【關於解釋國際攬炒：與外媒記者交流的工作日常】

早排同位識睇中文既日本記者食飯做訪問，佢做做下訪問期間，竟然拎左我個幾月前寫 #國際攬炒，差唔多成兩、三千字既長文出嚟，仲要自己用原字筆間曬部份佢覺得緊要既重點，見到嗰下真係覺得不得了。

呢一年以嚟，採訪同跟進香港情況既外國記者好多，當然各人認知程度都有唔同程度既差別，記得最經典係有位中歐本身唔太熟悉香港既記者問我「當選立法會議員後有咩感受」，當刻又真係有啲無奈…

點都好，國際攬炒同埋反制「臨立會 2.0」，唔好講話國際社會，就算本地都未必好明白當中較複雜既來龍去脈，感謝呢位記者之餘，我都未來都會同眾志團隊繼續努力，同各國政界官員傳媒交流時，準確分析香港抗爭形勢。

最後，如果大家早排未睇過既話，都歡迎大家重溫兩篇我寫過既文章（雖然我都知真係好長）：

【破局：立會過半 = 香港光已復？】
https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/

【議會過半想像：以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」】 https://www.facebook.com/200976479994868/posts/2887651214660701/

-----------------------------------------

A possible scenario will be like: Beijing will dissolve the existing LegCo and disqualify all 70 lawmakers once pro-democracy camps win the majority. One of the reference points is the recent statement by China’s office on Hong Kong Affairs, HKMAO.

The office unprecedentedly accused pro-democracy lawmakers of violating LegCo oaths when they use procedural tactics to block the controversial national anthem and national security legislation. In the eyes of Beijing, LegCo can only serve as a rubber stamp; otherwise, councillors fail to "show their allegiance to the central governments” and "serve dutifully” as the oath states. In other words, HKMAO is paving the way for a large-scaled disqualification before and after the election.

After the dissolution, Beijing will probably set up a pseudo-legislature and directly appoint all the members. That is not a crazy imagination since Beijing has done once in 1997. At that time, after pro-democracy forces won a majority during 1995-1997, Beijing set up a Provisional LegCo, directly appointed members and held meetings in Shenzhen. Therefore, history may repeat.

However, Hongkongers will still strive for a parliamentary majority since Beijing has already put its most controversial agenda, the national security legislation, on the table. The parliamentary majority is the only way for us to block this evil law.

If, at the end, Beijing really dissolves the LegCo and disqualifies all elected lawmakers, it means Beijing is shutting down all peaceful mechanism to resolve political problems and grievance. More importantly, this move will put the so-called promised autonomy under the One Country Two Systems formula to the test.

When even the legislature is a rubber stamp, it Is doubtful whether Hong Kong can still maintain its special status as an independent tariff zone. The latter will carry significant implications for international investors. On the street level, it is foreseeable that more protests will erupt, especially when Beijing starts to disqualify all pro-democracy candidates before the election.

https://twitter.com/joshuawongcf/status/1262645433337122816

中大公布第二批校園環境檢測結果





香港中文大學（中大） 早前委託獨立認可實驗室於不同時間在校園不同地點，抽取空氣、水質及泥土樣本，並送往化驗。大學已收到了第二批校園環境檢測結果。



因應有大學成員對校園可能殘留CS（鄰-氯代苯亞甲基丙二腈）的疑慮，校方已經進一步安排樣本檢測，預計將於二至三星期後收到結果，並盡快公布。



今日（12月12日）公布的第二批校園環境檢測結果包括13個泥土樣本（#1至#12 、S8）以及兩個水樣本（W9、W10）的化驗結果，摘要及參考水平如下﹕



(1) 泥土樣本



表一﹕泥土樣本（#1 至#12）

污染物

測試結果

參考水平

參考文件

二噁英

0.0037至0.0059 毫微克/克

1毫微克/克

香港環保署發出的「按風險釐定的土壤污染整治標準（公園）」

總多氯聯苯

< 0.2毫克/公斤

0.756毫克/公斤

多環芳香烴

< 0.500至2.05毫克/公斤

3.83至10,000毫克/公斤





表二﹕泥土樣本（S8）

污染物

測試結果

參考水平

參考文件

二噁英

0.12 毫微克/克

1毫微克/克

香港環保署發出的「按風險釐定的土壤污染整治標準（公園）」

總氰化物

< 1 毫克/公斤

4,900毫克/公斤

總多氯聯苯

< 0.200毫克/公斤

0.756毫克/公斤

多環芳香烴

< 0.500毫克/公斤

3.83至10,000毫克/公斤





(2) 水樣本



表三﹕水樣本（W9 及 W10）

污染物

測試結果

參考水平

參考文件

二噁英

4.6至4.7 皮克/公升

30皮克/公升

美國國家環境保護局（USEPA）建議的飲用水標準

總氰化物

< 0.05毫克/公升

0.2毫克/公升

總多氯聯苯

< 0.50 微克/公升

0.5 微克/公升

多環芳香烴

< 0.1 微克/公升

0.1 至 0.4 微克/公升





結論



(1) 泥土樣本



化驗結果顯示12個泥土樣本（#1至#12）的二噁英含量遠低於香港環保署在2007年發出的《按風險釐定的土地污染整治標準的使用指引》中「按風險釐定的土壤污染整治標準（公園）」之數值。這表示二噁英在這些泥土（#1至#12）的含量水平並不顯著，化驗結果與距離2號橋較遠位置的泥土樣本 （S1至S7、S9） 相若 （見表一）。





至於總多氯聯苯的化驗結果，所有泥土樣本 （#1 - #12）都遠低於前述由香港環保署發出的使用指引中（公園）標準之總多氯聯苯含量 (0.756毫克/公斤)。（見表一）



關於泥土樣本 (#1 - #12) 中多環芳香烴的含量，全部均低於參考文件中所規定的水平 （見表一）。 至於多環芳香烴中個別的化合物含量，可於此處瀏覽。



一個含有黑色煙熏物質的泥土樣本 （S8），在夏鼎基運動場裡被火燒焦的墊褥附近採集。測試結果顯示二噁英的含量相比其他泥土樣本為高，但仍相等於使用指引中的參考水平大約十分之一。這個略高的數值可能是由燃燒塑膠或墊褥的塑料部分引起。S8的其他測試參數例如總氰化物、總多氯聯苯和多環芳香烴，它們的含量遠低於在相關參考文件所規定的最低數值（見表二）。



(2) 水樣本



兩個水樣本從賽馬會研究生宿舍（一座）採集。化驗結果顯示兩個水樣本（W9 及 W10）中二噁英含量介乎4.6至4.7皮克/升。根據美國國家環境保護局建議的飲用水標準，其水樣本 （W9 & W10）中二噁英含量並不顯著。其他測試參數例如總氰化物、總多氯聯苯和多環芳香烴，它們的含量遠低於在相關參考文件所規定的最低數值 （見表三）。



從上述結論可見，這些污染物在泥土（#1 至 #12、S8）和水（W9 及W10）樣本的含量對健康的危害不顯著。



至於其他測試結果，大學收到後盡快公布。



相關數據可於此處瀏覽。







CUHK Releases the Second Batch of Test Results on Campus Environment



The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) earlier appointed an independent accredited laboratory to collect air, water and soil samples at various locations and at different times on campus and sent them for testing. The University has just received the second batch of test results.



In addition, in response to the concerns of some University members over the level of CS (2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile) on CUHK campus, the University has arranged to conduct another round of tests. The results will be announced as soon as they are received in 2-3 weeks’ time.



Here is the summary of the second batch of test results including 13 soil samples (#1-#12 & S8) and 2 water samples (W9 & W10) compared with the guidance notes/international standards.



(1) Soil samples



Table 1: For soil samples (#1 - #12)

Contaminant

Test results

Reference Level

Reference Document

Dioxins

0.0037-0.0059 ng/g

1 ng/g

Risk-Based Remediation Goals (RBRGs) for Soil – Public Parks, published by Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department

Total PCBs

< 0.2 mg/kg

0.756 mg/kg

PAHs

< 0.500-2.05 mg/kg

3.83-10,000 mg/kg



Table 2﹕For soil sample (S8)

Contaminant

Test results

Reference Level

Reference Document

Dioxins

0.12 ng/g

1 ng/g

Risk-Based Remediation Goals (RBRGs) for Soil – Public Parks, published by Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department

Total Cyanide

< 1 mg/kg

4,900 mg/kg

Total PCBs

< 0.200 mg/kg

0.756 mg/kg

PAHs

< 0.500 mg/kg

3.83-10,000mg/kg



(2) Water samples



Table 3: For water samples (W9 & W10)

Contaminant

Test results

Reference Level

Reference Document

Dioxins

4.6-4.7 pg/L

30 pg/L

Drinking Water Standards from USEPA

Total Cyanide

< 0.05 mg/L

0.2 mg/L

Total PCBs

< 0.50 µg/L

0.5 µg/L

PAHs

< 0.1 µg/L

0.1-0.4 µg/L



Conclusion



(1) Soil samples



Among the 12 soil samples (#1-#12), the dioxins (I-TEQ) are well below the Risk-Based Remediation Goals (RBRGs) of dioxins in soil (I-TEQ) for public parks as quoted in the Guidance Manual for Use of Risk-Based Remediation Goals for Contaminated Land Management published by Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department (HKEPD) in 2007. This indicates that the dioxins (I-TEQ) levels in these soil samples (#1 - #12) are not significant, and the results are comparable to soil samples (S1-S7 & S9) collected in the more distant locations away from No. 2 Bridge (see table 1).



Based on the test results of Total Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), all soil samples (#1 - #12) are lower than the respective limits of PCBs level (0.756 mg/kg) for public parks cited in the aforementioned Guidance Manual from HKEPD (see table 1).



Regarding the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) levels for these soil samples (#1 - #12), all of them are below the level as required by the reference document (see table 1). For the figures of individual PAH compounds, please click here.



A soil sample with black-smoked materials (S8) was collected in the vicinity of the burned mattress in Sir Philip Haddon-Cave Sports Field. The test result of the dioxins (I-TEQ) level is relatively higher than that of other soil samples though it is only about one tenth of the reference level cited in the Guidance Manual. The possible reason for the elevated result may be due to the burning of rubber or plastic components of the mattress. For the other testing parameters such as Total Cyanide, Total Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) for the sample (S8), they are all well lower than their respective limits as required by the related reference documents (see table 2).



(2) Water samples



Two water samples (W9 & W10) had been collected from Jockey Club Postgraduate Hall 1. The test results reveal that the dioxins (I-TEQ) levels for both samples (W9 & W10) are from 4.6 to 4.7 pg/L. In accordance with drinking water standards from United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the dioxins levels for these water samples (W9 & W10) are not significant. For the other testing parameters such as Total Cyanide, Total Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), they are all much below their respective limits as required by the related reference documents (see table 3).



In view of the aforementioned interpretation, the health hazards of these contaminants from the soil (#1 - #12 & S8) and water (W9 & W10) samples are negligible.



Other test results will be announced as soon as they are available. Related information may be viewed here.

【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】
// 當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權，暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來，這已清晰可見。僅說無諾，何能「止暴制亂」？
// Where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
https://www.facebook.com/…/a.455221741311…/1474268236073377/

【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】(Scroll for English)

1. 近日，警隊的行為就如國際特赦組織所言越見低劣。[1] 這皆因政府漠視其專家提供的建議，並以歇斯底里、毫無章法可言的策略回應持續的動盪。

2. 五個月來，政府持續容許以下情況發生，對警政問題及根本的政治危機藥石亂投：
a. 阻礙救護人員前往現場拯救傷者；[2]
b. 偏頗地處理強姦或酷刑對待被拘留人士的指控；[3]
c. 肆無忌憚地濫用武力；[4]
d. 以諸多藉口為警察的失控或報復行為辯解。[5]

3. 法政匯思強烈譴責警隊濫用武力，及其本末倒置、往往為社區添煩添亂的驅散示威者行動。警方在十一月十一日於香港中文大學（「中大」）、香港理工大學及香港大學等驅散非法集結及/或堵路行為的行動，指稱的事實根據惹人非議。[6] 在撰寫此聲明之時，警方甚至以催淚彈及橡膠子彈回應中大校長的善意，與學生發生激烈衝突，造成最少60人受傷及多人被捕。[7]

4. 歸根究底，現有的制度未能公正地調查涉及警務人員的刑事指控，乃是警民衝突的源頭。樂觀地看，這可能只是個別調查人員的疏忽；悲觀地看，這反映一種互相包庇的文化，可能已由員佐級警員到警務處處長、保安局局長甚至特首，滲透警隊及政府上下。無論是哪一個情況，這種警察橫行無忌的觀感已經令公眾對負責調查大部分罪行的警察的信任蕩然無存。這個缺口一開，刑事司法制度剩下非常有限的能力，處理失職警員。

5. 法政匯思繼續呼籲香港政府成立獨立調查委員會，調查包括六月份以來政府的治安管理手段。除了將肇事者繩之於法外，更重要的是全面檢閱香港警隊以達至結構上的改革。至今，特區政府對於這個明顯又實際的選擇不屑一顧，堅持讓一個缺乏監察權力的獨立監察警方處理投訴委員會（「監警會」）[8] 去調查警察投訴及內部調查科。這正正就是問題根源所在。

6. 監警會委派的國際專家組就這個問題發表《進展報告》。國際專家組與政府持相反意見。他們批評監警會在結構上欠缺全面調查權力，對監警會這一個輕型、監管式的體制是否能夠做出決定性的貢獻表示懷疑，更指出下一步的可能性諸如「委派一個享有所需權力的獨立調查機構以作更深程度及更廣泛的調查」，意味著一個獨立調查委員會。[9]

7. 對於近數星期暴力頻頻，政府沒有採取任何行動，只是堅拒示威者的訴求（包括成立獨立調查委員會），更稱他們為「人民的敵人」。[10] 警員們多月來非人化地濫稱示威者為「曱甴」。[11]

8. 法政匯思絕對不認同法外制裁。此立場於七月二十五日之聲明已表明。然而，當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權，暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來，這已清晰可見。僅說無諾，何能「止暴制亂」？

法政匯思
2019年11月15日
(PDF: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)

1. Police conduct has seen, in the words of Amnesty International, ‘another shocking low’ [1] in recent days as the Government ignored constructive feedback by its own experts and hysterically responded to the ongoing unrest without any rational strategy.

2. In particular, these allegations point to a wanton failure on the part of the Government to properly approach policing and the underlying political crisis, now in its 5th month:

a. Obstructing rescuers and ambulances from accessing the injured; [2]
b. Unfair handling of allegations of rape and torture in custody; [3]
c. Unapologetic excesses in its use of force; [4] and
d. Evasive defence of police officers acting impulsively or in retaliation. [5]

3. The Progressive Lawyers Group (the ‘PLG’) vehemently condemns the Police regarding their excessive use of force and dispersal operations which often create the chaos sought to be quelled. On 11 November, the police conducted operations in, amongst others, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (‘CUHK’), the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong and the University of Hong Kong to disperse unlawful assemblies and/or obstruction of traffic, [6] the factual basis of which has been doubted by many. As at the drafting of this Statement, as riot police responded to an olive branch by the CUHK Vice-Chancellor with tear gas and rubber bullets, severe clashes between students and riot police at CUHK are ongoing with at least 60 injured and dozens arrested. [7]

4. Nonetheless, the crux of the problem remains in the institutional failure to investigate criminal allegations involving police officers impartially. At best, it could be an omission by individual police officers in their execution of duty. At worst, it could be a culture that acquiesces and conceals wrongdoings affecting grassroot constables, the Commissioner of Police, the Secretary for Security and the Chief Executive alike. Whichever the case may be, this perception of impunity breaches the trust and confidence the public reposes in the police who are tasked with investigating most offences. With this link broken, there remains very limited recourse in the criminal justice system against rogue officers.

5. The PLG continues to call on the Hong Kong Government to appoint a Commission of Inquiry regarding, amongst others, the current approach to policing social unrest since June. Bringing wrongdoers to justice aside, the more important task is a holistic review on the Police Force and a roadmap to structural reforms. So far, the Government brushed aside this obvious and pragmatic option, insisting upon an inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Council (‘IPCC’) [8] whose (lack of) oversight over the Complaints Against Police Office (‘CAPO’) is the very issue at the heart of the current saga.

6. Curiously, the International Expert Panel of the IPCC appointed for advice on that very inquiry seems to hold a contrary view. In their Position Statement Report of Progress, the experts pointed out ‘structural limitations in the scope and powers of the IPCC Inquiry’ and noted that ‘it remains to be seen whether a light touch, oversight body like the IPCC, can make sufficient progress to produce any decisive contribution…’ It also identified a possible next step such as ‘a deeper more comprehensive inquiry in a number of respects by an independent body with requisite powers’, alluding to a Commission of Inquiry. [9]

7. In response to the extraordinary brutalities these few weeks, the Government did nothing but maintain that it will not yield to the protesters’ demands (including an independent Commission of Inquiry) and call them ‘enemies of the people’. [10] It has not helped that the police have for months been blatantly using such a dehumanising term as ‘cockroaches’ to refer to protesters [11].

8. The PLG stands by our Statement on 25 July 2019 and does not encourage citizens to take justice into their own hands. However, it is obvious by now that where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.

The Progressive Lawyers Group
15 November 2019
(PDF version: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)

【#星期五樂城】平常相處中，總覺得一切理所當然，直到嘗過分開的滋味，才慢慢明白對方在自己心中的份量。你有過這樣念茲在茲的朋友嗎？

熱愛音樂的Janice，與結他手Michael及琴手Grey，組了隊名為「Noiseguys and the Whitegirl」的樂隊，專唱廣東及台灣抒情歌。「起名蠻可愛的。我們每人抽出自己最喜歡的英文單詞，然後拼湊而成。」Janice回想，剛開始他們滿腔熱忱，想參加各大小比賽，吸引更多聽眾，傳揚音樂的美好。可惜磕磕絆絆的，走得毫不安穩。他們錄好了〈陪着我走〉，還未發佈，琴手Grey便失去影蹤。

「我在這首歌裏，感受到大家對音樂的熱情和衝勁。」彈唱的背後本無意義，但現在，Janice想把它送回Grey身邊，寄望再有夾band的機會，能陪伴彼此、繼續追尋音樂夢。
• — — • • — —•
《星期五樂城》獨立音樂唱遊集♬
Channel：https://bit.ly/34h4w65

欣賞更多「Noiseguys and the Whitegirl」的作品♪
IG：@hei.tunggg
YouTube：janice珍尼斯
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
明周娛樂 https://www.mpweekly.com/entertainment/
https://www.instagram.com/entertainment.mpw
明周文化 https://www.mpweekly.com/culture/
想食明周 https://www.facebook.com/foodiempw/
INNER https://www.facebook.com/innermpw/
https://www.instagram.com/in__ner

牙齒矯正Power Chain橡皮筋關縫原理及五大用法。會不會痛？戴多久？斷了怎麼緊急處理？｜林榆芩醫師

矯正的時候所使用的橡皮筋大致分成三種：
只使用在傳統矯正器的O ring tie、
傳統和新型矯正器如戴蒙矯正器都會使用的關縫橡皮筋power chain、
病人自行更換的顎間橡皮筋Elastics/Rubber Band
本集針對關縫的power chain做講解

Power Chain，直接中文翻譯應該叫做「強力鎖鏈」，
聽起來有點恐怖，好像是要用力量很大的鎖鏈把牙齒拴在一起。
其實Power Chain不是金屬的鎖鏈，
他是有彈力的連在一起的橡皮筋，
利用橡皮筋拉扯後會回復原來形狀的拉力，
將橡皮筋兩端的牙齒拉攏靠近，
就可以關閉牙縫。
此外因為Power Chain配戴方便的特性，
它可以搭配鈕釦、骨釘，從各個方向靈活的施力，
達到多種不同方向移動的目的。
這支影片就是要介紹用途廣泛的Power Chain
同時解答網友提問關於Power Chain的問題

power chain
可以配合鈕扣、骨釘
做很多方向靈活的施力，用途廣泛。
戴的時間有多久，
每個人的狀況都不一樣。

💡影片重點

0:00 前情提要
0:33 power chain橡皮筋作用原理
1:18 關拔牙/缺牙縫
2:15 closing coil spring
4:00 關小齒縫
4:40 防止縫再打開
6:00 壓前牙/壓後牙
7:30 壓後牙(改開咬)
8:06 戴power chain會痛嗎
8:40 橡皮筋斷了怎麼辦
9:49 染色問題
10:25 要戴多久

音樂: Walk
音樂家: @iksonmusic

✏️相關文章
影響臉型變因暴牙只是其中一個
https://follow-heart.com/pow_face
二次矯正費用和效果值不值得
https://follow-heart.com/pow_pri
我需矯正牙齒？牙套美女怎來的
https://follow-heart.com/pow_beu

✉️歡迎追蹤
臉書粉專｜https://follow-heart.com/pow_fb
IG追起來｜https://follow-heart.com/pow_ig

#牙齒矯正橡皮筋 #powerchain #牙齒矯正

Kurukyki‘s Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/kurukynki/

這是Kurukyki 寄給我的禮物 不過也都是他的商品唷
實在是太美太可愛啦～～～～～
偷偷說 目前我的Instagram正在開他的團購唷
他送我的禮物這次幾乎都能團購到
如果有喜歡千萬不要錯過唷！！！

目前kurukynki的印章正在團購中啦
在這裡附上表單給大家啦！
https://forms.gle/8Fo73DoT7ZzTNGks6
如果有喜歡就可以來下單啦
因為影片在週五發佈 所以團購延至明天3/1唷

噢噢噢 第一次發全英文開箱影片
好緊張啊～～～～～～～～～～
不知道這樣的影片大家是否喜歡
太久沒好好講英文 退步有點嚴重..

音樂 / Music: 木吉他音樂放鬆器樂放鬆的地方休息，學習
演出者 / Performer: 音樂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m25kulwotV4&t=1230s

剪輯軟體 / editing tool: iMovie / Premiere Pro
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 手帳 | 文具 | 封蠟 | 印章 | 拼貼
Journal. Stationery, Wax seal. Stamp. Cut and paste
- 喜歡分享紀錄自己的生活
Loving to share and document my life
- 從寫手帳 專頁 到現在的影片
From document on paper, social media, and now filming

Facebook: Tracy L.
https://www.facebook.com/heyiamtracy/

Sharing Instagram: @_tracysjournal_
https://www.instagram.com/_tracysjournal_

Personal Instagram: @_iamtracy_
https://www.instagram.com/_iamtracy_/