，涉在荃灣德士古道一個工廈單位管有近一公斤炸藥TATP，被告承認一項管有爆炸品意圖危害生命或財產罪。

星島社論
警方前年在荃灣某工廈搜查「香港民族陣線」成員盧溢燊租用單位，發現近一公斤的炸藥TATP（三過氧化三丙酮），盧溢燊早前承認一項管有爆炸品意圖藉以危害生命或財產罪。法官陳慶偉昨午在高等法院指，從其住處及手機搜證所得可見，盧溢燊準備及保存高爆炸性物品，意圖顛覆香港政府及宣揚港獨，亦認為被告屬主腦人物，屬最嚴重同類型案件，罪行邪惡，潛在危險比九七年「賊王」葉繼歡案更大，刑責甚或比管有兩公斤TNT炸藥以求財的葉繼歡更重，判刑須極具阻嚇力，終重囚被告十二年，為二○一九年六月爆發反修例運動以來最高刑罰。

經濟社評
一連兩天的氣候領袖峰會昨繼續召開，發達國家提出更進取減碳排放目標，固然是好消息，但更須承擔大國責任，提供資金和技術予發展中國家應對氣候暖化。惟再生能源牽涉到技術革命，而美國在這方面又落後中國，假如美國仍將美中角力放在首位，恐重蹈中美科技戰覆轍，令氣候危機有加劇之嫌，釀成全人類災難。美國總統拜登前天在峰會開幕時指：「科學家告訴我們，這是決定性的十年──是我們必須作出決定才能避免氣候危機最糟糕後果的十年。

立即贊助《852郵報》：
http://www.post852.com/support-us/

852郵報
http://www.post852.com