莫乃光's 的頭像

資深I.T.人,現任立法會議員。

可惡!讓我翻牆出去說,中國網絡開放自由!

上週,美國國務卿希拉莉在華盛頓哥倫比亞特區新聞博物館(Newseum),就互聯網自由發表演說(註一至三),其演說最重要的政治涵義,就是將「互聯網自由」定為一項基本的外交目標。希拉莉選擇這個新聞博物館發表演說,有其獨特的重要性:這個博物館是為了紀念新聞自由這項在美國被視為基本自由而設。按美國的傳統,但凡是重要的政治演說,必定有具影響力的人士出席,以今次為例,理查德‧盧格(Richard Lugar)和喬‧利伯曼(Joe Lieberman)兩位專責外交事務的資深參議員及很多外國的外交使團代表均有出席。

對於很多一直關注互聯網的發展,尤其是網上言論自由的人來說,希拉莉的演說其實沒太多新意,不過她在演說中點名批評中國、突尼斯、鳥茲別克斯坦、越南和埃及等國,收緊網絡和資料審查,例如博客、電郵、社交網絡以致流動電話短訊都列入要受審查的目標,繼而表明美國政府的立場,認為自由地表達言論是互聯網上的基本權利,批評這些政府的行為,違反《世界人權宣言》中人們有權「不受疆界限制並透過各種媒界尋找、接收和傳播信息和思想」。

長篇大論了一輪背景以後,希拉莉演說的重點,是美國政府會與商界、學者和非政府組織合作,協助各國的基層組織投入數碼年代,以及開發新的工具,讓使用者避開審查而能自由地表達意見,包括提供資金!簡單來說,中國政府等有防火長城,美國就協助為網民建「過牆梯」讓他們翻牆。其實,即使如此,也沒有什麼大不了。過去幾十年來美國政府資助營運美國之音電台,用短波向極權國家發訊息一樣,今天只不過將同樣的做法運用到互聯網上而已!

美國國務院為了希拉莉這次演說,邀請了多位來自中國、哥倫比亞、伊朗、黎巴嫩和摩爾多瓦等國的博客和社會運動的活躍人士,甚至有一位來自香港的大學生,出席是次演講。這些有機會出席是次演說的嘉賓,除了能與希拉莉拍照留念,親睹美國政客風采外,參與其中的一位中國著名博客安替(@mranti)在Twitter寫:「令人吃驚的事情:希拉里昨天45分鐘演說沒有用提詞器。提詞器在兩邊,但沒打開。」

在地球另一邊的中國,多位著名的博客,包括藝術家艾未未(@aiww)、網絡作家北風(@wenyunchao)和人民記者佐拉(@zuola, 周曙光),甚至設立反CNN網站的饒謹等,也獲邀到美國駐京大使館、和上海及廣州的領事館觀看直播及參與討論,了解希拉莉這次的演說。佐拉後來也在他的網誌(註四)寫出這一代中國網民的心聲:「中國國情蠻悲哀的:民眾很難透過媒體和公民社會去跟自己的政府溝通,還要借助予美國才能向政府傳遞想法 。」

至於對美國懷有敵意、自稱「自發建立揭露西方媒體不客觀報道的非政府網站」anti-cnn.com創辦人饒謹,會後在他的網誌上寫道(註五),他在會上要求美國官員解釋《全球最大的黑客集團是美國國家安全局僱用》之報導(註六),又質疑美國把Google事件提升至外交層面,和希拉莉的演說,只會令「中國人民反感」,而中國人民「不容外國把他們的思想加於我國頭上」。佐拉也只好在Twitter批評饒謹:「(饒謹的)問題的前提都是假設的,沒有任何具體事實依據」,筆者也只能說,若說西方媒體「不客觀」,饒謹這類典型中國憤青何嘗客觀?他有機會與美國政府對話,試問他自己的政府肯理會自己的人民嗎?

至於中國政府,顯然已處於被動位置除了例行公事地批評美國的指控「違背事實」,並且睜著眼講大話地說中國的互聯網是開放、中國憲法保護公民的言論自由外,又以中國獨特的國情和文化來開脫外,更甚者,就是以受害人姿態,指中國是被黑客針對最多的國家,博取同情分。

比較具創意的反擊論點,卻來自內地英文《環球時報》一月廿二日的一篇文章(註七),指現時美國和西方在網上的資訊,對不遵從它們的國家不利,而這些被不公平對待的國家,卻無法製造足夠的資訊量,與西方國家較「量」。作者以此作結,指現時不受限制的資訊流動是單方面和違反民主、製造壟斷的行為,因而其它國家過濾這些資訊是無可厚非之餘,甚至是保護這些國家的政治穩定云云。

這種論點明顯源自中外貿易戰和反對保護主義思維,但其邏輯實在獨到,筆者自問不懂得反駁。但幸好地,筆者的朋友,在美國雪城大學任教電訊與媒體政策的穆烈教授(Milton Mueller)卻一語道破當中破綻:此說若用於非洲的小國,或許還勉強說得通,但在中國而言,語言差異優勢大加上市場龐大,這種說法明顯是以民族主義和對抗外敵為藉口,企國為政府審查互聯網而塗脂抹粉,令人厭惡。很可惜,在中國經濟實力日强之際,當權者不肯還政於民,只顧鞏固政權,不斷重新定義其審查網絡,是所謂「具中國特色」的「自由開放的互聯網」。香港人對此早已瞭如指掌,就如我們近期天天在聽的「中國特色的民主普選」一樣。

唯一令我們稍為樂觀的,也許來自大陸翻牆網民的雪亮眼晴和他們的點點心聲,反映著他們在極權下的勇氣和良知:

[email protected] 廣播裡在播報關於希拉莉的新聞:“中國的互聯網是開放的,中國憲法保護公民言論自由。” 鳴鳴鳴,我是在哪裡呀? 」

[email protected] 真想翻牆出去告訴他們美國佬,我們中國網絡很開放很自由,不需要他們橫加指責。討厭! 」
註三:Internet Freedom: Secretary Clinton Delivers Major Policy Address (Video)
註二:克林頓國務卿對於互聯網自由的講話 (美官方中文翻譯)
註一:Secretary of State Clinton on Internet Freedom (English original)

所有評論

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 09:32

.........古有焚書, 今有封網和「綠壩」...we are back to the old days.

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 09:39

....Next step 坑儒????

old cat - 2010年01月26日 10:21

互聯網的出現,是對極權者的最大威脅,慶幸互聯網在中國已經生了根,對極權者而言是打開了的'pandora's box',互聯網以從前千倍的速度傳遞資訊,過去的控制傳媒,國家宣傳機器通通失效,所以限制互聯網上的自由在多行不義的黑社會主義國家是必然的國策,但國民有機會接觸外面世界之後,肯定會與'普世價值'接軋,我相信那些過時的黨八股在人民心中已沒有市場,耐心等待[網絡革命],[網絡起義]吧

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 10:35

和大陸網民交談多了, 我反而比以前樂觀, 大陸甚至90後的開明份子之多, 以前也想不到

PBrega - 2010年01月26日 10:38

A free sex without condom, that is internet. You may put on a condom, but not as good as without it. Ha! Ha! It is not the freedom of information that make those jerks scared, it is the truth that posts the biggest threat to them.

old cat - 2010年01月26日 10:45

eddie31兄, 我也有同類似經驗得出上述結論

余一斤 - 2010年01月26日 10:49

大陸惡搞視頻,網癮戰爭,說出網民心聲

http://v.ku6.com/show/RV6JSBe7Joja_myZ.html

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 10:54

......[old cat, eddie31 大陸甚至90後的開明份子之多, 以前也想不到]
Do you think they are trying to impress us about how well informed they are? Also the one you are in touch are likely the more educated ones up in the mainland.
When the US landed on the moon, I actually received mail from my relatives from the mainland telling me the news. In those time these subjects were taboo indeed. I did not know what to say to them at all.

C Mok - 2010年01月26日 11:01

小弟以為以科技破圍牆的方案最為實際,意即GOOGLE暫時退出中國,發展跨牆技術,可能須要一點時間,到成功的時間,內地自然會把百度,搜狐等完全開放,因為已禁不可禁。

liuyun. - 2010年01月26日 11:17

獨立中文筆會、維權網、參與、新世紀新聞、民生觀察5個網站昨日發表聯合聲明,對「這種以卑劣手段攻擊網站,侵犯網絡自由與言論自由,損害公民發布與獲取信息權利的違法行徑,表示強烈譴責與嚴正警告。」
5維權網遭黑客攻擊 料「有組織行為」

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 11:17

在內地上網, 煩人程度未試過好難想像, 網吧固然重點監控, 內地網民要登記身份證港人也要登記回鄉卡, 再要網吧中央系統統一管制放線. qq全天候監控已經唔係新聞.如果教育程度高的一群已慣於翻牆, 已經係一大進步, 起碼知同珍惜資訊自由

liuyun. - 2010年01月26日 11:17

old cat - 2010年01月26日 11:21

Daniel,是,我是從較年青,城市工作朋友(多是大專程度)得出這印象,但互聯網是年青人為主已是普世現象

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 11:29

遠不只是大城市, 二三線地區也然

亞難 - 2010年01月26日 11:32

中共如把Internet限制到為有中國社會特色的Intranet,那便逃不出柏楊講的醬缸文化,罪過!

浮世曲 - 2010年01月26日 13:44

一黨專政下, 要保持政權穩定, 必須要有一班聽聽話話的鵪鶉愚民, 外間"妖言"會破壞和諧, 不可被其取得也! 這是死症, 沒有政治改革, 短期難言變!

莫乃光 - 2010年01月26日 13:45

Someone asked me in Facebook, how to climb over the GFW in China. Here are some references.

网络翻墙方法搜集帖
TOR Project

GFW climber -- a new Olympic sport :)

liuyun. - 2010年01月26日 13:47

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 14:06

used to be proxy servers, but it is a race against the authority before getting blocked

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 15:04

I really like PBrega's remark about internet; and it looks like many people want free sex without condom; or sex to their desire's content. Let's not forget that while the majority of people enjoy 'proper sex', a small number of av-infected individuals can turn the joy around ... into a lot bitterness!

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 16:36

SWan, I guess you misread PB's statement to another side

如我是羅友恆 - 2010年01月26日 16:43

中共是人類最偉大的政府, 最偉大的發明,最偉大的領導人。 互聯網自由是美帝的工具; 我們要死保家園,趕美帝文化屠殺。

尼高 - 2010年01月26日 16:45

哈哈!

PCYK - 2010年01月26日 16:46

黨怕的是網絡快速而又可以一呼萬應的功能, 而不單是因為害怕甚麼色情(搵鬼信), 侵害幼小心靈, 甚至事物真相, 因為每日由海外歸國的人, 極少會不在海外時大量收取了自由資訊和真相(或稱事物的另一面).
黨怕的是在網絡上你很容易便知道自己的想法, 原來是有很多同路人, 這種呼應, 是專政者的死敵.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 16:48

Should we impose body check for health suspects? "No No, it violates our human rights; it violates our right of privacy ..." Trust me, not all men are equal. There are always bad guys on the street; worse, they dress like real nice people and talk like pro. "Freedom of Speech. Peace for All. Let's Build a New World without Boundaries...." I like these slogans but I also have to admit the dark force is in the middle.

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 16:52

one good question to SWan : do you want the same censorship standard as seen in the PRC to be imposed in Hong Kong?

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 16:57

Do you want health suspects unchecked in a population of 1.3 billion, in which the mindsets and beliefs and cultures can be vastly different?

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 16:59

Maybe I haven't made myself clear: Do you want the same net censorship standard as seen in the mainland to be imposed in HK, i.e. you and your children, friends are in the same situation as mainland netizens?

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:03

No. And that is PRC. They have their own belief and agenda on how to run the country to their best interests. It may be over rigid, but is not difficult to see their intention behind.

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 17:05

"oh yeah, I want the greater good for my fellow citizens, and no, me and my closet friends and relatives dont want to share this greater good", thanks

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 17:09

.....I mentioned before about the launch of intranet - a big one indeed for China or even province by province with million and million of switches/routers/relay station
[亞難 中共如把Internet限制到為有中國社會特色的Intranet]

yw1028 - 2010年01月26日 17:14

在安替博客(2009年1月20日)文章: [中国新闻教育的信仰危机]的讀者評論總共有15個, 其中兩個頗有意思的 .
其一:
[ 8楼 Ocean 评论时间: 2009-01-23 05:50:33
不要总是和美国比,只要是意识形态的东西,都是具有阶级属性的。作为新闻除了报到事情真相之外,主要的还是一个价值导向的作用,而你的这个价值导向本来就应该是为这个社会统治阶级的意识服务的,这个才是新闻的归属。如果都在单纯的追求自由,其实不就是写新闻的人想把自己的意识传递给读者,而当他自己想传递的意识与社会占统治地位的意识不符合时,就觉得是不自由不公平。这个本来就是一种力量的博弈和均衡,往往最后总是统治地位的意识是胜利的。]
其二:
[ 15楼 与子相悦 评论时间: 2009-05-26 05:24:01
我是三流大学老师,常常面对被洗了十几年脑的学生和被洗了几十年脑的老师.]

一位強調新聞的價值導向和作用,为这个社会统治阶级的意识服务的. 這是正統中共文宣綱領表達. 另一位則表達了一個新聞業教師的旡奈慼.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:14

"Rome was not built in a day." Read our history as it provides much guidance. Mr. Lam's commentary today is well-balanced; it also fits his Chinese name well - move and stop at the right time; but eventually we aim to progress!

PCYK - 2010年01月26日 17:17

我係為你好!
我都唔想管你架, 如果你有唔使我管嘅水平, 咁我就唔會管你啦.
不過我話你係有中國特色嘅人, 所以一定要管.
我係為你好!

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 17:18

it is easy to say greater good, while you would try everything to shield your closet friends and relatives from it and dont want to share the consequence of this "greater good". Again, that said it all. Again, thanks.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:21

Who has said "Let a few get rich first" ? Defintely not me.

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 17:23

....It is not even outlandish compared with 焚書坑儒. Also I see a lot of market for regimes in need of this control of info'.
If I were the 公安, I will start off setting up a huge government department with US$ billion annual budget.
Software side - getting rid of tcp/ip in favor of a new protocol (一黨政權穩定的 protocol ).
Hardware side - new computers (huge economic payoff on jobs) , more ID control (like 登記身份證港人也要登記回鄉卡).....more stringent control of 網吧 throughout the nation

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 17:24

and who said China needs to close the rich and poor gap? No my own words either

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:28

But that is reality! Show me the heaven on earth!

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 17:30

.....With 5000 software engineers (in this age of glut of U grads), getting a replacement of tcp/ip in favor of one that can be controlled by 公安 is within reach.
I can tell you all that there is no limit of the willpower of 一黨專政

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 17:31

"heaven on earth" is entirely another matter than the net censorship in real life. Not really convincing when you ask other people to sacrifice for the "greater good" but you dont want to do the same sacrifice. End of argument.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:32

Client side - use a finger-print-proof/enabled non-Window app that has no support for non-unicode.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:36

That is the point - each government has her own belief/philosophy on how to run their country/region! Each government tries to provide the HCF (or greater) good to all according to their belief.

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 17:37

.....It is a new type of warfare and arms race.

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 17:39

....[SWan Client side - use a finger-print-proof/enabled non-Window app]
I see a lot of economic activities and business opportunities indeed

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:40

... sorry, should be "... no support for non-GB2312" character encoding.

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:42

Glad to see many sharp biz minds amid white hot political debate.

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 17:45

Either you really shall have no share in this "greater good"(another nationality? I dont know), or you forget the legal status of this city, which will bind you along to this "greater good" should it happens, despite you like it or not

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:48

I still believe in "One Country Two System".

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 17:48

Two Systems

eddie31 - 2010年01月26日 18:08

to SWan, if that is your "business" idea, I feel really sorry for you( i know full well what non-GB2312 support implies)

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 18:14

I am not totally interested in business ideas; but the idea of unilaterally promoting free sex (sorry, freedom on the net) is not my cup of tea.

Daniel - 2010年01月26日 18:15

....[no support for non-GB2312] means only scrambling of simplified Chinese? That does not scramble traditional Chinese and English (correct me if I am wrong). Not good enough for 公安

S

SWan - 2010年01月26日 18:23

The non-support is indeed a very low barrier - easy to work around, but should require a big hurdle to many. In fact, if the client app is controlled by the central government, the restrictions and hidden monitoring can be beyond our imaginations.

yw1028 - 2010年01月26日 19:52

@如我是羅友恆,
莫非你真係籮柚痕不是 ?

liuyun. - 2010年01月27日 12:22

但這次辯論在中國民間,尤其是年輕線民中產生的影響卻不容低估。美國在他們的心目中重新占上了道德制高點,而中國政府卻顯得有點理屈氣短、窮於招架。一位網友在聽完希拉蕊演講後寫道:“從洛磯山到日本海,一幅橫貫大平洋的網路鐵幕已經降落下來。在它的後面,是所有渴望網路自由的中國線民。”另一位網友寫道:“1992年,克林頓總統提出資訊公路計畫,造就了今天的互聯網。2010年,他老婆希拉蕊•克林頓開始解決互聯網自由問題。感謝這一家子。要記住這個老太太,也許她的這次演講將改變互聯網。”

中美網路自由之爭

liuyun. - 2010年01月27日 12:26

漫畫:方濱興說:美國令網路資訊安全自由流動面臨危險 (網友李小乖)

scc - 2010年01月27日 12:39

CNN - U.S. enables Chinese hacking of Google
(CNN) -- Google made headlines when it went public with the fact that Chinese hackers had penetrated some of its services, such as Gmail, in a politically motivated attempt at intelligence gathering. The news here isn't that Chinese hackers engage in these activities or that their attempts are technically sophisticated -- we knew that already -- it's that the U.S. government inadvertently aided the hackers.

In order to comply with government search warrants on user data, Google created a backdoor access system into Gmail accounts. This feature is what the Chinese hackers exploited to gain access.

Google's system isn't unique. Democratic governments around the world -- in Sweden, Canada and the UK, for example -- are rushing to pass laws giving their police new powers of Internet surveillance, in many cases requiring communications system providers to redesign products and services they sell.

Many are also passing data retention laws, forcing companies to retain information on their customers. In the U.S., the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act required phone companies to facilitate FBI eavesdropping, and since 2001, the National Security Agency has built substantial eavesdropping systems with the help of those phone companies.

Systems like these invite misuse: criminal appropriation, government abuse and stretching by everyone possible to apply to situations that are applicable only by the most tortuous logic. The FBI illegally wiretapped the phones of Americans, often falsely invoking terrorism emergencies, 3,500 times between 2002 and 2006 without a warrant. Internet surveillance and control will be no different.

Official misuses are bad enough, but it's the unofficial uses that worry me more. Any surveillance and control system must itself be secured. An infrastructure conducive to surveillance and control invites surveillance and control, both by the people you expect and by the people you don't.

China's hackers subverted the access system Google put in place to comply with U.S. intercept orders. Why does anyone think criminals won't be able to use the same system to steal bank account and credit card information, use it to launch other attacks or turn it into a massive spam-sending network? Why does anyone think that only authorized law enforcement can mine collected Internet data or eavesdrop on phone and IM conversations?

These risks are not merely theoretical. After September 11, the NSA built a surveillance infrastructure to eavesdrop on telephone calls and e-mails within the U.S. Although procedural rules stated that only non-Americans and international phone calls were to be listened to, actual practice didn't match those rules. NSA analysts collected more data than they were authorized to and used the system to spy on wives, girlfriends and notables such as President Clinton.

But that's not the most serious misuse of a telecommunications surveillance infrastructure. In Greece, between June 2004 and March 2005, someone wiretapped more than 100 cell phones belonging to members of the Greek government: the prime minister and the ministers of defense, foreign affairs and justice.

Ericsson built this wiretapping capability into Vodafone's products and enabled it only for governments that requested it. Greece wasn't one of those governments, but someone still unknown -- A rival political party? Organized crime? Foreign intelligence? -- figured out how to surreptitiously turn the feature on.

And surveillance infrastructure can be exported, which also aids totalitarianism around the world. Western companies like Siemens and Nokia built Iran's surveillance. U.S. companies helped build China's electronic police state. Just last year, Twitter's anonymity saved the lives of Iranian dissidents, anonymity that many governments want to eliminate.

In the aftermath of Google's announcement, some members of Congress are reviving a bill banning U.S. tech companies from working with governments that digitally spy on their citizens. Presumably, those legislators don't understand that their own government is on the list.

This problem isn't going away. Every year brings more Internet censorship and control, not just in countries like China and Iran but in the U.S., the U.K., Canada and other free countries, egged on by both law enforcement trying to catch terrorists, child pornographers and other criminals and by media companies trying to stop file sharers.

The problem is that such control makes us all less safe. Whether the eavesdroppers are the good guys or the bad guys, these systems put us all at greater risk. Communications systems that have no inherent eavesdropping capabilities are more secure than systems with those capabilities built in. And it's bad civic hygiene to build technologies that could someday be used to facilitate a police state.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Bruce Schneier.

Editor's note: Bruce Schneier is a security technologist and author of "Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World." Read more of his writing at www.schneier.com.

U.S. enables Chinese hacking of Google

scc - 2010年01月27日 12:43

http://www.cloudprivacy.net/letter/

An open letter to Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt

Now, Can HKEJ.com enable https ?
An open letter to Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt

S

SWan - 2010年01月27日 15:38

好,為了提高我們中文的網絡優勢,我也學習用中文發言.
首先,Bruce Schneider的文章有點像他名字的簡寫-BS,且有帶著正義帽子去推銷free Sex之嫌:
- the U.S. government inadvertently aided the hackers (so the Chinese hackers can exploit ..., unsaid msg: USA is open but China exploits. But why such backdoor in the first place?)
- Systems like these invite misuse (who is to blame? the designer? the abusers? the government? all human beings?)
- This problem isn't going away (so what to do, leave it like that? just like HIV unchecked?)
- The problem is that such control makes us all less safe (bs, so no control will make us safer?)
- these systems put us all at greater risk (risk of what?)

我嚐試客觀去咀嚼bs的文章,但感覺是他不太客觀,簡而言之,先進國家是在使用這些監管去保護大多數人的利益但中國和Iran等國就利用這些去壓制言論打擊異己;幸好他在文章尾句加上純屬個人意見的字句.
這樣說罷:世界不是完美的,但我們不能因此而失掉追求天國的決心,人類的內心充滿詭詐,但也有光明的一面,我們身處在世不能因別人的黑暗而減少自己的光明.

eddie31 - 2010年01月27日 16:42

兩種監管完全是不同的兩回事.
先不要講美國咁遠, 就講香港好了,本港都有影視處電檢處, 如果只講ABSOLUTE VALUE的監管, 香港都有, 不過香港的監管有指引, 十分清楚集中在色情暴力, 及其他道德範圍的事(我幫佢地做過PROJECT, 我好清楚)事前檢查不包括資訊節目, 新聞節目, 及未有明碓投訴下之網路資訊, 當然更不會在主線接入口先設阻隔, 和內地明顯出於政治的全範圍=隔阻海外接入更是兩回事

最近關於網路保護兒童立法, 政府放棄強制網絡商提供過濾軟件, 是近期政府難得正面措施

S

SWan - 2010年01月27日 16:56

自由是需要監管的嗎?

Daniel - 2010年01月27日 22:03

....Seconded. Also there is a major difference[eddie31 兩種監管完全是不同的兩回事.]
In U S & H K & China, censorship is implemented on a subjective basis particularly on violence and sex 色情暴力.
But in the U S & H K, appeal against the censorship decision can be made to an independent legal system.
In China, the Supreme Court is part of the communist apparatus. So the latter decision is rubber-stamped

S

SWan - 2010年01月28日 00:52

即是說,自由是需要監管的.贊成.
即是說,網絡自由是需要監管的.
- 完 -

PBrega - 2010年01月28日 01:27

All these blabber about internet and cencorship are reckless of one important point. What is internet for exactly? EXCHANGE INFORMATION!!! If it is not allowed to do this, then, what hell you want to have internet for? Can you live without the internet? Can you work without the internet? Nowaday, people are obsessed by the large quantity of information on the internet. They lose control of themselves just like they lose control of their greed on stock market. They put the blame on somebody else and they know that their irresponsibility has nothing to do with any government or any authority. On the contrary, a totalitarian government or authority never want their people or slave to have any information at all, because information will threat their rule and power. That's why all those scumbags are talking about cencorship and security on the internet. If they are so damned scared, why not dismantle the whole damned installation? You can live without sex, can't you? Shithead!

S

SWan - 2010年01月28日 09:23

Glad PBrega finally broke the silence. I have no objection with 'Internet for Exchange Information'; just as 'Sex for sharing of love'. Freedom, without discipline, is indeed more like flirting around in a corrupted world; unless you are already living in heaven.

PBrega - 2010年01月28日 20:07

Dear SWan, the world never corrupted, only people corrupted. Descipline is for action, not for information. You won't commit adultery just by reading Playboy magazine. If you are a responsible adult, you should build up your common sense, and not to put on those irrelevant argument without any definition.

S

SWan - 2010年01月30日 00:59

Hi PBrega, common sense and definitions are often causes of argument themselves.

I believe the pursuit of true freedom shall never and must never and can never be stopped by any means. However, 'false' freedom often dresses like true freedom; and its ultimate goal is to enslave mankind.

My line of thoughts are two-fold:
1. human beings are corrupted but they can awaken to the calling of truth (light); so I am conservatively optimistic about the future of our generations (in fact of each individual, for each decision varies);

2. true freedom is to uplift mankind towards light; but false freedom enslave us to hell.

I can see light in your words and I hope you can uphold the light.

I will end my discussion here and thank you for your and others' inputs.

吴清心 - 2016年03月20日 17:21

不好意思,借貴壇的人氣來聲討信報論壇網管和編輯的胡作非為,打擾了請勿見怪!。。。。。 關於:吳清心早前發表的 “信報網站論壇的三宗罪”被論壇內部網管人員

蜻蜓88
石亦雲

文見亂

Sammy699

侈哆 

Liberphile

等人

假冒壇友(查其壇內空洞無文)

連續跟帖10多個蓄意以莫須有的五毛宣傳不道德或某信仰主義去誤導他人神功戲貼文怪異、、等等言論來蓄意抹黑惡毒攻擊本港土生土長的著名詞曲作家音樂製作人吳清心先生意圖隱瞞其網管編輯心理變態和無能真相--信報論壇不少言論主觀偏頗欠中立網管編輯無能和素質低下自甘墮落讓其他壇友一同起哄我哋今日去邊度搵靶射?),可謂心狠手辣惡毒至極然後該貼再被刪除

 

針對本港土生土長真心實意的愛國愛民愛心音樂家吳清心先生的無理刪帖行為其實早已開始見一貼刪一貼諸位可以在吳清心論壇中發現真相

 

附注一

劃破黑暗的時代 指引光明的路向《回歸浪漫的世界》“萬家燈火 驅散黑夜, 走向光明  共同尋找”是純紫攜手吳清心正在演繹的動人新曲《回歸浪漫的世界》其中一句重要的歌詞內容。以純紫吳清心為靈魂人物的以諾歌唱音樂藝術文化團隊,在這個黑暗的世代,正在克服種種艱困地勇闖光明的路向,要帶領這個時代的人們在黑暗中劃出一道破口,讓光芒照耀,燃點人民新希望的曙光,越照越明亮,直至全球回歸浪漫的理想實現。 “愛心”、“公益”、“分享”是以諾陽光基金會及以諾文化傳播的核心文化,以諾的項目與使命包括:一)國家公益活動《為國謳歌》全國起動二)民族文化使命《浪漫的中華》環球巡演及三)國家民族任務《以愛之名唱響大美中國夢》下鄉獻愛心活動,加上為了配合我國新一代領導人全球戰略部署的是此活動《全球回歸浪漫香港起動》等,均是屬於愛國、愛民、愛地球的國家級、國際性和宇宙性高端事業。

純紫與吳清心去年12月在中國起動了為國謳歌公益巡演浪漫的中華--

福的惠州》,得到了國家機關中央媒體及各方鋪天蓋地持續兩個多月的報導及讚譽這次活動也正好在香港這裡舉行慶功宴感謝大家一同出席和祝賀這樣不可替代被譽為貼近國家新一代領導集體的治國理念和心聲的皇家御用音樂團隊兩位核心靈魂人物本港著名詞曲作家音樂製作人吳清心老師及國寶級歌唱家純紫小姐他們可謂是影響深遠的音樂家正在為國家為民族和為全人類地球村作出貢獻

 

純紫擁有非一般的天籟音色和音韻的結合可以挑戰宇宙最強音的歌藝成為地球上極少數具有靈性的真正天籟之音屬於中國的軟實力之一唱出和平友愛的中國資訊到全世界為全球4500萬客屬人士為家鄉為香港為祖國及為本地樂壇爭光

純紫吳清心受讚譽愛國浪漫是永恆的主題http://ent.qianlong.com/2016/0104/242472.shtml

 

附注二

音樂救贖攜手傳遞愛的正能量:。。。而音樂家卻可以通過音樂演奏出一場無聲的教誨將愛傳遞給更多的人心中懷有愛的人創作出來的音樂往往可以帶給大家一場不同凡響的視聽感受在有限的創作時光中吳清心譜寫出了十幾首美妙動聽的音樂作品並迅速獲得了香港大眾的喜愛不僅如此專業領域也對吳清心創作的音樂給予了一致的贊許就像習主席在文藝工作座談會所說的那樣文學家藝術家只有在中國夢實踐中把自己當作群眾的忠實代言人耐得住寂寞才有可能創作出接地氣經得起時間考驗的精品

讓愛飛翔一場音樂知音的旅行吳清心和純紫他們正是用自己生命的積累和心血來創作了中國夢主旋律的系列文化歌曲

 http://www.newspaper365.org/yule/yinle/2014-12-17/10496.html

 

只有登入後或登記成為會員才能發表意見

版規:

  1. 網站編輯或網站作家開題,網友可回應。回應必須貼題,請勿重覆;勿發表誹謗,人身攻擊或不雅內容。
  2. 網站編輯有權發表或不發表網友張貼的內容。(請參閱議論守則)
  3. 開題之網友可編輯其在過去7天內發表之論題,或刪除相關回應。

查閱 FAQ

信報簡介 | 服務條款 | 私隱條款 | 免責聲明 | 廣告查詢 | 信報會議中心租賃 | 加入信報 | 聯絡信報

股票及指數資料由財經智珠網有限公司提供。期貨指數資料由天滙財經有限公司提供。外滙及黃金報價由路透社提供。

本網站的內容概不構成任何投資意見,本網站內容亦並非就任何個別投資者的特定投資目標、財務狀況及個別需要而編製。投資者不應只按本網站內容進行投資。在作出任何投資決定前,投資者應考慮產品的特點、其本身的投資目標、可承受的風險程度及其他因素,並適當地尋求獨立的財務及專業意見。本網站及其資訊供應商竭力提供準確而可靠的資料,但並不保證資料絕對無誤,資料如有錯漏而令閣下蒙受損失,本公司概不負責。