🇲🇾 Book Exhibition 10/17-12/19 🇲🇾
The Invisible Future, Facing the Visible Past : Photobooks of Malaysia
🎉 Opening will be on this Saturday (10/17) 14:00-20:00, join us at Lightbox to see, taste and hear Malaysia.
-
Through a collection of 20 photobooks, 100 extended works and 3 events, this exhibition invites its audience to dive into the intricate histories and diverse cultures of Malaysia. Following the path mapped by curators, the audience will see the changing of Malaysian society and landscape over the centuries, the situations of its people after independence, and the concerns of contemporary Malaysian artists for their country. Curated by Malaysian artists Jeffery Lim and Bernice Chauly, this is the very first international photobook exhibition Lightbox Photo Library co-hosts.
In the mid-twentieth century, Malaysia broke free from the British colonization and began the journey of recollecting its identity. How did Malaysians view themselves? What roles did photography play in the process of exploring, reflecting and presenting? With travel photography of early western explorers, images taken from the perspective of colonizers, and photography as art, propaganda and historical documentation, how can we, under the complicated context of history and ethnicity, find a way to face the past and imagine a future? Or, is there a way?
To answer these questions and to re-create the Malaysia in their mind, our curators have strived to collect a total of 120 photobooks, 20 of which have been highlighted as the main works of this exhibition, complemented by introductory texts penned by the curators. The remaining 100 books will also be exhibited as extended reading materials. Moreover, according to the content of the photobooks, this exhibition includes introductions to the society and history of Malaysia to help the audience get a clearer picture.
Who are we? What are the stories of our land that have shaped the society we live in and the people we are today? These are the questions that haunt all who wish to re-construct their self-identity. No matter how well or little you know about Malaysia, we sincerely invite you to participate in this rare event, to learn more about the southern neighbor of Taiwan, and to embark on a journey of discovery of self and the past through the photobooks of Malaysia.
-
〖 About the book exhibition 〗
*Date: 2020/10/17-12/19
*Time: Every Tue-Sat 13:00-20:00 (except for 10/24)
*Venue: Lightbox Photo Library (19, Ln. 269, Sec. 3, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei)
*Curator: Jeffrey Lim(林猷進)、Bernice Chauly
-
〖 About the events 〗
🇲🇾 10/17 Sat. Opening day
*Time: 14:00-20:00
*Contents: Provide Malaysian snacks ,music and exhibition guide (for 1hr in Mandarin, please sign up to join.)
🇲🇾 10/17 Sat. Exhibition guide (in Mandarin)
*Time: 14:00-15:00
*Sign up: https://forms.gle/bNvggRXrijaak9JD6
We will reserve seats for those who signed up.
* The guide would be live broadcasted.
* Please wear a mask during the guide.
🇲🇾 11/14 Sat. Curator's talk (in English)
*Time: 14:30-17:00
*Speaker: Jeffrey Lim(林猷進)、Bernice Chauly
*Moderator: 鄭文琦
* The talk would be live broadcasted.
* Please wear a mask during the talk.
* We will announce more detailed informations later.
同時也有2部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過5,440的網紅Chris Quimbo,也在其Youtube影片中提到,Empty House Tour New Zealand Hey guys! This is it! I'm finally showing you my investment property here in New Zealand. This is an empty house tour. ...
「content on independence day」的推薦目錄:
- 關於content on independence day 在 Lightbox攝影圖書室 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於content on independence day 在 李怡 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於content on independence day 在 蕭叔叔英式英文學會 Uncle Siu's British English Club Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於content on independence day 在 Chris Quimbo Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於content on independence day 在 seanlje Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於content on independence day 在 80 Independence Day Social Media Post & Creatives ideas 的評價
- 關於content on independence day 在 Independence Day of India - Facebook 的評價
content on independence day 在 李怡 Facebook 的最佳解答
Don’t get overawed (Lee Yee)
On the day that the National Security Law was passed by the National People’s Congress, I got a message of a friend from afar: “Are you secure?” I answered without even giving it a thought: ”No one is secure in a secure country.”
When maximal authority of a country is realized, individual rights are so minimal that no one is secure. Even in China where the plebs would answer with a big NO, are people in power secure? Was Liu Shaoqi, the late Chairman of the People’s Republic of China persecuted to death during the Cultural Revolution, secure? In the past 70 years, have most of the people in power of different levels been secure in view of the miseries they have encountered? Was and is Jiang Zemin, the former General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party(CCP), secure? Is Xi Jinping secure?
The befalling of the National Security Law is likened to “the second handover of Hong Kong”. An online article points out “the difference between the first and second handover” is that “the people who resent the CCP in 2020 is countless times more than those in 1997, and in terms of reputation, conduct and calibre, the people who espouse the second handover in 2020 are not even comparable to those who espouse the first handover in 1997”. Another says that “Hong Kongers belonging to no country before handover used to live in peace and work with contentment”, and asks “where their homes are when they belong to a nation”? In China, even the movers and shakers evacuate their relatives by fair means or foul from their country to a strange place they call home in the West.
The Articles of the Hong Kong version of National Security Law was not announced until it took effect, so that Carrie Lam was unable to utter a word about the details of it on the day of implementation of the Law. Legislation as such is preposterous. The full text of it is awash with equivocal meanings of unfinished wordings, which is so jaw-dropping that even a layman would ask: What kind of legal document is that? Zhao Sile, a journalist from China, said online: “The Law is typically from China because the laws of China have always been ambiguous and ill-defined”. She continued, “How are they enforced? Arbitrary and flexible provisions are made by different administrative departments which then inflate in power unceasingly.”
Regarding the abovementioned, it is almost pointless to delve into every Article of it for clarifying under what circumstances does one offend and not offend the Law, and where the grey areas are. Take those dubbed the “four ringleaders of Hong Kong independence” and “gang of four that jeopardizes Hong Kong” by Chinese media as an example. While they are known to be opposed to Hong Kong independence and even anti-localist, and did not advocate the protest last year, China deems them to be guilty of all of the above by dismissing the actuality. Subsequently, some budding political groups disbanded in no time. However, if the CCP decides to recriminate, on no account can they escape. That being said, it is possible that China will sit on the issue of Hong Kong independence provisionally in an attempt to dilute the sanctions against it from overseas. With the arbitrariness and flexibility of laws of China and its enforcement, no one is secure, nor one is doomed to committing a crime. Falling into a trap is simply akin to running into a car accident.
Looking at the National Security Law, Hong Kongers, who are accustomed to living under the rule of law, will naturally get frightened and anxiety-ridden, and try to wash their hands of sensitive issues. They think they will stay secure by stopping short of slogans with content of “secession of state” or disbanding a political group. In reality, if the CCP wants to get you in trouble, it does not have to leverage the National Security Law. Manipulated by the CCP, the SAR government can do and will do whatever stipulated by the National Security Law. Is the Law retroactive? Wasn’t the disqualification sentence for Leung Chunghang and Yau Waiching, former Legislative Council members, retroactive? And the judge that brought in the verdict based on retroactivity was Andrew Cheung Kuinung, the next Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal to-be. Does it make sense to contemplate upon the situation differently before and after the enactment of the National Security Law?
Now that the CCP can do whatever it wants. Is the enactment of the National Security Law an unnecessary move? As Chinese officials said, the Law, like a sword dangling above Hong Kongers, is to get them overawed and frightened.
Scared? Surely. Yet, one should have been scared much earlier on. If one had been scared, one would have arranged for fleeing from Hong Kong. Those who choose to stay should not let fear take control of them.
I have always remembered what British writer Salman Rushdie wrote after September 11 attacks in 2001: “Amid the conflict between liberty and security, we should always opt to stand with liberty without remorse even though we make a wrong choice. How do we beat terrorism? Don’t get overawed and don’t let fear take control of you even though you are scared.”
The late U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” If we let fear take control of us, we give up liberty.
content on independence day 在 蕭叔叔英式英文學會 Uncle Siu's British English Club Facebook 的精選貼文
蕭叔叔短評被譽為「人生有呢種朋友不枉此生」的黃仁龍那十頁紙求情信
全文:
http://m.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20170220/s00001/1487583133001
(報章轉載錯漏不少,敬請留意)
I have known Mr Donald Tsang since 2005. As Secretary for Justice (SJ), I worked closely with Donald as Chief Executive (CE) between October 2005 and June 2012. In addition to official dealings, I consider Donald to be a good friend and someone I admire for his dedication to public service.
Donald's over 40 years of service and contribution to Hong Kong is a matter of public record. Others will speak to his key role in helping Hong Kong weather through stormy financial crises. Here I would refer to his significant contributions to the public based on my own personal experience particularly in the area of the rule of law in Hong Kong.
During my 7-year tenure as SJ, I had on numerous occasions tendered legal advice to Donald as CE. He would sometimes debate with me and test the basis of the advice; but he has never acted against such legal advice. This in itself is a remarkable attribute as the head of the HKSAR.
Donald always said to me the Governors he previously worked with, however headstrong, would always abide by the legal advice of the Attorney General, and it is important that the CE of the HKSAR should stay that way.
Congo Case
One of the most important tasks, if not the most important task, of the CE of HKSAR is to faithfully and effectively implement the principle of “one country, two systems.” The power of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) to interpret the Basic Law and its exercise have always been considered a major challenge to the post-1997 constitutional order.
During my tenure as SJ, the NPCSC interpreted the Basic Law once in 2011. That was upon the reference by the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) on the question of state immunity. The issue in the case is whether the People’s Republic of China’s doctrine of absolute immunity (under which no foreign state can be sued in the court at all) should be followed in Hong Kong. Prior to 1997, Hong Kong’s common law provided for restrictive immunity, where foreign states could be sued if the dispute arouse out of commercial transactions.
The HKSAR Government lost in the Court of First Instance and in the Court of Appeal. If the Government were to lose again in the CFA, it could stir up serious political and economic repercussions for China particularly vis-à-vis her African friends. National interest of China was at stake. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was understandably very concerned.
Immense political pressure mounted. There were suggestions that Beijing should not take any risk but should consider taking more definitive measures such as an interpretation of the Basic Law before the appeal was heard. If that were to happen, on the eve of the appeal hearing, the damage to judicial independence would not be less than an overriding post-judgment interpretation.
I cannot go into further details for confidentiality reasons. However, I can testify that Donald has been solid and staunch in endorsing my stance against any extra-judicial measure in view of its adverse impact on the rule of law.
Owing in no small part to Donald’s endorsement and resolve, the Central People’s Government (CPG) was content to trust the HKSAR Government and the CFA, and to leave the appeal to be heard by the highest court, despite grave risk and many conflicting views given by others. At the end, the Government won in the CFA by a majority of 3 to 2. The Court further referred the relevant Basic Law provisions to Beijing for interpretation, as required under Article 158 of the Basic Law, before pronouncing the final judgment. A huge constitutional crisis was warded off. The rule of law had prevailed.
Over this difficult episode, I know Donald had been under tremendous pressure. I remember often times he suffered from acute acid reflux before and after major discussions. Yet he stood firm throughout.
As CE, Donald had faithfully discharged the indispensable trust reposed by both the CPG and by Hong Kong. He had the courage to stand by what he believes to be right and the ability to address mutual concerns and to strengthen mutual understanding. He had performed well the crucial bridging role in the two-way process under “one country, two systems” at critical times.
Constitutional Reform
There was another important event in which Donald’s principled stance had been vital in achieving a favourable result for Hong Kong: constitutional reform.
Although no change could be made of the imminent 2017 CE election method due to the set-backs in 2016, during Donald’s tenure as CE, he has been made significant contributions toward moving Hong Kong closer to universal suffrage.
The first landmark was achieved, with tremendous efforts by the core team under Donald’s lead, when the NPCSC delivered its decision in December 2007 setting out “the timetable” and “road map” for universal suffrage in terms of the elections of CE and Legco.
Second, in 2010, the Government managed to secure Legco’s support to pass the 2012 constitutional reform package. Here, Donald had played a pivotal role, one perhaps not many are aware of.
Whether the 2012 reform package could be passed in 2010 was crucial to ensure “gradual and orderly progress” and that the next round (i.e. the intended goals of universal suffrage in electing CE in 2017) could be achieved.
In June 2010, the original government proposal was losing support and hope was vanishing for it to be passed at Legco. Time was running out. Whether to modify the package by incorporating a proposal of the Democratic Party (i.e. the additional 5 District Council Functional Constituency seats to be elected by over 3 million electorate, “the new DCFC election method”) appeared to be the lynchpin.
Without going into details again for confidentiality reasons, I can again testify that the make-or-break moment was when Donald made the timely and difficult decision to revise the package by incorporating the new DCFC election method. It was an agonizing decision for him as he had to override certain internal opposition and to risk personal credibility and trust before the CPG. As an insider, I know that decision was not a political manoeuvre but a selfless act for the sake of the long-term wellbeing of Hong Kong and the smooth transition toward universal suffrage.
Son of Hong Kong
Donald is truly a “son of Hong Kong” (香港仔). His genuine concern for the public good is most vividly demonstrated when Hong Kong was caught in crises of one kind of another.
Hong Kong went through attacks of avian flu and swine flu. Donald tirelessly headed the cross-bureau task forces and chaired long and intensive meetings. I remember more than once Donald being caught in very heated debates with colleagues, pushing them to the limit to mobilize maximum resources and manpower, in order to give the public maximum protection against these outbreaks. He would grill colleagues over thorny issues such as requisitioning hotels as places of quarantine, not satisfied with the usual civil service response of reluctance, as lives of many were at stake.
Over the Manila hostage incident in August 2010, Donald vigorously pressed the President of the Philippines for full investigation, joining the victims’ families and the rest of Hong Kong to cry for justice, although his action raised eyebrows as foreign affairs strictly is a matter of the CPG under Article 13 of the Basic Law.
Donald had a strong concern for young people. During my tenure, exceptionally I was commissioned to chair a Steering Committee to combat drug abuse by youth. The public might not realize this initiative in fact came from Donald. He was deeply concerned and alarmed by the reports reflecting the seriousness of the problem. He was determined to tackle the problem pro-actively. The Steering Committee was unprecedented, involving concerted and strategic efforts of different departments and bureaus. More importantly, Donald was instrumental in putting in substantial and sustainable resources to strengthen the efforts. The figures of reported drug abusers, particularly among young abusers, have seen significant decline in the past few years.
Other contributions on the rule of law
There was no shortage of controversial cases involving judicial reviews and fundamental human rights. Amidst other voices and political pressure, Donald had fully taken on board the legal position that the Government has a positive duty to protect such rights, including taking reasonable and appropriate measures to enable lawful demonstrations to take place peacefully.
Further, Donald also readily took on my advice regarding procedural fairness in handling Government businesses with quasi-judicial element such as administrative appeals.
Donald truly believes in judicial independence. He assured me repeatedly the independent and internationally renowned Judiciary in the HKSAR is our pride and the cornerstone of our success. His personal commitment to this cause is manifested in his positive response in acceding to many recommendations of the Mason Report endorsed by the Standing Committee on Judicial Salaries and Conditions of Service.
Furthermore, his conviction on the importance of the law as Hong Kong’s assets was amply manifested in his exceptional support in the development of Hong Kong’s capacity as an international arbitration centre. Donald was very understanding on the need of expansion on this front and had put in personal efforts to make it happen. He was instrumental in enabling resources are in place to secure additional space for the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, and to procure the arbitration arm of the International Chamber of Commerce and the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission to set up regional offices in Hong Kong.
A fair man who has given much to the public
Before joining the Government, I was an Election Committee member of the Legal Subsector elected on the same ticket as Ms Audrey Eu, Mr Alan Leong and other vocal barristers. In that capacity, in 2005, I first met Donald in an election forum where I questioned him harshly and criticised the Government’s earlier attitude over certain rule of law issues. Instead of bearing any grudge, in the late summer of 2005, Donald invited me to take up the post as SJ, assuring me that he would give me full support in upholding the rule of law in Hong Kong. That quality of fairness in Donald and that personal assurance to me have never slackened in the following 7 years in which I served in his cabinet.
As CE of the HKSAR, Donald had truly poured himself out. I strongly believe his significant contributions to Hong Kong in the past over 4 decades should be properly recognized.
Dated the 20th day of Februray 2017.
Wong Yan Lung SC
- See more at: http://m.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20170220/s00001/1487583133001#sthash.0nwGN3QA.dpuf
content on independence day 在 Chris Quimbo Youtube 的精選貼文
Empty House Tour New Zealand
Hey guys! This is it! I'm finally showing you my investment property here in New Zealand. This is an empty house tour. I've always wanted to do one of these and now I have the opportunity. Sorry again for the quality of the video. I remember that week very well, everything happened all at once; settlement day, changing the roof, showing potential tenants, and finally moving in the tenants. But still very grateful for everything :)
▶︎SUBSCRIBE!
http://bit.ly/2bZX2J4
▶︎CHECK OUT MY TRAVEL PHOTOS ON INSTAGRAM: @chrisquimbo
please help me get to 20k!
My Youtube gear:
Iphone 8plus
Velbon Tripod
Canon G7X Mark 2
Post production:
Mac Air (Final Cut Pro)
If you want to create content, I say do it. Do it now, do it today. It doesn’t have to be for anyone, do it for yourself.
Music:
https://soundcloud.com/ehrling
Kevin MacLeod. Available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b.... Download link: https://incompetech.com/music/royalty…
content on independence day 在 seanlje Youtube 的最讚貼文
Selamat Menyambut Ulang Tahun Hari Kemerdekaan Ke-57!
Thanks Instill Films for helping out: http://www.youtube.com/user/instillfilms
and thanks to those who were so sporting to be interviewed. It was a lot of fun, even for myself.
____
What is National Day?
Definition: Designated date on which celebrations mark the nationhood of a nation or non-sovereign country, which nationhood can be symbolized by the date of independence.
Who came up with the Negaraku Song?
The tune was originally used as the state anthem of Perak, which was adopted from a popular French melody titled "La Rosalie" composed by the lyricist Pierre-Jean de Béranger.
How many times did Mahathir shout Merdeka in 1957?
First of all, that was a trick question... it was Tunku Abdul Rahman. Not Mahathir, nor Najib. and he shouted 7 times.
How many points does the star have in our flag? and how many stripes?
Number of points the star and stripes are both 14. Representing 13 states and Federal Government. The 14-pointed star symbolises the unity of the 13 states with the Federal Government. The stripes all have equal width.
What is the name of our flag?
Jalur – A Malay word meaning a band or stripe of colour. The 14 parallel red and white stripes symbolise a common mission, a common direction and a virtuous path followed by the peoples of all states regardless of creed, race and religion.
Gemilang – A Malay word meaning bright, brilliant, resplendent or excellent.
Jalur Gemilang represents the excellence of the peoples and the nation of Malaysia in every field, be it at national or international level. Jalur Gemilang symbolises a nation and peoples who are hard-working, patriotic, strong, courageous and prepared to sacrifice for the race, nation and religion.
How many prime minister was there before Najib came into position?
Answer is 5. Najib is the 6th Prime Minister.
How many states in Malaysia?
13.
_____
*This content was based on true responses*
Know Malaysia, Love Malaysia, Be a true Malaysian.
_____
Find me here:
http://www.facebook.com/seanlje
http://www.twitter.com/seanlje
http://www.instagram.com/seanlje
content on independence day 在 Independence Day of India - Facebook 的推薦與評價
Independence Day of India. 4890 likes. Join us in the celebration of 15th August, 2022 - the 76th Independence Day of India: https://knowin. ... <看更多>
content on independence day 在 80 Independence Day Social Media Post & Creatives ideas 的推薦與評價
... independence day greetings, happy independence day, independence day ... create Unique Independence Day Wish with a relevant content and appropriate graphics. ... <看更多>