Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
When I question the officers on inquiry
Please let them stand over there so they can see the video
Now I will invite Mr. Lee, secretary-general of Executive Yuan
Mr. Chen, minister of Internal Affairs
Mr. ***, national police agency director
Mr. Hsiao, vice-secretary of Executive Yuan
please tell them to stand over here and watch the video
We have a 3 minute video
Watch it carefully
Where's Mr. Hsiao (secretary-general)?
Where is he? I thought he's here.
Man: He asked for leave.
Man: I approved it, he has a rehearsal to attend.
Now look here, this is
the first half video of unarmed students in the executive yuan being evicted with violence by the police
Students chant: Withdraw the agreement with China; defend democracy.
At first, there were reporters inside the executive yuan with the students.
They were in good order, and were not much of them.
It would have been easy to evict them with-out violence
You can see that it was the police damaging public property x3
Most probably it was the police who ate the suncakes
We will never know what the police did inside
When all the doors were blocked by the police
They were the only ones behind it
We can also see that rows and rows of police were also blocking the stairs
The students were like sitting ducks
Gathered into this small space, which made them easy to be handled.
But what you first did was making the media leave
Police made all of the media leave the perimeter
The video shows that the police are actually pushing media personnels out
Some of the journalists were injured which were not shown in this video.
(Policeman says to anti-riot police squad: please get the media personnels out)
Legislator: Who is this guy? I have to know, please report to me later
This guy who told the anti riot police squad to evict the journalists, who is he?
Who gave the orders?
Is this your SOP?
Is making media leave your SOP?
After the journalists were evicted
the police inside weren't heavily armed
Of course they werenˇt heavily armed
But they do have truncheons.
They faced outside when they forced the media out
The students hopelessly shouted for the media to stay.
(Students: Media stay; freedom of press.)
They were just hopelessly shouting out slogans.
We do not see any students running out
We do not see them throwing objects.
Nor having any actions that were potentially harmful
They only shouted in hope of the media staying.
Now, let's see what kind of forces came
The police kept on changing different kinds of forces, this is the second kind.
The police gears here (XXXX I can't hear), now with shields
Now with shields, they could have surrounded the students with shields and removed and carried them out one by one
At this stage we thought you could have removed them without violence
BUT NOW LOOK WHAT YOU HAVE HERE!
THEY WERE PREPARING TO BEAT THEM WITH THIS WAVE
YOU WERE GOING TO BEAT THEM
THE STUDENTS COULD NOT FILM ANYTHING ANYMORE
BECAUSE YOU TRIED TO REMOVE THEM BRUTALLY.
Come, stand in front of the mic.
A student said
I could only suppress my trepidation
Try to calm others
Because a lot of female students started to cry
We knew we were going to be handled with extreme violence
The next second
They (the police) said
We will not permit any resistance
Is it really necessary to use this many anti-riot police?
If this was a legal law enforcement, was it necessary to evict the reporters?
The students said
What we faced the next second was inhumane and brutal treatment
Then they were bashed and kicked
The students kept asking, "Aren't we all Taiwanese?"
His fellow peers beaten
Then he was dragged and towed out of the building
When regained conscious, he was at the emergency station
Let's read more
Some female students were grabbed by the hair and were beaten to concussion
This is it
Director, director
in that space with such few students
You had multiple amounts of police in comparison
Were your subordinates capable of evicting the students non-violently?
Tell the people
Under the circumstances that we just saw
A pat on the shoulder or carrying the students out bare handed
Three to one or four to one
Were they capable?
In my opinion, I don't believe that they would have listened if we had told them to leave.
No, no, I'm telling you, could they have been carried them out? You are trying to blur the point
COULD THEY HAVE?
With all those men, COULD THEY HAVE?
HUH?
Non violent, Non violent...uh...
YOU THINK WHAT WE JUST SAW COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DONE WITHOUT VIOLENCE? You are afraid to answer
Iˇm not afraid to answer, yes we can.
YOU CAN DO THAT RIGHT?
WHY DIDN'T YOU THAT?
WHY IN THE FIRST PLACE WERE THERE FULLY ARMED SPECIAL FORCES?
WITH STEEL TRUNCHEONS! THAT KIND OF RIOT POLICE!
Who made the call? The commander on site? Or even higher ranks?
Officers on site could have done without violence like you said, but didn't choose to
But chose violence, who's orders?
The divisional commander... he thought it was appropriate under the circumstance
Wo who was the commander?
Who was it?
I have to look it up
YOU DON'T KNOW EVEN UNTIL NOW?
Yes
YOU THREE ARE A PILE OF IGNORANCE
Until now, you're either lying or trying to avoid responsibilities.
IT IS CLEARLY SHOWN THAT YOU TOOK ILLEGAL ACTIONS
YOU USED THE SWAT TEAM!
According the the "law"
It clearly states that
SWAT teams are composed of elites and quipped with selected equipments
Forming a special force
Specially trained
Deployed for special missions, and are used against organised and armed criminals
How dare you use this kind of standard to evict students that could be easily carried away
Okay
So is this your statement? Your statement is
There were mistakes during the mission
But it was because of the mistakes made by a few
Is this how you define this?
Yes
Okay
Minister, is this how you define it, too?
Yes
Okay
Mister secretary, is this also how Mr.Jiang, the premier, defines it?
I believe this was the police department's decision...
IS THIS HOW YOU DEFINE IT?
Yes
Ok. Director, when you people gave orders to evict the students, what options did you had in mind?
At all costs?
Absolute non-violence?
Who made the choice?
I told director Huang to do the utmost to eliminate this situation...
The utmost! Director: Yes DID YOU SAY THE WORDS "NON-VIOLENTLY"?
DID YOU SAY THESE WORDS
Director: No No you didn't
you guys have to take full responsibility x2
But youˇre avoiding it
BECAUSE THE COMMANDERS DIDN'T TELL THEM TO EVICT THE STUDENTS NON-VIOLENTLY!
WHAT THEY BROUGHT! WHAT THEY USED!
HEAVY ARMOUR FOR THEM TO USE
WHEN THEY SHOW UP THIS WAY AND DIDN'T RECIEVE ORDERS TO AVOID VIOLENCE...
BUT AFTER WHAT HAPPENED YOU BLAME THIS ON THE FEW (POLICE) WHO LACKS DISCIPLINE.
YOU JOKING?
Who are you to be the director? Who are you to be the minister?
Making them into a sandwich biscuit using this much force
At all costs
Heavily armed
No commands of non violence
Do the utmost
And to take responsibilities onto themselves
That's you! That's you! The three people standing here!
This is your standard
Do you want to apologise for this whole incident?
Director, will you apologise?
Do you think you need to apologise for PART of this incident? Or not at all?
Whole incident? PART of this incident? Not at all? Three options, which is yours?
Partially
Partially, yeah? which part?
I think the first part is, the outcome
Affecting everyone in this nation, we apologise for that.
You apologise for this, what about the way you handled it?
We are still under investigation
I cannot accept this
Okay now, Minister, what is your answer?
Same as the Director.
Yes? Say it!
We apologise for the uneasiness brought to our society.
What about the way handled?
We will explain after the incident is fully investigated.
I hope you don't wear out our resources for nothing, and make others below you take the responsibility.
Mister Secretary-General?
(bunch of BS.)
You actually are chief of staff
You don't take any responsibility(Sarcasm)
You didn't need to come (Sarcasm) It is the vice premier who should be present here.
This is only the matter of rank
Ok. Now i want you to promise me two things
Hand over all the video files
First, I want you to guarantee you won't destroy any evidence. Can you do that?
Can you do that?
Pardon, what did you just say?
To keep all evidence including security camera footage and evidence tapes. Promise you won't destroy them. Now, swear.
Of course we won't
Has the judicial branch preserved the evidence?Minister of Dept. of Criminal Investigation comes next. (For what? Unclear)
Director: in this case... uh (More BS, trying to shift the topic.) Congressman: Not yet, huh? Because there are lawsuits going on? Director: The Taipei Prosecutors Office is investigating this incident.
Have you demanded all of the evidence to be preserved?
We will give will give it to them.
You will? Okay.
The second thing i want you to promise is that the students that are currently occupying the legislative yuan, Promise you won't use violence to evict them.
Promise you won't use violence to evict them.
Can you promise that? That what happened in the executive yuan won't happen again.
Come, make your promise, what will you do to those in the legislative yuan?
If the protesters will keep the protest peaceful, like now, then I promise.
Then?
Unless the situation changes.
For example?
Some other acts of violence or hostility.
OK
But the protest in the Executive Yuan was neither.
Of course, they broke in.
You just couldnˇt handle the venue that they broke into.
It was actually the same thing. It was just your dignity and face that you were saving, you misused your power of justice.
So, you promise you won't use violence if the situation doesnˇt change
So that counts. Minister, are you going to back him up?
(Blabbering) Still, all these decisions should be made by the police agency.
Aren't you an official? You are a government official
Do you mean you don't have/want to take any responsibility?
Legislator, you mentioned ¨violence〃. There definitely wasnˇt anything you speak of.
Then what did you just apologise for?
We will tell the police to finish their duties in a lawful way.
Of course you guys have merits
But your faults outnumber your merits
Let's see, "Bloomberg Businessweek" says
Taiwan's president 'lit on all sides', is just like the former Ukrainian president
Shameful! President Ma, compared with Ukraine's former president who was brought down by the people.
The "Times Magazine" says
This tragedy reminds us of the 228 incident in 1949
"Times Magazine" March 24th
March 25th "Le Figaro Newspaper" says
Unarmed protesters facing armed police. Taiwan's democracy has never been in such crisis since the dictatorship ended 25 years ago
March 25th "The Guardian" says
Taiwanese protestors are fighting for democracy
You have merits because you let Mr. Jiang, the premier, can go to work on Monday
You have faults BECAUSE YOU LET PRESIDENT MA LOSE ALL HIS FACE IN FRONT OF THE ENTIRE WORLD
You three are in deep trouble!