與網友辯論台灣議題

william.c

漏了這一段。

Murray(48)

>>....... The principle is indeed simple: corruption is what leads to the downfall of a regime. And that includes Richard Nixon.<<

我想討論最後一句。一直我們討論的是贪污，Murray的corruption擴大到腐敗及腐化(腐敗是行動、腐化是狀况。一直我們討論的是贪污會毀减一個政權，Murray的regime卻縮小到某一屆政府，甚至總統本人。

老Dick是說謊，失信於人民，掩飾罪証，違犯憲法。當時的白宫無疑可入於corruption的一類(行政上腐敗，但不是疲頹無力)。但老Dick不是贪污，整個國家體系也並沒有贪污，並沒有全面腐敗及腐化。老Dick的白宫體系也不是美國regime。謹識。

由此，我不大同意「And that includes Richard Nixon」的申論。(我是水門事件迷)。

william.c

ifg
註冊用戶


space to self-indulge

  Quote:
Originally posted by swana at 2006-3-2 01:37:
....

PRHK is a Hong Kong web-radio hosted 100% by HK people, who are not necessarily familiar with or interested in Taiwan issues.  W.C. is here to exploit our lack of understanding and indifference, to position himself above all others as a de facto ‘Taiwan expert’.

Newcomer may not know, people of this forum has learnt to ignore him, giving him space to self-indulge, letting him to continue his tirades, allowing him to hallucinate in a self-proclaimed image of an expert, which is neither justified nor earned.

Do not challenge him to a debate, for this person is not worthy of your time.
I also doubt whether his English comprehension skill is up to par!!.  



Swana 呢篇o野都要茶茶自典：-

<i>who are not necessarily familiar with or interested in Taiwan issues</i>
Freudian slip? ... but 班大嘴又 necessarily interested in 評論播！重好有見地丫

<i>exploit our lack of understanding and indifference</i>
<b> "our" </b>可能有些少語病

<i> hallucinate in a self-proclaimed image of an expert</i>
條友真真有 "proclaim" an  image 還是某某reader self-hallucinate ?

<i>challenge him to a debate</i>
his challenge is for a response, which I think he got it
whether it's gonnabea debate is doubtful, but looks like Franzkafka is trying to engage

老實說， william c. d posts 又真係長些少
小人都睇唔掂，唔知 up 乜
但 Swana 呢篇就精釆絕 ... 絕對OT對人不對事
讓我玩埋最后一句：
<i>I also doubt whether his English comprehension skill is up to 岸par!!.</i>

XDDDD

william.c

各位，假如我怕人地點睇我，我就不會上論壇贴文了，cyber space是個自由空間，我是個IT人，熟悉cyber文化。唉，同時，睇下乜人至得架。大佬，以上是匯文，有人睇唔得哂我無計，我唔會遷就人的，不計較有冇人睇的。

Btw，我無話過自己係 ‘Taiwan expert’，讚我又唔似，屈我又唔知想屈我乜，夠pop咪揾出一D我講錯嘅地方囉，又唔係，真無聊。

OK，以後不會回應任何不懷好意的叫蠶。

william.c

>>夠pop咪揾出一D我講錯嘅地方囉<<

白痴想challenge我，當然唔答啦，唔通佢痴跟佢痴咩？有隻網脚想用南方朔打我(不是指第一位贴友，係第二位)。南方朔又唔同，級數高好多。但不幸，累到南方朔成為我操刀之物(南方朔不會看此論壇的了)，呢隻網脚無影無蹤。

anyway，有冇人睇我帖文唔通自己唔知咩？有人嬲到發文向我叫蠶，反映我贴文剌到一些不同意我內容的人，多謝捧場！對唔住！繼續刺。

william.c

franzkafka
中級用戶


  Quote:
Originally posted by ifg at 2006-3-13 12:53 AM:
challenge him to a debate
his challenge is for a response, which I think he got it
whether it's gonnabea debate is doubtful, but looks like Franzkafka is trying to engage



唉, 大佬, 你咪擺我上台, 我老早已經舉白旗投降. 你想同佢玩, 你咪自己搞壇perestroika round II囉 -- 然後你兩個鬥吹, 一定惦丫!
我真係要同佢玩, 幾句搞掂, 如下:
一篇評南方朔, 一百字內應該搞掂, 可以吹一千字以上, 睇到你暈為止.... 好簡單之嘛, 一句, 政治人物嘅決定, 係評論裡面, 係唔應該被道德化. 講完.
咁問題黎勒... william.c有無自己跟呢個標準呢? 佢評陳水扁, 又係唔係做埋同一樣野?

william.c

swana
註冊用戶


#60  self-indulge at a later time...

ifg 大人駕到, 點可以唔俾面答下,
不過這兩天忙著收拾行李搭飛機,
等我返左香港坐定定先至同你繼續 self-indulge....

self-indulge, self-hallucinate, whatever that may be, at a later time.

william.c

ifg
註冊用戶


#63  舉白旗投降

  Quote:
Originally posted by franzkafka at 2006-3-13 02:55:

唉, 大佬, 你咪擺我上台, 我老早已經舉白旗投降. 你想同佢玩, 你咪自己搞壇perestroika round II囉 -- 然後你兩個鬥吹, 一定惦丫!
...  

路過就多口o者
呢個池有 william.c 就多 d clickrate
否則 ......

反廿三谷果壇
舉白旗都睇唔到啦

鬥吹就留番比《龍門陣》d 主持

william.c

>>呢個池有 william.c 就多 d clickrate<<

ifg係咪講笑？咁叫多 d clickrate？在台灣網論壇，半日就有這個數( hot subject)。

william.c

ifg
註冊用戶



#65  咁叫多 d clickrate？

  Quote:
Originally posted by william.c at 2006-3-13 19:16:
>>呢個池有 william.c 就多 d clickrate<<

ifg係咪講笑？咁叫多 d clickrate？在台灣網論壇，半日就有這個數( hot subject)。  



閣下d thread 唔睇內容唔回
都起碼要 click 6-7-8 o下先 surf 完
比起其它 d 口痕友係有d 長度
以岸伯口吻 ....夠哂多...再多幾個william.c要另開異號科林

台灣網 <-> 香港網
又點比？ 呢面番鬼佬多 d
識講識聽都未必識寫中文架