rockypath

我觉得黄毓民和陈伟业，先系真真正正的汉子，什么事都放在台面给大家讲，给大家评，光明磊落

甘样的政治人 ...
kingkong123 發表於 2011-1-26 00:20

不如你叫他們兩個先交代清楚與社民連之間的金錢瓜葛以明示他們是如何一個＂真正正的汉子，什么事都放在台面给大家讲，给大家评，光明磊落＂．

你又如何肯定他們是＂真正正的汉子，什么事都放在台面给大家讲，给大家评，光明磊落＂？你是幫他們守門口的“金剛”？

我相信持保留態度的人會是大多數。

rockypath

多鳩餘。合則來，不合則分。又有咩咁大不了？

社記俾啲小人當道，而陶君行又 lead 得唔好，偏離咗個黨嘅主 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-1-24 21:50

The collapse of the party indicates the dark side of politicians. A party only seeks for its own good using the name of HK people deserts an ending like this.

rockypath

回復  rockypath


   如果身有屎，使鬼退党吗，再讲了，如果真系因为钱银的问题，黄陈二人大可好似白鸽党甘暗中投靠共产党好过啦，大把钱。 使鬼搞场大龙凤吗

kingkong123 發表於 2011-1-26 09:35

What kind of logic is that? If they are not clean, they definitely should renounce their membership or the party should kick them out.

Do you know what you are talking about?

rockypath

再講，你呢啲腦殘嘅廢物，報咗出來你都唔會聽㗎啦～
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 10:19

The point is not whether I would listen, it is whether Hong Kong people would trust them.

Lik, do you have the ability to listen and understand the points of views which disagree with yours? I would have a doubt on that.

rockypath

这个就是政党的演变，使政党不断的成熟， 每个政党都会经过的阶段，就好像每个人都有青春期甘
必经之路， ...
kingkong123 發表於 2011-1-26 09:36

曇花一現的政黨在歷史上的確是經常看到的現象。

rockypath

For the record, of course I read, listen, and understand the views from those that I disagree with. Otherwise, how would I know how ridiculous their viewpoints are? and how else would I be able to mock and ridicule the likes of you, Peter, and Soli? ...
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 10:55

For the record, you attacked people who had a different point of view with coarse languages. And you chose to run away instead of standing up like a man and have the courage to face the facts when you could not defend your position.

Am I telling the truth or not? Do you have the courage to tell us?

rockypath

你明明係PK，唔通我仲要讚你係聖人？你出 post 就有五毛子收，我出 post 就徙我唔只五分鐘嘅時間。我先無你 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 11:17

Thank you for reconfirming the type of person you are - a coward who cannot face the facts and chooses to defend itself by rudely attacking people.

Didn't I tell you the point is that they need to win the hearts and supports of Hong Kong people but not how beautifully they can present themselves with speeches?

rockypath

你呢挺對人不對事嘅廢物，就算事實擺在眼前，你都唔會接受唔會佢地㗎啦？

5條片 50幾分鐘，但你幾分鐘之 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 12:05

Lik, do you have the gut to answer me directly?

First, how do you know I had not viewed the clips (just by the time I posted? are you the only source I can receive information?)? Based on what you know that are the truth and facts? Were you personally involved in the process? In addition, it is only a voice and story of one side. I don't think you would bother to listen to the story of the other side. Moreover, there are situations that it could be  合法 but not necessary 合理.

Second, do you agree that it is critical for them to win the trust, hearts and supports of Hong Kong people. Yes or No?

rockypath

50幾分鐘嘅片，你可以響幾分鐘之內睇完？你係超人定係識得 time warp呀，老細？咪玩啦～

每一個政客都需要得到人民嘅支持，毓民同大舊亦唔例外。問題係，即使事實擺在眼前，好似你同Peter呢挺刷鞋狗又會聽咩？全世界都知道趙連海同劉曉波係無罪，又唔見中共法院判佢地無罪釋放？
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 13:13

你識唔識人話？ What made you fall into the imagination that I only realized the existence of the those clips on web and watched them after you told me even though I had repeatedly told you that that you are not the only source of information?
   
It will be my problem whether to admit and accept a fact and truth when it is presented in front of me.

Your problem is that your definition of truth and fact depending on your personal and biased preference. If it agrees with and supports your viewpoints, you would accept it as a fact and truth even though it may not be the truth or fact. Otherwise, sorry.

rockypath

你老吹又好，夠薑就又好，係之前有睇晒大舊講乜野嘅話，你咪認咗佢囉，反正又無人能夠證明你有無睇過。你不 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-1-26 18:05

You have not answered my question - how can you be so sure what they said is the truth and fact? Do you have the gut to answer directly instead of avoiding it? Are you personally involved in the process and knowing all the details and facts?

You once again reconfirm what I said about you - your definition of truth and facts depending on your own personal and biased preference.