發文作者:kahoo | 四月 6, 2007

加拿大應否達成賴昌星的心願, 讓他留在加拿大當農夫?

精彩重溫:
Part 1 (starts at 17:30):
http://www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart12-4-6-2007.asf

Part 2:
http://www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart13-4-6-2007.asf

Part 3:
http://www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart14-4-6-2007.asf

Part 4:
http://www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart15-4-6-2007.asf

 


Responses

  1. Lai should be sent back china no matter what excuse.

  2. What a shame that quality of dial-in listeners are so low..

    Those who advocate to send him back despite the risk of
    1, Unfair trial
    2, Death penalty
    3, Torture
    should have their Canadian citizenship or immigrant status revoked immediately and sent back to China.

  3. 賴昌星應該回中國受審,加拿大應該make sure
    賴昌星有公平公開審判,如果判有罪,應保証人
    權組織可隨時探監。我不信大陸會反口,否則以
    後再想引渡罪犯,不單是加拿大,在全世界也沒
    可能。

  4. 中國有公平審判的一日,香港也有普選了。
    就是澳門也不引渡人返大陸。

  5. To be or not to be (a peasant or farmer), Lai is the question.

  6. 好似高山,都唔知是否有人把唔見左D錢都入他數。

    真可笑,那些聽眾連律師也罵。都不知他們是怎樣來加拿大的。

  7. 昨日賴昌星。
    今日高山。
    明日so博士。
    後日可以是你和你的子女。

  8. 無 獺 猖 狂 賴 昌 星
    無 法 無 天 在 死 纏
    挑 戰 法 律 人 神 憤
    為 求 保 命 撒 謊 言
    .
    讓他留在加拿大當農夫? 我提議就用呢個題目來做塲棟篤笑, 再搭埋 Cytodex 兄句莎士比亞名句嘅改良版來做開塲白, 肯定全塲爆滿!
    .
    但話又講番轉頭, 我又唔贊成引渡呢個人渣之中嘅人渣番大陸受審噃。
    .
    Michael 以上三點, 如果對賴昌星真要被引渡後接受, 真係要講句『應有此報』。 正所謂『出得黎行』, 就『預咗要還』。 但如果加拿大要 send 個 message 俾中國, 要俾佢知道國際上有幾不滿: 對程翔又係莫須有式審判, 對捉咗法輪功信徒又將其秘密折磨至死, 對任何持不同政見人仕又強廹打壓, 對西藏和尚同人民又….唉, 如再寫落去, 真寫到天光都未寫得完。
    .
    現在希望用賴昌星呢張牌, 可以提醒中國要更加開放司法制度, 直至一日為止, 加拿大才可有信心同中方簽下重犯引渡條例, 咁先至另千千萬萬中國人可視中國為一塊樂土。
    .
    現今只希望能放逐賴昌星到唔知邊個山卡啦國家, 千祈唔好俾佢做我隔離隣舍就阿彌陀佛喇。
    .
    咁嘅人渣, 多一個唔多, 少一個唔少, 就算佢呢世夠運喇。

  9. Culprits (Lai is probably, if not definitely, one) find loopholes in the law and use the excuse of humanity to get permission to stay in Canada and avoid from repatriation to the country where the crimes were committed. It is normal that we, citizens who have done nothing against the laws and worked hard to protect the well-being of our society, feel aggrieved because public funds have been wasted for the law suits in connection with their issues and these culprits can be our neighbors. However, we have to remember that this is the cost we have to pay for maintaining a society with human rights and freedom. I think most, if not all, of us won’t come to Canada if she doesn’t have such a well- established legal system.

    犯罪者(賴昌星如果不是肯定便是可能是其中一位)利用法律漏洞和人道藉口, 獲得留在加拿大和逃過被遣返他們曾犯法的國家. 作為從沒犯法和努力維護社會權益的市民, 我們感到不忿是正常的, 因為處理他們的案件, 浪費公幣和這些罪犯可能就是我們的鄰居. 不過, 我們不要忘記, 這是我們為維持一個有人權和自由的社會必須付出的代價. 如果加拿大沒有一個成熟的法律制度, 我相信就算不是全部, 也會是大部份的我們, 均不會到此地定居了.

  10. 我話賴昌星唔駛走,不是加拿大有一個成熟的法
    律制度,而是佢有大把錢可以請律師打官司。

  11. > 我話賴昌星唔駛走,不是加拿大有一個成熟的法律制度,而是佢有大把錢可以請律師打官司。

    可以請律師打官司, 是要有一個成熟的法律制度。在加拿大,我想就是一個免費的律師,也會保證他的權利。

    你有交通意外,也一樣要錢打官司。

    (我不是同情賴昌星,只是不相信中國的政治謊言。D共官共了人民的錢,一定多過賴昌星走私的。而且,那個剛死人大不是走私的嗎?)

  12. 我同意Michael兄的看法. 如果你在一個法制不成熟的國家, 就算你有錢, 你仍不可以和政府站在平等的地位上打官司. 我雖極不願意, 但仍要指出, 在我廣義上的祖國(我已宣誓成為加拿大國民)內, 與政治有關的官司上, 與政府交鋒的律師(有關人士付費聘請的), 根本發揮不出在有成熟法律制度國家下律師應有的作用. 正如我先前所說, 讓罪犯如賴昌星之流留在加國, 是我們要維持一個有自由和人權的國家必須付出的代價. 我們所以要付出這些代價, 正是因為那些罪犯來自的國家, 沒有成熟的法律制度.

    I agree to Michael’s point of view. If you are living in a country where its legal system is not a mature one, you are still not able to get the same status as your government in a court case against her even though you are financially capable. I’m very reluctant to point out that in my broadly defined Motherland (I’ve sworn to be a Canadian), China, the lawyers (who are paid by those involved in the legal proceedings) facing the government cannot fulfill their duties in political-related court cases as their counterparts do in countries with a mature legal system. As I have said in my previous entry, permitting culprits like Lai to stay in Canada is the cost we have to pay to maintain a society with freedom and human rights. The reason why we have to pay the cost is simply because the countries where they came from do not have a well-established legal system.

  13. 想真一點,賴昌星又唔係殺人放火,最多只是走私走稅。

    我D朋友都有時買下走稅私煙。又或者由香港"走私"隻手表或新的電話返加拿大,又或者cash買嘢走稅。唔知D聽眾點解對佢這麼反感?

    自己無罪的就用石頭吧!

  14. Here is an excerpt from: http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/1/1/3/n29179.htm
    .
    報道指出,和以往很多走私分子不同,賴昌星要攻下的是整個廈門海關,不是一兩個關員;他不要偷偷摸摸、小打小鬧地走私,而要大規模、公開化地走私。楊前線出任廈門海關關長之后,在賴昌星“票子、房子、女子、車子、位子”的“五子絕招”之下,眾多海關關員紛紛落水,海關成了“順昌者昌,逆昌者亡”之地。不听賴昌星的,一律調往不管事的單位或邊遠地方海關。向他靠攏的,升官發財,花天酒地。据說,賴昌星笑那些以高速快艇闖關或是半夜偷偷走私的行徑為 “做賊”。而載運“遠華”貨物的船則是在白天公然開進廈門港的。海關、公安、工商、邊防,只要知道是“遠華”貨物,全都抬手放行。“遠華”的貨物一到,海關關員連貨都不驗,“遠華”說什么貨就是什么貨,報多少數量就是多少。成品油、汽車、電腦芯片、鋼材、香煙等暢行無阻,國家的海關稅收隨之成為“遠華”的利潤。為了保護走私市場,“遠華”還与一些机构聯手打擊其他走私集團,別的公司要走私,必須向遠華交保護費。廈門海關簡直成了“遠華”的一件擺設,可以任意擺布。
    .
    報道說,在進攻腐敗官員方面,賴昌星以“出手大方”聞名。在賴昌星看來,收效最大、賺錢最多的行業,不是高科技,不是第三產業,而是對人際關系的投資,用体力賺錢是下策,用錢賺錢是中策,用關系賺錢才是上策。他非常細心地研究每一個官員的愛好,因為愛好就是貪官的命門。憑著這一看家本領,賴昌星腐蝕百官勢如破竹。官員如是,演藝娛樂圈中的美女就更不在話下了。
    .
    Here is another link about the death of his brother, which is among other people who either died or will be dying in a Chinese jail mainly becaus of him:
    .
    http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/2/12/5/n252538.htm

    (遠華案要犯一個月內接連死於獄中)

    So much for the guarantee of his safety in the Chinese judicial system after his extradition, if it ever happens.
    .
    Note:
    .
    This is by no means a mom-and-pop smuggling of a 6-pack from Buffalo to Toronto, Lai has built an entire empire that systematically controlled the import and export business in and around the Guangdong province to support his lavish lifestyle. The extent of his bribery in mainland China was staggering. He carefully studied the habits and weaknesses of each of his preys (government officials, reporters, etc.) before he flooded their bank accounts with large sums of bribe.

  15. I’d agree with the opinions expressed by many.
    .
    Here are some of my thoughts in addition to some well thought ones.
    .
    (1) Lai was a very legendary figure who had emerged to become a very successful smuggler from a “peasant". Given his lack of formal education, he was really street-smart enough to navigate in a sea of corruption by matching the right brides (as quoted by 獨孤兄’s “五子絕招") to the right people.
    .
    (2) Has anyone ever questioned the diplomatic assurance issued by the Chinese foreign ministry? Like others here say; his crime already fits for a death penalty sentence, how could someone outside the judicial system say that Lai could be exempted from the execution?
    Isn’t that an irony and mockery to the independence of justice system? In fact, everybody knows that the Chinese government has her “visible” hands over the court and justice system. Even if a decision not to execute Lai was made by the highest official (President Hu or Premier Wen) rather than a judicial procedure, one can not guarantee the next official coming into power would overturn that. The issue at hand is that the decision is made by human and not by system. After Lai’s turnover, Canada will never have the power to ensure Lai would not be subject to torture or unnecessary hardship because it becomes China’s “internal affair”, not alone to visit him in jail.
    .
    (3) The emergence of Lai was no doubt unique to China, Russia, and any country where totalitarian regime has an iron grip over resources, human rights, way of thinking, etc. A free and democratic system would not allow corruption to develop in such a scale and be unchecked, I would blame the government as much as Lai for being equally corrupted. After all, Lai was using his wit to take advantage of the already corrupted system to his benefits. Imagine how a peasant and the poorest would be allowed to advance in society and be given better opportunities in nowadays China, they (peasants) are typically the victims of the corrupted systems. I am not saying I endorse him and approve his actions but he, at least unlike many other peasants, would try everything necessary to get rich. Deng promised his economic reform to allow some to be affluent but he did not mention that peasants were not part of the formula.
    .
    (4) A peasant is more or less a member of a social class whereas a farmer is more of a profession. If Lai could stay in Canada, I could hardly imagine him being a successful farmer even though he was a peasant before.
    .
    Personally, I would incline not to send Lai back to China (same reasons as 獨孤兄, Michael, and 一聽眾). With the death of Lai’s brother, I think it would present more incentive not to send him home.

  16. Michael 兄又不需要以你一小撮貪小便宜的朋友來與賴昌星相比. 求丙兄的看法和寶貴的資料應可令你明白賴對社會的破壞是如何深遠. 相信你的朋友如有和賴一樣的行為, 你早已恥與為伍了.
    不過, 賴昌星之流雖然是罪犯, 我們仍深信他們具有我們一樣的人權. 基於這信念,我們不忍將他們貿然遣返到一個司法制度不健全的國家, 令他們得不到公平的審判, 並可能有生命的危險而已.

    It’s not necessary for Michael to categorize a few of his friends who are greedy for a few bucks as same gang as Lai. 求丙’s view points and valuable information must have made him understood how seriousness of detriment Lai has made to the society. I believe that if your friends acted in the similar ways as Lai, you would have felt insulted to have dealings with them.
    However, we still believe culprits like Lai should have the same human rights as ours. Based on this belief, we can’t be hardhearted to hastily repatriate them to countries whose judicial system is biased, leading to a result that they are unable to get fair trials and their lives can be at risk.

  17. 有D偷換概念,犯了法可以逃避審判,算什麼"成
    熟的法律制度",都未審怎知一定是不公平的審
    判。不健全的法制,亦可有公平的審判。唔通只
    有人權國家的法庭才有公平的審判?賴昌星犯案
    時一早都知如果事發是會打筢,唔係都唔駛要走
    佬啦!判什麼刑才算公平?我說是干涉司法獨立。
    昜地而處,如果有人貪污逃回中國,如加拿大想
    引渡,中國說:查無實據,而且加拿大有種族歧
    視的先例,怎知加拿大能不能有公平的審判!這
    又如何?

  18. 其實各位觀點亦很有道理, 只是不同時間, 地方, 或環境造出來, 結果會折然不同。 走私來說, 其實只屬軟性罪行 (soft crime), 照本國法律來說, 本應亦不是怎麼大不了, 可能刑期大不了十年八載便可出獄。 但在中國大陸, 賄賂一經定罪, 賄賂雙方極有可能被判死刑。 而賴昌星遠華走私案, 涉案人數之多, 可想然知。 而被賴昌星牽連入獄而又可作供之人, 又離奇一一暴斃; 反過來賴昌星則可在此消遙法外, 真是一聽眾女仕話齋, 另人感到不忿。

    真實一經入獄, 不用說中國大陸, 就是美加來說, 亦難保人權受保障。 記得 Paul Bernado 嗎? 一入 “maximum security" 的監獄便被監犯在獄警『不為意』下打到鼻破血流。 又記得連環殺人犯 Jeffrey Lionel Dahmer 入獄後, 又在獄警『不為意』下被另一監犯謀殺呢? 今次賴的同謀, 獄中暴斃, 亦一定不了了之。

    Cytodex 兄亦帶出很多不同觀點, 最難忘亦是從正面看賴本人。 其實每一個人靠自己雙手, 創做神話式嘅財富, 一定有其過人之處。 而賴昌星則是在人際關係上以過關斬將式另所有人臣服於一個農民出身嘅人, 亦是萬中無一。 如他能利用其魅力及靈活頭腦於正途上, 可能再創造李家誠之後又一奇蹟亦不出奇。 其實賴亦與明太祖朱元璋有好多共同之處 (可能賴還未及朱元璋一般卑鄙), 但朱元璋竟成開國之君;所以不同時間, 地方, 環境, 可能結局真是出人意表。

  19. My apology. Make it “Paul Bernardo", not “Paul Bernado".

  20. 慢感人:
    相信沒有人認為那些罪犯可以逃避審判. 問題是他們竟有能力(極可能有貪官收了賄賂)逃離了他們的國家, 來到加拿大. 加拿大被迫要招呼他們而已. 這是一個對自由和人權有承担的國家, 為其他在這方面做得沒有那麼好的國家付出代價.
    你可能有些激動, 致令在邏輯上出現問題. 如果有人權的國家沒有公平的審訉, 你憑什麼理據可以說服自己, 沒有人權的國家可以有公平的審訉呢? 再者, 雖然中國有死刑, 但你甚可在沒有經過公平的審訉, 斷言賴昌星應受處決呢?
    不錯, 中國可以就加拿大引渡罪犯的要求作出拒絶, 但極可能是因為其他原因, 而不是種族歧視和人權問題. 如果你真認為中國有可能用這些理由來拒絶的話, 你在這問題上, 就有點不甚理智了.

    I don’t think there will be any one who will agree to no trials to be imposed on those culprits. The problem is they can flee from their home country (probably they have bribed the officials concerned) to Canada, which is forced to entertain them. This is the cost paid by a country which treats freedom and human rights as high priority. She has to pay because there are some countries which don’t have the same high standard of these values as Canada.
    You look to be agitated, resulting a fallacy in logics. If there won’t be fair trials in countries with human rights, what rationales to convince you that there’ll be fair trials in countries without human rights? Moreover, even though China has capital punishment, how can you definitely say that Lai is to be executed without going through a fair trial?
    You are right. China can refuse Canada’s requests to extradite culprits, but probably for reasons other than racial discrimination and human rights. If you genuinely think that she may use these reasons for the refusals, you may be irrational in facing this issue.

  21. 冤案在加拿大多的是,賴昌星要被遣返已是裁
    決,所爭的是風險評估。會否判死刑和會否受虐
    待是員主要考慮。中國有賴昌星犯罪的十足証據
    ,駛乜玩"不公平的審判" !
    *** 賈慶林還是中央政治局常委,賴昌星怎有事
    ,拖多幾年拖到佢下台就會。

  22. 慢感人:
    其實你已捉到重點, 為什麼加拿大法院己裁決賴應遣返, 卻還遲遲不去實行, 就是你所說的他回國後會否被判死刑和虐待. 為什麼加拿大有這方面的疑慮, 就是中國的人權紀錄差.
    另一個是態度問題, 那是一種未審先判的態度, 加上群眾壓力, 連閣下這麼開明的人, 都在未審前, 已說他該死. 他在回國後的命運可想而知了.
    你提及賈慶林就更恐怖了. 他可以影響法院?

    In fact, you have already got the main point. Why has Canada still not repatriated Lai after judgment of repatriation has been granted by the court? The reason is the one you have said. Canada cannot make sure that Lai won’t be tortured and sentenced to death after repatriation . Why does Canada have to worry about that? It’s simply because China’s record of human rights is poor.
    Another problem is a judgment-before-trial attitude. In addition, there is a pressure from the masses. Even an open-minded person like you has already said that Lai should be sentenced to death before any trial. It is not difficult to imagine what Lai’s fate will be after his repatriation.
    Your remarks on Jia Qing Lin are even more horrible. Can he influence the court?

  23. 引渡最大阻力是在中國,不是在加拿大。

  24. Despite his “alleged" crimes, Lai’s case has led many to believe that Canada has become a heaven for criminals who could exploit the protection given by Canadian Charter of Rights and freedoms (presumed innocent until proven guilty and not subject to cruel and unusual punishment).
    .
    No doubt, Lai and a few may have exploited that but like 一聽眾 has explained previously that that is the “price” we all have to pay for our freedom and democracy in order to protect the majority of the people for their rights and freedom.
    .
    The only way to avoid giving the slightest chance for criminals is to have every incoming Chinese immigrant and visitor subject to an entirely different set of laws in order to filter out those who try to take advantage of the system. But, that means all of them will be discriminated. That is, it creates an even bigger problem than the existing system.

  25. 慢感人兄:
    請恕在下魯鈍, 不明白引渡最大的阻力在中國是什麼意思? 是中國拒絶引渡賴昌星回國嗎? 有空請賜教.

    Please forgive my stupidity for not understanding the comment that the biggest obstacle of extradition of Lai comes from China. Please elaborate it when you have time. Thanks.

  26. 賴昌星只是平民,憑什麼可以正控制整個廈門海
    關?賈慶林當時是福建省長,現在是中共政治局常
    委,怎會冇份?當加拿大考慮中國會否判死刑和
    會否受虐待,中國就會傳出會判死刑,亠定會不
    放過他。

  27. I definitely agree to Cytodex’s view points. Just as what he said, screening Chinese immigrants and visitors by an entirely different set of laws is impracticable and totally unacceptable. I think, one, if not the only one, of the possible ways to solve the problem of abuse of Canadian laws in this aspect is when all or at least most of the following happen.
    1. The concepts of human rights between China and Western countries can be reconciled.
    2. China’s judicial system is genuinely independent.
    3. People’s representatives are genuinely elected by those represented by them and they are not just acting as a rubber stamp.
    4. The officials, especially those at the top level, of China government, are not scared by opposite opinions and criticisms.
    5. The relationship of superiors and subordinates is not to be viewed as the same as that of masters and servants. The feudal concept of death to reciprocate should be abandoned.
    It is hoped that under these circumstances, there won’t be tortures, people can speak up for themselves or through their representatives, officials are willingly to listen to people’s voices, and fair trials are possible.

    我絶對同意Cytodex 的見解. 正如他所說, 用一套不同的法律去篩選中國移民和遊客是行不通和完全不能接受的. 我想, 解決在方面濫用加拿大的法律這個問題的其中一個, 如果不是唯一一個的話, 可能性就是以下全部或最少大部份情況發生.
    1. 中國和西方在人權的概念上能接軌.
    2. 中國的司法制度真正獨立.
    3. 人民代表是真正由他們代表的人民選出來, 而他們不只是作橡皮圖章.
    4. 中國官員, 特別是最高層的, 不再害怕相反意見和批評.
    5. 上司和下屬的關係, 不再視乎等同主子和僕役的關係. 以死相報的封建思想應該併棄
    希望這大環境下, 沒有迫害, 人們可以直接或經由代表為自己說話, 官員願意耹聽人民的聲音, 公平的審訉可以進行了

  28. 慢感人兄:
    多謝賜教. 我疏忽了這些微妙關係.


發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

分類

%d 位部落客按了讚: