溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 曾偉雄「炸彈論」濫轟學生 [打印本頁]

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-9-12 21:53 標題: 曾偉雄「炸彈論」濫轟學生

http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20110913/00176_005.html

曾偉雄「炸彈論」濫轟學生

政府和警方在國務院副總理李克強訪港期間打壓示威權利，剝削新聞自由，港大校方、學生、麗港城「六四男」及記者團體代表，昨日雲集立法會，聲稱圍剿警務處處長一哥曾偉雄，其中校方公開與警方的會議紀錄，踢爆警方大話連篇，強行擴大港大保安區及大舉派員進駐校園。不過，被揶揄為「公安局局長」的曾偉雄不但未有認錯道歉或收回引起公憤的「黑影論」，反而提出更嚇人的「炸彈論」，暗示學生可能攜帶手提炸彈炸李克強，令人啼笑皆非。

立法會保安事務委員會昨再次召開特別會議，討論李克強訪港的保安安排，港大校方首次派員出席，教務長韋永庚公開多份會議紀錄與圖則，力證李克強訪校的保安安排一直是由警方建議，港大惟有配合，校方一直無被知會有多少警員進駐校園，警方又於活動前一天臨時要求擴大限制區域，他們當時已有「好大保留」，曾反建議在太古橋封鎖一條行車線列作示威區，但仍遭警方拒絕。

列核心保安區無知會居民

港大校方與學生昨日槍口一致對外，炮轟警方。（伍鎮業攝）

港大學生事務長周偉立又表示，警方當日先將三名學生困在梁銶琚樓防火門內，才通知校方保安接手處理，並非如曾偉雄之前所說，是校方要求警方協助處理，他坦言非常不願見到有肢體衝突。

遭禁錮的港大生李成康指摘警方在商討期間不停向校方施壓，強調學生與校方才是真正主人，警方無權要求校方服從警方安排，要求立法會動用權力及特權條例調查對公民權利的侵犯。「六四男」黃健亦踢爆警方從未知會麗港城居民，該處已列為核心保安區，強調他用真金白銀買下單位，警方無權無理徵用。

「六四Ｔ恤男」黃健激動發言，質疑他家中廁所當日是否也被列作保安區。

面對港大校方、學生及六四男連番炮轟，保安局局長李少光不但沒有解釋，更語帶不在乎般呼籲學生循法律途徑處理及向警方投訴，期間更試圖轉移視線，把替補機制論壇衝突混為一談，稱要對示威暴力予以譴責。李成康強調調查是警方的責任，沒理由將責任推給示威者及法庭。

曾偉雄承諾警方會檢討有關安排，但為時需要三個月，並以避免影響警方處理投訴做藉口，拒絕收回「黑影論」。談及保安區應有多大時，他舉例指一個炸彈可波及二百米範圍，可致嚴重傷亡，似是暗指學生可能會攜帶炸彈。

議員促「公安局局長」下台

社民連議員梁國雄指摘曾的說法毫無根據，此說法等於容許警方將保安區無限擴大：「你哋有冇收到情報話有炸彈？個示威區一百公里咁遠，你哋唔話如果有導彈會點？」人民力量議員黃毓民指摘警方打壓和平示威，進駐大學校園，猶如「法西斯保安部隊」及「公安局局長」，要求曾偉雄引咎下台。即使是建制派的廠商會議員林大輝，亦質疑曾偉雄是否因上台後首次處理領導人訪港而「騰雞得滯」，希望警方吸取教訓。

多名泛民議員先後提出動議，譴責警方做法及政務司司長唐英年的「垃圾論」，以及要求特首和立法會成立法定委員會徹查事件等，但因時間不足未及進行表決。委員會主席涂謹申表示，會安排再開會處理。

本身是港大校友的陳淑莊，手執港大校方文件質疑警方講大話。

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-9-12 21:55

一個不斷俾人當面踢爆講大話嘅特區公安局局長，仲有乜野資格繼續留任？！響立法裡面被質詢而當面講大話，點解又可以唔需要負上任何法律責任？！

-力

作者: fishbelly 時間: 2011-9-13 08:00

我好怕搞下搞下會不了了之, 你知香港人善忘

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-13 09:24

the police is the time to fight back to those non-sense attack

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-9-13 09:39

我好怕搞下搞下會不了了之, 你知香港人善忘
fishbelly 發表於 2011-9-13 08:00

所以好大程度上，香港人絕對係抵撚死。

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-9-13 09:44

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-9-13 09:56 編輯

還是那一句－趕快告警察和政府，讓法院判個清楚。

堅持警方不能設立保安區的說法根本就是可笑而且是自欺欺人。

警察在特定情況下當然可以徵用居民財產和物業。ＴＶＢ劇集有很多這樣的場面。

我之前就提過我奇怪學生竟然被允許進入１００米範圍，因為一個手榴彈是完全可以在這個範圍內造成傷害。最基本的ｐｒｅｖｅｎｔｉｖｅｍｅａｓｕｒｅｓ是要做到的。

國家領導人會有親民活動，但都是在確定受攻擊的可能性很低的情況之下才進行的。中國總理（不記得是朱鎔基或是溫家寶）就曾在ＳＡＲＳ期間到我們北京分公司的同事的幾戶鄰居家探望。小區也沒有被封鎖，而大部分居民根本就不知道總理有來過小區。

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-9-13 23:56

還是那一句－趕快告警察和政府，讓法院判個清楚。

rockypath 發表於 2011-9-13 09:44

同政府打官司？知唔知律師，仲要係大律師幾貴？唔係一般升斗市民可以負擔。

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-9-14 00:07

同政府打官司？知唔知律師，仲要係大律師幾貴？唔係一般升斗市民可以負擔。 ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-13 23:56

That is why the western legal system is only for the rich and is not working.

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-14 00:24

同政府打官司？知唔知律師，仲要係大律師幾貴？唔係一般升斗市民可以負擔。 ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-13 23:56

but that is not fair to just blame the cops duty without any obvious evidence that the justice system recognize
if u want democracy, follow the rules, don't 輸打贏要

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-14 00:28

還是那一句－趕快告警察和政府，讓法院判個清楚。

堅持警方不能設立保安區的說法根本就是可笑而且是自欺 ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-9-13 09:44

strongly agree
成班左一句自由﹐右一句民主既紅衛兵
仲有個D o羊V煞﹐真係﹐又要威﹐又要戴頭盔

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-9-14 01:03

同政府打官司？知唔知律師，仲要係大律師幾貴？唔係一般升斗市民可以負擔。 ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-13 23:56

一些政治團體之前一直在攻擊政府說政府做事沒有法律支持。他們當中不少是律師或律師團體。他們若真的是為民請命而不是在做秀抽水，那他們就應該替老百姓出頭，不是只說不做。

作者: soli 時間: 2011-9-14 15:25

喊包周圍話人地“禁錮”他﹐但又怕輸唔敢訴諸法律﹐擺明係身有屎﹐就好似上次那個雞蛋仔呀伯一樣。
唔知被人屈“禁錮”個幾位警員可唔可以告喊包誹謗呢?

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-9-14 17:06

That is why the western legal system is only for the rich and is not working.
peter236 發表於 2011-9-14 00:07

咁你話咩制度先至work？大陸嗰套？

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-9-14 17:09

but that is not fair to just blame the cops duty without any obvious evidence that the justice system recognize
chunsh 發表於 2011-9-14 00:24

It's also not fair to assume the students misbehaved, either.
To me, the guy who wear the June 4th T-shirt got "removed" right away from the scene. That's more unacceptable.

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-14 20:10

本帖最後由 chunsh 於 2011-9-14 20:12 編輯

It's also not fair to assume the students misbehaved, either.
To me, the guy who wear the Ju ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-14 17:09

the T-Shirt guy is different issue. I tends to believe the cops have received some 線報 and know about the background of that T-Shirt guy so they just block take action to him. What I mean is, he is not just a simple citizen that just wear that T-shirt to walk by. He should have other planning and the cops knew about it. This is my point of view, no matter you agree with it or not, BUT---------

for the hk-U event, if the cop set up some security area, no matter in whcih country in the world, the citizen MUST not cross the line. Now it is the students and those fuxking retarded senators accused the cops are guilty and break the law. No problem, let put it on the court and give evidences and let the judge decide

One important thing, the cops didnt do/say anything pussy to try to accuse the students are guilty in the lawful way. but that 喊包男 and his pussy friends/校長(見風使舵)/政棍do

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-9-15 00:33

thethe T-Shirt guy is different issue. I tends to believe the cops have received some 線報 and know about the background of that T-Shirt guy so they just block take action to him. What I mean is, he is not just a simple citizen that just wear that T-shirt to walk by. He should have other planning and the cops knew about it. This is my point of view, no matter you agree with it or not, BUT---------
chunsh 發表於 2011-9-14 20:10

你這樣陰謀論，反正我就不信了。

for the hk-U event, if the cop set up some security area, no matter in whcih country in the world, the citizen MUST not cross the line. Now it is the students and those fuxking retarded senators accused the cops are guilty and break the law. No problem, let put it on the court and give evidences and let the judge decide

chunsh 發表於 2011-9-14 20:10

Issue is, if there is a security zone, it should SHOW to public (e.g. 架起鐵馬) so no one will attempt to get across that boundary. If someone attempt to cross then it's that person's fault. In this case, there is no sign of such security zone.

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-15 00:40

你這樣陰謀論，反正我就不信了。

Issue is, if there is a security zone, it should SHOW to public ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-15 00:33

You just show people another example that we should put that in court
cos you are blaming the cops has done things wrong and not follow the rules.
I was not there and I didnt say the cop have NOT done anything wrong. Thats why I suggest whoever accuse the other party to be guilty should use evidence in court

saying the others guilty and this and that not good without evidence just shows that they are lack of evidence to prove their point and acting sissy

did the cop sue anyone for that or blame anyone have broken the law?

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-9-15 00:44

在本港法例下，只可設定公眾範圍或禁區，而在設立之前，都必須刊憲，或者得到行政長官批准。並需要公開宣佈。「核心保安區」係禿鷹老作出黎既字，法律跟本冇俾警隊設立呢樣野既權利。

作者: MoiRhapsody 時間: 2011-9-15 00:46

對，等開完第三次會睇下個民主黨個o靚仔告唔告。

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-9-15 00:47

回復 17# chunsh

The cop does not sue anyone doesn't mean they have done the right thing. By stopping the students from getting into so-call invisible security zone, to me that doesn't sound right.

作者: chunsh 時間: 2011-9-15 06:07

本帖最後由 chunsh 於 2011-9-15 06:14 編輯

回復 chunsh

The cop does not sue anyone doesn't mean they have done the right thing. By stopping ...
fibbi 發表於 2011-9-15 00:47

doesn't sound right......so the cop didnt break any law, right?
also, since when and from which country of the cops need to get approve from the citizen regarding to the size of the security zone when some big 官員 visit their places?

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/)