國土防衛部隊
如果有一天,中国打到你家門口,你想抵抗,你想要保護你的家人、孩子,你所居住的家園,你的生命財產安全。
但是電話斷了、網路沒了、停電停水了,就算在你家客廳裡,也是一片漆黑,你該怎麼做?你聽說你的鄰居、朋友聚集在外面的街口,正在抵擋一台裝甲車,你想幫忙,想加入,但你不知道你該怎麼作戰,你不知道你該跟誰聯繫,你甚至沒有一台這時候足以聯繫他人的無線電。
拿起掃把也跟他拚了,這是一個形容詞,我們都知道,我們可以不只是這樣而已。
你不是役齡的現役軍人,你就是一個普通的勞工、上班族,但你知道,你保家衛國的心,不比現役軍人來得低。
那時候的你,該怎麼做?現在的你,又可以怎麼做?
壯闊台灣 吳怡農 與前參謀總長李喜明將軍,近日在報紙上投書,講述「建立國土防衛部隊」的重要性。
他們首先就提出一個重要的觀念:
「我們永遠不會放棄;任何關於停止抵抗的訊息都是錯誤的」。
「國土防衛部隊」這個概念,來自美國的「國土防衛部隊」(National Guard)與後備部隊(Army Reserve),也來自瑞典政府近年來在倡議的「全民國防」的概念。
這是個有明確定義,也是正規軍事用詞,部分人士斷章取義,稱其為「在家當兵」。
這些政治人物,甚至利用這樣的斷章取義,不斷炒作,把一個理當全民可以理性、嚴肅討論的公共政策,變成了炒作聲量的素材。
國土防衛部隊,簡言之,就是藏兵於民的概念。
它把「保家衛國」,到前線作戰的概念,拉回到自己的鄰里、社區、縣市。
「保家衛鄉」。
如果發生戰爭,你想要保衛你的家人,保衛你的親戚,保衛你的社區,你需要一定的作戰能力,你也需要一定的團體協助。
這就很像是古早時代,庄頭庄尾的自己組織的民團的概念很像,但是,要真正有戰力,散兵游勇,是不夠的。
現代的「國民兵」,需要現代化的訓練,也需要真正有具備一定程度的通訊、動員、作戰的能力。
以美國的國土防衛部隊為例,一個一般的國民兵,平均一個月到部隊單位裡接受兩天的訓練,在訓練期間,有薪資,也有一定的醫療保險計劃(免費健檢)。讓有意願保家衛國的人,保持一定的體能、戰力,並且在國家緊急狀況時,可以「保家衛鄉」。
所以,可以說,「國民兵」,是一個讓人可以有正常工作、成家立業之餘,還可以保持戰力,並且還有一定薪資補貼的編制。
現在,身兼兩份工作,「斜槓」的狀況,很常見。「國土防衛部隊」這個制度,也可以是一個兼職工作的選項。
在吳怡農的文章裡,有詳細講述這個制度可以先以小型部隊作為實驗,先試試看,讓已經屆除役年齡的人也可以保持戰力、志願保家衛國。
我在閱讀吳怡農這篇文章時,也不時想到地方平時就已經有的「民防」的編制。
根據現有「民防法」的規定,每個縣市、區、里,都編有民防人員訓練、演習、服勤或支援軍事勤務召集的工作。
但現有民防法的規定中,訓練時間只足因應緊急的天災等狀況,而且,也因為結合了義消、義交、義警等系統,訓練與支援的任務,都比較傾向一般性的緊急狀況。
「國土防衛部隊」概念的提出,是要加強「軍事」面的訓練,我也認為,薪餉、醫療福利等制度,也可以導入,並且,有真的讓軍事訓練落實的機會。
我認為,修改「民防法」,加強現有的「民防」的訓練,並且讓軍事相關訓練,納入民防的體系中,是個在立法上可以先微幅修改的方向。
當我們了解到底什麼是「國土防衛部隊」的正確觀念,我們就會知道,那些要把這個討論矮化為「在家當兵」,是多無聊、也多沒有營養的政治口水。
這是個值得我們好好討論的議題,在中国文攻武嚇日益增大的今時今日,我們更應該嚴肅思考。
延伸閱讀:
李喜明/備役上將 | 吳怡農
《後備的轉型:建立國土防衛部隊》
https://nong.tw/civil-defense-force/?fbclid=IwAR1tSAtbSEkB6BKPTrFWXH5uz8U7Q__Hl449J_fCLklbrVUwFGkE-MSJvDc
吳怡農+李喜明 中央社專訪
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202010150264.aspx
PS。圖為我在這週的連續雨勢前,在情人湖公園入口,要求北觀處儘速派人前來清淤,避免雨時積水淹到路面上的會勘。
基隆市議員 張之豪
同時也有1部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過15萬的網紅pennyccw,也在其Youtube影片中提到,Allen Iverson cuts his hair. Could it be true? The famous cornrows are gone? Yes, yes and yes. Indeed, when Allen Iverson cuts his hair, it makes the ...
civil guard 在 Claudia Mo/毛孟靜 Facebook 的精選貼文
#立會去留 #RTHKLettertoHK
Participating in the upcoming extended term of the legislative council is, I feel, the lesser of two evils. Of course the one-year postponement of the election which should have been held this month was an anti-democratic trick by the government to avoid facing the voters. The extended term surely lacks legitimacy in the public eye.
But with liberal and democratic institutions being constantly undermined by an executive seeking to bring the other arms of government under its control, we must take every opportunity to voice our concerns, use every forum to fight back in the interests of Hong Kong’s governance, and the promises enshrined in the Basic Law.
Of course previously I’ve had my reservations about staying on, as it would mean accepting a quasi Beijing appointment in an un-elected legislature, ie without the people’s mandate. I’ve had my moments of a psychic tug-of-war.
It’s also understood that many of our young view some of the veterans in the democratic camp as washouts, that they belong to an earlier civilisation and should have been “outed” anyway. Some online criticism would go as far as, and I quote, “Can’t let go of the pay and the glory associated with a Legco seat, can you? Like you are being thrown a bone, a bone only but you can’t wait to go get it”, unquote.
Amongst the democrats I’m probably, probably, the one with the least
political baggage: The fact that I do not have a political party background; that I’m not young and as a result I wouldn’t need to worry too much about career development or prospects. And so perhaps I am more able to consider the “stay or quit” question with an even more free mind.
What’s happened is the number of pro-democracy legislators has already been thinned by legal manoeuvres to oust elected members. But we can perhaps muster just enough votes to deny the pro-government camp absolute control over the council.
Unrepresentative though it is, the council often is not just a talking shop and rubber stamp. It does have some ability to query officials, demand information and make constructive criticism of government proposals and policies. Even when the criticism is not particularly constructive, or some would even call it destructive, it could at least help vent public anger and frustration.
We need opposition voice to at least better health policy, labour rights, pollution, education and public transport problems.
Between now and next September we should be able to show Hongkongers that we can be of value in fighting for their interests. Although the system remains heavily weighted against us, the legislature remains a place where we can stand up, on the spot, against the arrogance and incompetence of the administration.
We don’t just make noise, we carry on to serve as the voice of the people. We shouldn’t become outsiders looking in. We need feet on the ground.
Sure we could be running into a storm without even an umbrella. Things could get painful. It’s so much easier to quit. But to quit would just be taking a placebo line. We cannot pretend the pain is not there, we just need to deal with it, fight it.
The lawmaker capacity does carry a degree of power. Once I called the agriculture and fisheries department, demanding to speak to the department head, saying it’s a matter of utter emergency. What was happening that day was a government wild pig hunting team armed with Remington's was scheduled to go to a village, provoking an unnecessary but possible violent standoff between villagers and animal rights campaigners.
My little intervention was successful. The AFCD head heeded and cancelled the hunting mission that day. And thanks to joint efforts on the civil society and Legco fronts such wild boar hunting squads have now been scrapped altogether.
Another episode that has been lodged in my head involved what happened on August 31 last year. Speculation was rife that there were fatalities inside the Prince Edward MTR station that evening, at the peak of our protest movement. I made a number of official enquiries and subsequently managed to have a face-to-face meet-up with the fire services chief.
Although in the end neither the police nor the fire department could satisfactorily explain the discrepancies in the number of injured and the state of injuries, at the time it was the only way to prompt —- if not force —- the civil servants involved to do their explaining in public, to the media.
It’s experiences of the kind that help to solidify my opinion that democrats should remain on the inside. Because of what we do, a lot of incompetence and hypocrisy, sometimes even some crookedness get exposed.
Beijing loyalists and the pro-government type would keep on politely tip-toeing around issues so as not to offend the authorities, they would keep on spinning mistruths, the democrats can counter that performance.
At a time when Hong Kong is politically, financially going down the tubes, with our young in particular feeling helpless, at a time when hope seems to be dismissed and punishment dealt, when discontent could morph into pure hate and antipathy to the government, democrats should help by not abandoning any battleline.
Anyone who wants to query government policies, draw attention to abuses, obtain information now faces increasing difficulties.
Assembly is restricted. People have to guard their words. Much mainstream media simply reflect official policies and journalists now have to be approved by the police to be treated as such. However inadequate it may be, the legislative council remains a forum for questions and comment, and is widely reported.
And popularly elected legislators in particular have standing which cannot be ignored at home, and they are also focus of foreign inquiry about Hong Kong issues. Journalistic institutions magnify the impact of such individuals who would otherwise find themselves crying in the wilderness, lone voices without a platform. Legco is a platform, however shaky.
If results of an opinion poll —-expected by Tuesday —-commissioned by the Democratic Party tell us to go —- easy, we’ll just pack up.
But Im hoping for the opposite. I for one would want to keep staying on the Legco frontline, standing up for what I believe. Nothing egotistical about it. We will simply take what's left and fight it out.
I’m prepared to take the lesser evil.
XXX
https://www.rthk.hk/radio/radio3/programme/lettertohongkong
civil guard 在 Xiaxue Facebook 的精選貼文
Reposting a snippet from my latest blog post, you can read the full article here: http://xiaxue.blogspot.com/2020/07/raeesah-khan-ge-2020-and-being-labeled.html?m=1
I’m posting more about Raeesah Khan today.
First, a disclaimer. I do not dislike the Worker’s Party.
Of all the opposition parties, I think they are the best. I live in Aljunied grc, and they have done a great job so far. I agree with many of the policy suggestions in their manifesto.
For example, redundancy insurance, abolishing the retirement age, or lowering the age of eligibility for BTO flats, which will help singles and our LGBTQ community to get housing just like married couples are.
Previously I mentioned on my ig stories that Raeesah Khan is not suitable to be an MP.
Today I am going to ask some very important questions which I hope both WP and Raeesah will answer.
I refer to this tweet by Raeesah in the photos.
It appears that she is saying her political views can be summed up by
- Angela Davis’ political views
- Intersectional feminism
Many of you may not know about Angela Davis, but she is a far-left activist, who spent her life sympathising with some of the most oppressive communism regimes around.
She literally calls herself a communist, and was a member of the Communism Party in USA. I think there is no need to explain how horrible communism is.
And of course in order to make any non-communist country a communist state, it would involve total revolution, many lives, and replacing it with a totalitarian regime in charge of redistributing wealth back to its citizens.
She is also a prison abolitionist, campaigning for prisons to completely be eradicated. Where to put the murderers, I can’t seem to find a good answer, because it seems she also is against the death penalty.
Angela Davis was a member of the Black Panthers, a brutal communist, anti-semite organization. In 1970, Angela Davis bought the weapons that were used for a shootout during a trial of 3 black inmates accused of killing a white prison guard. All the black men and judge who was held hostage perished in the gunfight, and Davis fled the state. She was eventually caught.
Even though she conspired to commit murder, the jury found her not guilty.
In short, this woman is the antithesis to the Singapore that Mr Lee Kuan Yew wanted.
This tweet of Raeesah Khan’s talking about Angela Davis was posted only a few weeks ago, but surprisingly enough, nobody is talking about it.
Anyone who knows who Angela Davis is should be horror-filled that a candidate running for parliament is a fan of hers, and claims that the reading of her books represents her political views.
Previously I mentioned Raeesah appears to be one of those radical leftists who seem hell bent on bringing the toxic, cancerous identity politics that America is so notorious for into Singapore.
There are racial issues that minorities face in Singapore, of course there is. It is tough to be a minority in any country.
But instead of discussing calmly and logically what new politics can be introduced to solve these problems or what laws need to change, proponents of Identity politics instead try to make a single race the enemy.
When there are enemies, people unite. Political parties using this method will see themselves get votes if they manage to market themselves as the empathetic ones, even if the politics they impose do more evil than good in the long run.
Society is then split into a them vs us, while tribalistic infighting ensue. If you disagree with this method of classifying victims by their skin colour (when in fact so many things determine a person’s privilege, such as looks, height, family wealth, health, both parents around etc etc), you are automatically seen as racist and the bad guy.
Because nobody wants to seem morally corrupt or unsympathetic, they prop up this system.
Instill this sentiment into citizens long enough and resentment builds. The ones constantly told they are being oppressed will start seeing oppression everywhere. They won’t even try to succeed in life, because they are told they are so oppressed they can never make it. They believe their oppressors owe them.
Meanwhile, the majority race starts feeling angry at constantly being called oppressors. Or maybe they are poor and unhappy themselves, but see that resources for help are only made available for minorities but not them. If they were indeed racist before, this makes them even more racist.
What eventually happens is civil war. We cannot have this poison in Singapore.
Raeesah’s has apologised for her posts, but nobody needed to hear whether she is sorry she was being insensitive.
What people need to know is:
Does she still believe our courts are corrupt as she so insinuated? Does she still believe law enforcement unfairly target minorities? If not, what made her change her mind? Her statement does not address any of this.
Worker’s Party claim they did not see those posts of Raeesah’s. Fair enough. But I do not believe they have done such terrible vetting that they have not seen her tweet about Angela Davis which was so recent.
I wish to ask Raeesah Khan, DO YOU DISAVOW ANGELA DAVIS’ POLITICAL VIEWS?
- Do you believe that Singapore, through a brutal revolution and death, can become a communist utopia?
- Do you think that everyone in Singapore should not own private property and should have equal wealth, the very values communism epouses? If so, do you seek to redistribute your multi-millionaire dad's wealth to the poverty-stricken citizens of Singapore?
- Do you agree that it is only with violence and death do we achieve true freedom?
- Do you seek to abolish prisons in Singapore?
- Do you believe in the ideologies of Karl Marx, or Valdamir Lenin?
As for Worker’s Party, why did you field a candidate who holds extreme left-wing views?
Do you agree with her ideologies and think it aligns with yours? DO YOU ENDORSE THESE FAR LEFT VIEWS??
Please answer these questions. I write all these not because I am a PAP lackey, even though obviously people will say I am. Despite what you think, I believe it is healthy to have opposition seats in parliament.
However, I absolutely do not want to see candidates such as Raeesah Khan in our parliament - she brings with her dangerous political views that can topple the peaceful society we built over the years and is completely against everything that Singapore stands for. As it is, the mindless youth of Singapore are already echoing her dangerous ideologies.
I would rather any opposition joker win than her.
civil guard 在 pennyccw Youtube 的最讚貼文
Allen Iverson cuts his hair. Could it be true? The famous cornrows are gone? Yes, yes and yes. Indeed, when Allen Iverson cuts his hair, it makes the headlines. That's how closely associated cornrow braids have been with Detroit Pistons guard Allen Iverson.
Allen Iverson Cuts His Hair: A brief History of Cornrows
When Allen Iverson sported cornrow braids, he was in a sense paying homage to his ancestors, for the cornrow hairstyle originated in Africa. Historians believe that the hairstyle dates back as far as 500 B.C., in fact. Various styles served to transmit a variety of attributes, including social status, age, and religious affiliation.
The cornrow braid hairstyle survived the ravages of slavery in America. Maintaining the hairstyle was one of the few ways that slaves could remember and celebrate their native culture's rich traditions. The cornrow styles that black slaves fashioned were an amalgamation of African, European and Native American hairstyle trends. And, interestingly, among some runaway slaves, flamboyant cornrow styles were worn as blatant acts of defiance.
After the Civil War, more and more African Americans began to straighten their hair. Among black children, though, the cornrow style remained a place where the tradition was enthusiastically continued. Oftentimes, in fact, little girls would get their first cornrow braids while sitting at the knees of their grandmothers.
Allen Iverson Cuts off his Cornrows: Whatever Happened to Cicely Tyson?
When Allen Iverson first decided to rock cornrows, he may have been indirectly influenced by actress Cicely Tyson. Back in 1963, she wore cornrows while she co-starred in the television drama "East Side/West Side" with George C. Scott and Elisabeth Wilson. Arguably, it was Cicely Tyson who helped kick off the "Black is Beautiful" movement in America during the late 60s and early 70s, which was a time when black women began to eschew hair straightening in favor of more "natural" styles.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7c869/7c8698c8ffd0ec4d20e11ca8120a3b63160b1658" alt="post-title"
civil guard 在 History of the Guardia Civil. - YouTube 的推薦與評價
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/46354/4635486b3f310877429640576628c8aa3e23ce4f" alt="影片讀取中"
The Guardia Civil was founded in the reign of Elizabeth II of Spain, and endorsed by Gonzalez Bravo's Government, with a general consensus ... ... <看更多>
civil guard 在 芬蘭近代史學會- 2. 白衛隊(White Guard, 芬蘭語 ... 的推薦與評價
白衛隊(White Guard, 芬蘭語:Suojeluskunta),又稱為民防隊(Civil. ... 又稱為民防隊(Civil Guard),為芬蘭內戰期間屬於右派、保守派、自由派陣營的武裝力量。 ... <看更多>