.
電影主角
Photo: 黑雨舍
Translation: @benkongenglish
.
觀眾總默默地向主角靠近
電影也好 各類戲劇也好
我們內心都會加入主角的陣營
希望主角獲勝 或是成功 或是完美結局
.
有時候主角是盜賊 或是身障者
有時候是妖怪 或是傻子 窮人
意味著主角不是正義
也不是健全 美貌 才能 財富
.
我反覆思量
得人心的主角 是善良和愛
.
The audience usually root for the lead character be it movie or any kind of drama.
We usually hope the main character either wins, succeeds or has a perfect ending.
.
Sometimes the main role is a thief or a person with disability.
Sometimes he is even a monster, a dumbhead or a poor person.
He may not always be righteous, able-bodied, pretty, wealthy or of high calibre
.
I gave it much thoughts:
The common grounds of them are love and kindness
同時也有1部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過9,330的網紅香港人在檳城Jason,也在其Youtube影片中提到,又有wall painting 又有公仔 打卡唔錯 走佬去馬拉 第8集 香港人在檳城 https://viu.tv/encore/pick-me-up-to-malaysia-full-version/pick-me-up-to-malaysia-full-versione8heung-gong-...
common grounds 在 外交部 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ROC(Taiwan) Facebook 的最佳解答
【雲林 #土豆鳥🐦飛入 #愛爾蘭🇮🇪】
不要再戰 #香菜 了🌿
來點香蔥吧❗
試試涮嘴爽口的雲林花生 🥜
首批雲林香蔥花生
年假期間成功進軍愛爾蘭市場
#台灣 高品質農產品
踏出進入歐盟的第一步 🐾
原來花生出口的背後
有個小故事 🧐
愛爾蘭國鳥 #小辮鴴 Northern Lapwing
其實有個台灣味的暱稱 👉土豆鳥
因為部分族群會長途飛到台灣避寒
花生田裡常能見到牠們的蹤影
雲林堪稱愛爾蘭國鳥的第二個故鄉呢❗
而且呢
#愛爾蘭黑啤酒 #Guinness 🍻&威士忌🥃➕ 花生🥜
堪稱好絕配 💕
外粉們不妨也一試吧⁉
同場加映
雙邊貿易背後的推手▶ Taiwan in Ireland 👏👏
專業賞鳥的要來這裡▶ 中華鳥會 Taiwan Wild Bird Federation
#香菜跟香蔥其實都喜翻
#喝酒不上班上班不喝酒
Did you know that the #NorthernLapwing, a common sight in the peanut fields of #Yunlin in #Taiwan, is also the national bird of #Ireland? The birds visit Taiwan from November to March each year, while in Ireland you can see them all year round.
In the Irish language the bird is named #pilibín (or “little Phillip”) due to its apparent resemblance to King Phillip II of Spain, with a feather in his cap, while in Taiwan, due to its haunting grounds, it is named the “peanut bird” or “thôo-tāu tsiáu-á.” It seems the Irish have an appetite for Taiwanese peanuts in common with the birds, as a first shipment of Taiwanese shallot peanuts from Yunlin cleared customs in #Dublin on the first day of the #LunarNewYear. Hopefully this will allow Taiwanese farmers to gain a foothold in the Irish and #EU markets!
There's nothing better than some Yunlin shallot peanuts as a bar snack while you're sipping your Guinness!
#Birding
common grounds 在 Facebook 的最佳解答
(轉)
【有關司法機構被官營媒體攻擊的聲明】
《人民日報》於2020年12月27日發表一篇抨擊香港法院在一宗涉及知名人士的案件中批准被告人保釋的評論文章,而文章發表的時候該獲准保釋的決定已進入上訴程序,我們就此表示嚴重關注。文章攻擊法院的判決,並形容《蘋果日報》創辦人黎智英「惡名昭彰,極度危險」,以及是「亂港禍首」。該報斷言在黎智英案中,不准保釋須是前設的常規,並要求司法機構「作出正確選擇」。文章又認為已經有足夠證據顯示黎智英已觸犯國安法第55條,該條訂明某些案件可以移交中國大陸審訊。當上訴委員會將於2020年12月31日就政府申請上訴許可召開聆訊,由國家政權控制和營運的報章刊登該篇評論文章,令人尤其擔心及被視為是試圖干預我們獨立的司法機關的程序公義。
作為致力守護長久以來珍而重之的法治和司法獨立的法律執業者,我們認為有責任提出以下關注,並以個人名義僅此聲明:
1、 官營媒體對司法機關毫無基礎的攻擊應當停止
在數位親建制人士及官方控制和營運的媒體 - 包括《文匯報》及《大公報》- 要求「司法改革」及嘲諷「黃官」的日益壓力下,出現上述評論文章,我們深表憂慮。我們注意到司法機構自今年9月以來,已就對其日趨激烈的攻擊發表了四份聲明。
誠然,公眾有權討論及評論法院的裁決及其根據的事實及法律,惟討論不應流於憑空論斷、政治抹黑,或企圖向法院就某些案件的裁決施加壓力,否則公眾對司法機構的聲譽、專業和獨立勢必受到嚴重破壞。特別是《人民日報》刊登的評論文章,會被視為明顯地向法院將要審理的案件施加壓力,此舉可以是違反審理中的案件不應評論的原則,以及有損公平審訊。這些攻擊應當立即停止。
我們亦呼籲律政司採取行動,維護司法機構免受官方控制或營運的媒體作出毫無基礎和不實指控。正如高浩文法官在其判詞中指出,「在普通法司法管轄區,例如香港,傳統上法官和司法機構是不會公開地就針對其裁決和個人而作出的不公平和不適當的批評為自己辯護,而傳統上負責律政的官員則有責任反駁錯誤的指控,以維護司法機構和個別法官。」
2、 公平審訊及無罪假定
不論如何解讀,香港特區政府有法律責任保護每一位香港居民的基本權利不受侵犯,包括公平審訊的權利。我們質疑一旦涉嫌觸犯國安法第55條下,該等權利是否仍然受到保障。理由有兩方面:第一,我們質疑中國大陸在刑事審訊的程序中,對公平審訊是否有足夠的保障,那是由於中國尚未落實《公民與政治權利國際公約》,這亦是長久以來為人詬病。第二,12名香港居民於2020年12月28日在深圳鹽田法院受審的案件,沒有公開審訊,他們亦沒有權選擇他們委託的法律代表,令人質疑香港特區政府有否履行其法律責任。
上述關注,反映國安法無法為被告人提供足夠的基本人權保障,並在法律上存在很多不確定性。正如英國最高法院院長賓漢(Lord Bingham)在其著作《The Rule of Law》中說明,法治的核心是在一個地方裡,所有不論屬公共或私人的個人和機構,都必須受法律的約束及保障,而法律必須是公開和預先頒佈,以及由法院公開執行。因此,我們促請有關當局嚴格遵守法治原則,自我約束,以及謹慎運用國安法賦予的權力。
帝理邁
林洋鋐
彭皓昕
蔡頴德
黃耀初
2020年12月30日
【Statement on Continuous Attacks on the Judiciary and
Art. 55 of the National Security Law】
We note with grave concern that on 27 December 2020, l the People’s Daily published anr editorial piece criticizing a decision in respect of a bail application that is currently subject to an ongoing appeal. In attacking the judicial decisions in Apple Daily founder, Mr Jimmy Lai Chee-yin’s case, the People’s Daily has labelled him as a “notorious and extremely dangerous” and an “insurgent”. It added that the presumption against bail should be the norm in cases such as Lai’s and urged the judiciary to “make the right decision”. The commentary further claimed that there were sufficient grounds in Mr Lai’s case for invoking Article 55 of the National Security Law (NSL) - which allows certain cases to be transferred to Mainland China for trial. This type of commentary appearing in a newspaper run/controlled by the Central Government, when the Appeals Committee would soon be hearing the Hong Kong Government’s application for leave to appeal on 31 December 2020, is particularly worrying and borders on an attempt to interfere with the due administration of justice by Hong Kong’s independent judiciary.
We, the undersigned, in our personal capacity and as lawyers committed to safeguarding the Rule of Law and the independence of judiciary, we feel duty bound to draw attention to the following matters:
(1) Unfounded attacks against the judiciary by state-run/controlled media should cease
The above-mentioned commentary was made amid intensifying calls for “judicial reform” and deriding “yellow judges” from various pro-establishment figures and state-run/controlled media, including Wen Wei Po and Tai Kung Po. To that end, we note that the judiciary has had to issue a total of four statements since September this year, in light of the intensifying attacks mounted against it.
Whilst members of the public have the right to discuss and comment on court rulings for reasons grounded on fact or law, such discussion should not cross into bare assertions, imputations of political bias, or attempts to put pressure on the Judiciary to decide specific cases in a particular manner. Otherwise, public confidence in the integrity, professionalism and independence of the judiciary would be seriously undermined. Notably, the commentary published by People’s Daily, could be perceived as putting pressure on the judiciary to decide a pending case in a particular manner, which breaches the sub judice rule and could prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial. These attacks should cease immediately.
We also call on the Secretary of Justice to take action to defend the Judiciary against unwarranted accusations led by state-run/controlled media. As Judge Russell Coleman noted in his judgment, “it has been the traditional view that Judges and the Judiciary do not speak out in defence of their decisions or to defend themselves against unfair and inappropriate criticism [...] in common law jurisdictions like Hong Kong, it was the tradition that the minister responsible for the administration of justice has the duty of defending the Judiciary or individual Judges against wrong accusations”.
(2) Concerns about fair trial and presumption of innocence
The Hong Kong Government has the legal obligation to protect any Hong Kong residents, whose rendition is sought, from violation of his/her fundamental and non-derogable rights, including the right to fair trial. We question whether such rights can be guaranteed upon invoking of Article 55 of the NSL. The reason is two-folded. First, we question whether China has adequate protection on the right to fair trial during the criminal process, as mainland China has not ratified the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and has been long criticised on such. Second, the fact that the 12 Hong Kong residents who stood trial at Shenzhen Yantian People’s Court on 28 December 2020 were denied the right to open trial and the right to appoint lawyers of their choice, casts considerable doubt on whether the Hong Kong Government can fulfil its legal obligation.
These concerns reflect that the NSL lacks adequate protections to safeguard an accused’s fundamental human rights and lacks legal certainty. As Lord Bingham wrote in his book, The Rule of Law, at the core of the rule of law is the notion “that all persons and authorities within the state, whether public or private, should be bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly and prospectively promulgated and publicly administered in the courts”. Accordingly, we urge the authorities to uphold strict adherence to the rule of law and exercise restraint and caution in invoking its power under the NSL.
Mark Daly
Michelle Tsoi Wing Tak
Kenneth Lam
Davyd Wong
Janet Pang Ho Yan
Dated this 30 December 2020
common grounds 在 香港人在檳城Jason Youtube 的最讚貼文
又有wall painting 又有公仔 打卡唔錯
走佬去馬拉 第8集 香港人在檳城
https://viu.tv/encore/pick-me-up-to-malaysia-full-version/pick-me-up-to-malaysia-full-versione8heung-gong-yan-joi-sing
蘋果日報專訪
https://hk.lifestyle.appledaily.com/lifestyle/realtime/article/20190828/59979215
記得訂閱我的頻道
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCs8Pg2zqUIcOQKCMLLersA
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
檳城生活篇
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNua8e_-hKz_GGTZ2LMjRoHPYY1KDhwK-
移居檳城小貼示
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNua8e_-hKz9xqTE3E8Nvq52_efsIM1fu
Follow me on ??????
香港人在檳城 Facebook Page
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/HKPenang
Instagram : https://www.instagram.com/hongkonger_in_penang
Facebook close group - 香港人在檳城交流區
https://www.facebook.com/groups/920270138008910/
Email : hkinpenang@gmail.com
拍攝工具⬇︎
相機:DJI Osmo Pocket, Iphone 8 plus
航拍機:DJI Mavic Air
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9af63/9af633f408ca095dba08825c76ed19a5370c6fbd" alt="post-title"
common grounds 在 Common Grounds - 首頁| Facebook 的推薦與評價
Common Grounds Coffee House and Cafe is one-of-a-kind in Lexington, Kentucky and we've been in business for over 20 years. ... <看更多>