Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light

assault boobs

So as well as umbrellas, cling-wrap and water pistols, boobs are now an offensive weapon in Hong Kong that our burly police force, armed with, guns, carbon-graphite batons and pepper spray should fear.

“Stand-back lady, those boobs have the potential to assault me!”

It really is a sad state of affairs and shows just how desperate the Hong Kong Government is to gain convictions of protesters at any costs. Never mind that the rest of the World will scratch its head and wonder, what on Earth is going on in Hong Kong? None of this matters, for there’s only one direction the Hong Kong Government is looking for approval and that is to the north.

In reality, no one will look into the real detail of the case and find out how or why a grown man, with years of police training and carrying weapons, could be assaulted by a young woman’s boobs. Or how possibly the softest part of a woman’s body could become so dangerous as to warrant her being sent to prison? The sensational headline is enough to make Hong Kong look ridiculous. No need to delve any further. The damage is done and the biggest boob is Hong Kong’s credibility. The Onion couldn’t have made up a better headline.

But away from the absurd headlines and endless innuendoes, there’s a very real message being sent out to Hong Kong protesters and that is, there is no limit to how far the Hong Kong Government will go to try and secure prosecutions of those it feels are politically opposed to it. The agenda is to scare people off the street at any cost, even if that means making breasts dangerous weapons.

As a regular observer of protests in Hong Kong, I’ve become accustomed to seeing the police gently tap away Blue Ribbon supporters who are drinking on the street, openly provoking conflicts, jostling with protesters and wait for it, shoving and sometimes even hitting policeman. All of which are absorbed by the police force and explained away as natural, spontaneous acts of frustration towards the unreasonable protesters. However, flip over to the other side of the street and if you touch a police man it would constitute serious assault worthy of a violent arrest. On top of this, if you happen to find yourself near a violent police arrest, then everyone in the area becomes guilty by association and could be subject to violent arrest, beatings with batons or pepper sprayed without warning.

The police really act out a Dr. Jekyll and Mr.Hyde cabaret show on every protest now or; these people here, arrest them at any cost, those people over there, do not arrest them at any cost.

So every protest, the absurd pantomime begins, scores of police escort rowdy blue ribbons, sometimes kilometres to get cabs home erstwhile, on the same street, PTU officers run down protesters and hog tie them, kneel on their heads, like they were knife wielding manics.

Sometimes I imagine that surely some of the police officers must be embarrassed by their openly biased behaviours towards one group over another, but then reality kicks in and I can see in most of their eyes that they so hate the democracy protesters on the street that if they were given a free choice of what to do, they wouldn’t address the bias, but instead would up the level of violence threefold.

Protests are increasingly becoming war zones by design, with the the lion-share of people arrested being Localists. But don’t be fooled that this is because Localists are less law abiding or more wanted. The target of the war is on protests!

The HK Government believes the best way to solve the protest problem in Hong Kong is to hit it hard and make all protests look like unreasonable radicals and increase the cost of attending. The HK Police Force is a more than willing accomplice in this dark plot.

The only way to stop this wicked plan succeeding is to get out on the streets and reclaim the city back street by street, person by person. Just like on September 28th, show the Police and Government, the more they introduce violence into society, the more people will come out to resist and say no!

Why More Independence for Hong Kong Makes Sense

one country two systems

The Chinese economy is now facing its strongest challenges for a generation and Xi JinPing’s best efforts to create a nationalistic, shareholder, last stand for the stock market seem to have largely failed. What the fall out from this will be we can only speculate, but the enormous economic disaster that is the Chinese economy is not of Hong Kong’s making. Back in the colonial days, if the British economy collapsed, Hong Kong would not be expected to fall on its sword in sympathy.  Likewise, given the stormy times ahead for China, Hong Kongers should not be looking at going down with the sinking ship, but instead working on preserving what makes the city different, or the Two Systems part of the Basic Law. Given this, the idea of a Hong Kong City State becomes increasingly more viable and appealing.

The impracticalities of a Hong Kong City State are often premised on the geopolitics of Asia remaining similar to what it has been for the last 30 years. But once you accept the premise that the geopolitics of Asia are heading into turbulent seas, then the question of how best Hong Kong can survive the storm becomes much more pertinent and pressing. More independence and autonomy, and not less, suddenly become compelling.

When you live in the shadow, of the overly jealous and malign CCP, even uttering the word independence under your breath is high treason against The Party. Certainly, there are significant amounts of people who believe the independence debate in Hong Kong was created by the CCP to create social division within the democratic movement and brand everyone who opposes the government as splitists.  In China, there can be no worse a traitor than a splitist. However, most of the anti-independence arguments are actually ill-thought out if we work back from 2047. For, when we look at the pros and cons of more independence based on 2047 as a starting point, it starts to make a lot of sense and a much smarter path to follow than blithely accepting whatever bones the CCP wishes to throw Hong Kong erstwhile its own economy and political system rips itself apart.

It’s not too early to ask the question, what will happen come 2047? Does Hong Kong law become superseded by Mainland law? Because if that’s going to be the case, the day this is officially announced, whether it be tomorrow or in ten years time, will be like pulling a plug on the city. Money, resources and people will stampede to safer havens. Those that faithfully pledge their full allegiance to The Party, will be left in a hollow shell of a city as anything that creates real, global value will be gone.

If your argument against greater Hong Kong independence is that HK’s unchangeable destiny is to eventually be  fully assimilated into CCP’s China and become a carbon copy of any other CCP city then you must first be clear what these other cities will look like in five years time, or even five months time! Simply pointing out that we need to be more like ‘them’, but having no clue what ‘them’ will look like and having zero control of how ‘they’ are created is no plan at all. Hong Kong certainly has all the tools to make a positive contribution to the place known as China for many years to come. The same can’t be said of the multitude of cites we’re supposed to be more like, and that includes Shanghai. The most likely future for these cities are astronomically high, local debts, huge environmental clean-up bills, violent, social unrest and rampant corruption. None of which Hong Kong suffers from yet. Hong Kong has everything it needs to protect itself from such a bleak future, but unfortunately the current government seems intent on throwing away all the city’s global advantages in a lame attempt to show loyalty to a broken political part that pretends its a country.

No one who advocates greater independence is dreaming that Hong Kong isn’t part of China in a physical sense, but being geographically part of a continent and being ruined by the politically oppressive CCP are not one-in-the-same. The CCP is not China, it is not the country, neither is it the people. It is a shadowy, political organisation with a horrific track record for wreaking havoc upon the peoples of China throughout its very short and violent tenure. There will come a time when the CCP no longer holds power, but there will still be a China and also city in its south called Hong Kong. This is what the independence debate is based on, a practical approach to preservation, and there’s a lot to be protected here in this quasi-City State. This is the true pragmatic path for Hong Kongers now, or how does Hong Kong negotiate the impending disaster that is the CCP’s complete loss of trust in China and not be destroyed with it?

Currently the CCP tirelessly tries to bewitch pragmatists in Hong Kong with the narrative that the only future lies with them, a transient and decaying political entity, motivated by self-preservation and quick gain. However this lie becomes increasingly less convincing with every passing week.  Hong Kongers are no stranger in handling inept northern governments. They have played this game for almost two centuries and they know when the winds of change howl, and China looks like a shaky pile of eggs (危如累卵 – Wei Ru Lei Luan), their future lies in protecting their own autonomy and not integrating more into turmoil.

The opinions in this article are of those of the writer, if you agree or disagree feel free to leave a comment here or on our facebook page. The wonders of a free press allow for a discussion and debate of ideas – unlike north of the border.

cartoon: www.anntelnaes.com

Happy 18th Birthday Hong Kong SAR

hong kong flag2

As the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region turns 18 never has it been so obvious and open how the pro-China sycophants are looking to destroy and undermine Hong Kong for their own self interests.

The lack of respect and disdain Chief Executive CY Leung has for Hongkongers (as opposed to Mainland Hong Kong residents) is obvious every time he opens his mouth and either insults HongKongers or sticks his tongue further up the Mainlands arse.

689’s latest show of pettiness and vindictiveness is to not invite the Legco members who voted against the fake universal suffrage bill last month to the Hong Kong 18th Anniversary flag raising ceremony.

Beijing what you fail to understand is that you have created the discontent and anti-China feeling here in Hong Kong by imposing on us completely incompetent Chief Executives who couldn’t run an orgy in a brothel.

What I fail to understand is why you want to turn Hong Kong into just another mainland city when so many members of the NPC have invested their personal money in Hong Kong purely because it’s not a Chinese city…

I know it goes against the basic CCP’s dictate of line your own pockets first and let everyone else fight over the scraps – but if you want to ease tensions here and in cities on the mainland you need to start looking after the people you claim to be representing. Pitting penniless peasants against each other so the CCP could stay in power worked well in the past. But HongKongers and many Mainlanders are educated and aware and not happy to suffer so corrupt government officials can enrich themselves.

In less than a year you’ve allowed CY to destroy the reputation of the Hong Kong Police and it’s relationship with HongKongers. Camera phones and the internet expose the lies the police tell. One video can be edited/cut to support your lies, but hundreds shot from different angles expose the truth – and that genie can never be forced back into it’s bottle.

So Xi Jinping, as an 18th Birthday present to HongKongers why not give 689 the boot and impose a leader with a brain and an understanding of how to return Hong Kong to its status as the World’s Greatest City. Why should you do that? Pure self interest – a thriving dynamic Hong Kong, drives Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and other mainland cities to improve and become great. A neutered Hong Kong removes that incentive. There’s enough people and money around in China to have several great and unique megalopolis.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY HONG KONG Special Administrative Region!

Graphic: credit to the original artist

This is Hong Kong, not China

It’s noisy outside Legco! Not with chants from people about what they believe in, but because the Pro-Beijing mob have wheeled in a concert quality sound system to drown out anyone who isn’t getting paid to be there. Not wanting to hear people who disagree with their worship of all thing$ North of the Border, they don’t want to see them either… Hundreds of banners and placards have been erected to shield the ‘I’ll do anything for a dollar’ brigade from those who believe that the people running Hong Kong should be held accountable for their actions.

I’m tempted to write that their was much wondering about why these compensated protestors (selling their integrity for 88cents and a bowl of plastic rice) were wearing shiny new numbered shirts, but nobody cared.

As a person who loves Hong Kong and has proudly called it home for over 20 years. I love that the place I call home has freedom of speech, something denied those living North of the border. I rejoice that hard work and talent are rewarded regardless of race, colour or sex, unlike up North where it’s who you know and how thick is the wad of notes openly passed across the table… So what I find most offensive about those supporting this fake bill of universal suffrage is that they’re waving Mainland flags.

If those protesting in favour of bill believe it’s in the best interests of all HongKongers then put away those Chinese flags because you live in Hong Kong not China.

Here’s a simple question for all those who love the Mainland and think government officials don’t need to be accountable to the people for their actions. What’s the biggest and most publicised drive of the current General Secretary of the Communist Party of China? Xi Jinping most media covered focus is anti-corruption – not health, not jobs, not housing, not education. not the economy… Anti-Corruption, the arresting and jailing of those working for the government who instead of looking out for the people, line their own pockets and beat up those who complain about it. If the $50million CY Leung took from one of the largest sub-contractors of the majority government owned MTR was all above board. Then why didnt he declare it and prove he paid tax on it.

Here’s another few questions for those people waving red flags:
If the mainland’s way of doing things is so wonderful, why is much of wealth of China’s 1%ers invested outside China? Rich Americans invest in America, Rich Brits invest in Britain. Rich Mainland Chinese invest everywhere except China!

You never read of HongKongers flooding across the border to the North to smuggle things to Hong Kong. Yet thousands upon thousands of Mainlanders flood into Hong Kong daily to smuggle everything from milk powder to frozen meat to luxury goods (many ironically originally made in China) across the border – why because they don’t trust products made in China!

If the ‘Mainland way’ you love so much is so wonderful…
Why are Hong Kong children being squeezed out of schools because the classes are full of Mainland kids!
Why are our hospital beds full of Mainland patients?
Why do Mainland mothers flock to Hong Kong to give birth?
Why are local jewelry stores routinely emptied of gold by Mainland tourists?
Why since the handover have almost a million people left the Mainland on one-way permits to live in Hong Kong?

We HongKongers are proud of our home, it’s not called the World’s Greatest City for nothing! Yet our traitorous Chief Executive CY Leung is systematically and deliberately destroying the people and the city he’s supposed to serve.

The people of Hong Kong peacefully and politely showed CY, Beijing and the world their displeasure with his policies – CY’s response… to declare that 50% of HongKongers were too poor to know what was best for them. To destroy the integrity of the HK Police by having them beat up, tear gas and pepper spray those who want to call CY to account for his incompetence while turning a blind eye to the crimes of those support him.

Why do we want Universal Suffrage, because the ‘leaders’ imposed on us by Beijing have ranged from incompetent through idiot to corrupt. Yes, under proper universal suffrage we might vote for our own incompetent corrupt idiot – then more fool us!

We have Freedom of Speech in Hong Kong, so all you red flag waving compensated protesters are entitled to shout all you like. But if you love the ‘Mainland way’ so much why not feck off and live there! No need to close the door on your way out!

On the 26th Anniversary of Tian’anmen Massacre – an Open Letter to Fellow Students in Mainland China

On the 26th Anniversary of Tian’anmen Massacre – an Open Letter to Fellow Students in Mainland China

By a group of overseas Chinese students, letter penned by Gu Yi, published: May 27, 2015

This letter, written in Chinese, has been circulating through email groups and on social media since May 20. Yesterday the Chinese Communist Party-run Global Times gave it a free publicity push – double strength (here and here). – China Change

We are a group of Chinese students born in the 1980s and 1990s and now studying abroad. Twenty-six years ago on June 4th, young students, in life’s prime with innocent love for their country just as we are today, died under the gun of the People’s Liberation Army in Beijing’s streets. This part of history has since been so carefully edited and shielded away that many of us today know very little about it. Currently outside China, we have been able to access photos, videos and news, and listen to the accounts of survivors, unfettered. We feel the aftershocks of this tragedy across the span of a quarter century. The more we know, the more we feel we have a grave responsibility on our shoulders. We are writing you this open letter, fellow college students inside China, to share the truth with you and to expose crimes that have been perpetrated up to this day in connection with the Tian’anmen Massacre in 1989.

Around 9:30 on the night of June 3rd, 1989, gun shots tore the tense streets of Beijing. On that day, troops enforcing martial law opened fire on students and residents who had protested peacefully for nearly two months. The demonstrations were initiated by college students but people from all walks of life participated, numbering over 300,000 at the peak. The center area of the peaceful sit-in was in Tian’anmen Square. It was a time when the nation had been encouraged by the relatively freer and more open political atmosphere throughout the 1980s, people had had trust in the Communist Party and held expectations of a government that called itself “the people’s government.” At a time when economic crisis threatened and corruption worsened, students and residents wanted to have a dialogue with the nation’s leaders to make the country a better place. Never for a moment did the peaceful demonstrators dream that a planned massacre was awaiting them.

Per orders from Deng Xiaping, Li Peng and other Chinese leaders, the PLA forced its way toward Tian’anmen Square to clear out the student occupiers. They drove tanks with machine guns mounted on top, and they shouted “I will not attack if I am not attacked” while opening fire on civilians. On its route at Muxidi (木樨地), several hundreds of unarmed civilians fell in streaming blood shouting “Fascists!”, “Murderers!” Among them was Yan Wen (严文), a 23-year-old mathematics student at Peking University, shot dead by bullets to his thigh. He was there with a camera to record history. Another was the 17-year-old high school student Jiang Jielian (蒋捷连) who had been determined to go to the Square to be with older brothers and older sisters there. 19-year-old Wang Nan (王楠) was yet another who fell, and the bullet-holed helmet he wore is now on display in Hong Kong. The 21-year-old Wu Xiangdong (吴向东)had with him a death notice that read, “For democracy and freedom, for the fate of the nation, every ordinary person has a responsibility.” According to witness accounts, the troops that had entered the Square beat clusters of students with batons even though the two sides had already agreed on the student withdrawal; at Liubukou (六部口), tanks chased, and ran over, a column of students who had left the Square and were walking back to their campuses. Fang Zheng, a senior at Beijing Sports University, lost his legs to speeding tank tracks. There had been unconfirmed reports that pockets of protesters were encircled and executed en mass. Around June 4th, massacres also occurred in Chendu, Sichuan province, and elsewhere.

In mid and late June that year, the government issued three versions of a “report on quashing the riots.” It portrays the civilians as a rioting mob and presents precise numbers of dead and wounded among the troops and the loss of vehicles, but at the same time, it is vague and contradictory on the number of civilian deaths. Questions remain: why were the weaponized troops unable to defend themselves [if there was indeed a riot]? If they were unable to defend themselves, how did they break through the blockade of hundreds and thousands of civilians? What caused the people of the nation to gather in the streets of the capital to prevent the troops from moving forward? The report claims that the civilian deaths were few. If so, why repeatedly alter the number of death and never publish an accurate count? If the report is to be believed, the civilians attacked the soldiers first. If so, why was the first death among soldiers not reported until more than three hours after the troops opened fire and blood bathed Muxidi? During the protest, police once confided to Zhou Fengsuo (周锋锁), one of the student leaders in the Square, that “Beijing’s public order has never been so good” as the last two months of “disruption” and “riot.” According to the memoir of Hou Dejian (侯德健),[the Taiwanese poplar singer] who stayed until the last moment in the Square, students insisted on non-violent principles even at the last moment of forced withdrawal and threw away any possessions that could be used to attack.

Meanwhile, the atrocities of the troops were recorded in photos of bleeding wounded and stacked bodies, videos of shooting civilians, hospitals’ body identification notices and body counts, shocking reportage by Wu Xiaoyong (吴晓镛)of Central People’s Radio Broadcast, not to mention the persistent questioning of Tiananmen Mothers over the last twenty-six years. If all of these are lies as the government claims they are, what is making these parents, now white-headed and frail, seek justice for so many years while sacrificing a normal life?

Last year on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, this writer met with some of the survivors of the massacre. The MC read aloud a partial list of the dead, and people proceeded in a long line to pay respects with flowers. From hundreds to thousands, there have been different numbers and we might never know exactly how many died that year in Beijing. But people witnessed many shocking crimes, and perhaps many more occurred at unknown corners without witnesses. Some witnesses have grown old, others have passed away, and still others dare not speak even though they now live safely overseas. The Chinese government has never dared to publicize the exact number of deaths, and in dealing with a historical event of such magnitude, it first portrayed it, solemnly, as an “anti-revolutionary riot,” and then over the time it downplayed it as a “political ripple,” systematically erasing it from the collective memory of a generation. June 4th has become a “sensitive” time each year, an unmentionable date. Such an enforced taboo is a reverse proof that the atrocities against civilians in 1989 are something the Communist Party would rather keep mum about, although this is a Party with a murderous history of civil war, anti-rightist movements, and the Cultural Revolution.

A classmate of this writer believes that the events from twenty-six years ago are too far back, today’s China is getting better and better, and he lives a very happy life.  As I walked on the Avenue of Eternal Peace two years ago, I saw no trace of blood or bullets but skyscrapers and the bustling of people and cars. We live in prosperity, but what kind of prosperity it is – our imagination is constantly challenged by the astonishing scale of high and low ranking officials, the marriage of power and money that the students opposed twenty-six years ago has become the prevalent model of the state economy. Xi Jinping’s regime waves the banner of anti-corruption, but ordinary people are thrown in jail as trouble makers for holding signs asking officials to disclose their assets.  The clans of Deng Xiaoping and Li Peng, whose hands were stained with the blood of students, have become filthy rich. We are shocked to discover that we are governed by officials whose family members live abroad. In other words, we are ruled by a bunch of foreigners, and China is merely the goose that lays golden eggs for them.

Twenty-six years ago, students wanted freedom of the press; and twenty-six years later, all media are still controlled by the Party’s Propaganda Department, and journalists and lawyers are being put in jail for invented crimes. Gao Yu’s crime was leaking state secrets, or the ruling party’s latest ideological guidelines. Some of my friends are of the opinion that those who draw the Party’s ire do so because they are famous and conspicuous. We, on the other hand, are mere ordinary people who don’t care about politics. But are ordinary people safe from harm? Think about Xia Junfeng (夏俊峰), Xu Chunhe (徐纯合), and the daughter of Tang Hui (唐慧). No one is safe in a dictatorial system.

When North Korean soldiers crossed the border and killed innocent Chinese, and when Burmese bombers bombed Chinese territory, this government merely “protested.” Come to think about it, the PLA’s only military victory in the last thirty years was the bloodbath in Beijing’s streets on June 4th, 1989!

This is fragile and distorted prosperity. Stability maintenance expenses are as big as the military budget; the Great Fire Wall is being stacked ever higher. They all indicate that, at any moment, truth can come to broad daylight, and the prosperity can collapse.

A voice inside China that says, the Tian’anmen Massacre was unfortunate, but the Chinese Communist Party has learned a lesson, and we don’t want to obsess over it. But the suppression has never stopped: the truth about June 4th is still covered up, the dead still do not have closure, some survivors have served long prison terms, Tian’anmen Mothers are prevented by security police from paying visits to their children’s burial sites. Last year, a group of scholars was detained for having a home seminar to remember that day, and a female student at the Beijing International Studies University was disappeared for proposing a technology to spread the truth about the Tian’anmen Movement.

Meanwhile, the man who made the decision to open fire on students and civilians has been admired and extolled as the chief designer [of China’s economic rise], and neither officers nor soldiers who directed the killings have been tried in a court of law. Do not expect this regime to plead guilty. Nor will they confess to errors as they did after the Cultural Revolution ended, because they know all too well that, once they acknowledge their crimes, they will likely be engulfed by the people’s wrath. They claim they have the ownership of a “universal truth,” but they have built high walls on the Intenet, and they hide in dark rooms to delete news as well as comments. Such is their “confidence in guiding theories” and their “confidence in the path chosen.”

This is the killer’s regime. The gun fire on June 4th shot dead their legitimacy, and what they have accomplished since June 4th is not important. We do not ask the CCP to redress the events of that spring as killers are not the ones we turn to to clear the names of the dead, but killers must be tried. We do not forget, nor forgive, until justice is done and the on-going persecution is halted.

This writer and the signers of this letter know very well that there are consequences in writing and signing this letter. But this is our responsibility, and we hope fellow students inside China know this part of history, and reexamine the violence and atrocities since the Communist Party’s beginning in 1921. From Jingangshan (井冈山, one of CCP’s early bases in Jiangxi province) to Tian’anmen Square, millions of innocent people have died, and we must remember them, but also reflect on wave after wave of sufferings. We have no right to dictate your minds or ask you to do something, but we do have a dream: we dream that, in a future not too far from now, each one of us can live in a country free of fear where history is restored and justice realized. This is the China Dream we have – we, a group of Chinese students studying abroad.

Written by:
Gu Yi (古懿, University of Georgia, [email protected])

Co-signed by:
Feng Yun (封云, University of Central Lancashire)
Chen Chuangchuang (陈闯创, Columbia University)
Zheng Dan (郑丹, Adelphi University)
Chen Bingxu (陈炳旭, Missouri State University)
Jin Meng (金萌, Northwest Missouri State University)
Lu Yan (卢炎, University at Albany, SUNY)
Wang Xiaoyue (王宵悦, University at Albany, SUNY)
Wang Jianying (王剑鹰, University of Missouri)
Meng Li  (St. John’s University)
Wu Lebao (吴乐宝, Melbourne, Australia)

You can sign it too:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mXmqrVd-rmeahW9j8lrBMwupdfIaS3KE2bbKfW5r2sY/viewform

Translated by China Change
Chinese origina《海外中国留学生六四26周年致国内同学的公开信》

Attacked Ming Pao Journalist Kevin Lau speaking at the Human Rights Press Awards

Attacked Ming Pao Journalist Kevin Lau speaking at the Human Rights Press Awards

Journalist Kevin Lau spoke at the Human Rights Press Awards annual luncheon on 9 May, 2015 about being attacked in February 2014. The attack, by chopper wielding assailants who hacked at his legs, took place not long after Lau was sacked as the Editor of Ming Pao, and left him bleeding on the pavement.

Here is his address on why “Now is the worst time – and best time – to be a journalist in Hong Kong.”

Dear Guests and Friends,

In the past two years, people have frequently asked whether press freedom in Hong Kong was under threat. Now I think the answer is crystal clear. It is. In this sense, now is the worst time to be a journalist in Hong Kong.

For those of you who still have any doubts about this, who still believe that the Hong Kong press still enjoys the same freedoms it used to have, let me ask you a few questions.

1. How often do you see the proprietor of a highly popular newspaper coming out to admit publicly that Mainland corporations including major banks are withholding advertisements for political considerations?

2. How often do you see the owner of a highly popular news website coming out to admit publicly that he was closing down his news operation for fear of political reprisal?

3. How often do you see a commercial broadcaster shutting up a highly popular current affairs program host by suddenly terminating her contract?

4. How often do you see over a hundred reporters, editors and news anchors of a major television station signing a joint public statement to criticize the news handling decision of their news controller?

5. How often do you see a veteran journalist who had been the chief editor of an influential newspaper being brutally attacked with a
chopper outside a public park in broad daylight?

When these unbelievable things all happened within a time span of twelve to fifteen months, do you think it is pure co-incidence? For every single incident mentioned here, one might say that perhaps it was an isolated case, that perhaps it was not directly related to press freedom. However, when they came one after another like dominos, the effect on public perception and public confidence was debilitating.

I have stayed in this field for 25 years. I know the climate changes when I see the signs.  This is not the first time. Back in 2003 to 2004, when we had a similar situation of an unpopular Chief Executive trying to sell an unpopular policy to the public, we would see powerful people stretching their muscles to try to stamp out any critical voices in the mainstream media. Last time the unpopular policy was national security legislation. This time it is universal suffrage with a nomination screening mechanism. History is repeating itself.

If you need more evidence, to prove that press freedom in Hong Kong is really under threat, I would refer you to the numerous statements and reports published by the Hong Kong Journalists Association, the Foreign Correspondents Club and other professional organizations. The alarm bell has been rung again and again. You may also look at the findings of journalism professors at local universities on media self-censorship, which has gone up, and media credibility, which has gone down.

The latest signal of this worrying trend is the government decision not to prosecute a criminal suspect who was alleged to have assaulted two television journalists performing their duty of reporting in a public gathering. The apparent reason was that the suspect and the actors were allowed to wear hats and masks covering most of their faces in the identification parade, which rendered the victim’s task of identifying the attacker impossible.

Recently I was asked by some young journalism students whether they should join the news profession in light of all these unfavourable developments. I told them all the inconvenient truths. The sad reality is that in many respects now is probably the worst time to be a journalist in Hong Kong. But, nonetheless, I advised them to go ahead and become journalists if they are really interested in news reporting. Why? Because in other respects now is also the best time to become a journalist in Hong Kong with an eye on the future.

Hong Kong will maintain its role as an international financial centre. This is a simple fact recognized by everyone, including the authorities in Beijing. The Chinese leaders may have a different view from the local community regarding democratic development in Hong Kong. But there is no dispute on HK’s role as an international financial centre. During the Occupy Movement last year, Beijing gave the green light for the cross-market stock purchases program between Shanghai and Hong Kong. The timing of the decision surprised many people. It reflected a strong determination to keep HK’s stock market vibrant and useful for Mainland enterprises to raise capital.

As we all know, a truly international financial centre must maintain an environment where there is a free flow of information. You cannot shut Bloomberg down. You cannot ban Facebook or Twitter or Youtube. Last year when the Apple Daily’s highly popular news website was paralyzed by hackers, apparently coming from the north, they decided to upload all their digital news onto Facebook and Youtube. Unless you could shut down the entire internet, you could not stop them from publishing their stories. As a result, the attacks stopped.

Digital news is a totally new ball game. In the past, we, the editors in charge of the news rooms of mainstream media outlets, dictated what the public could read or watch. We the editors decided which item went on the front page and became headline news. Now the game has changed. In the digital world, the crowd decides which piece of news they prefer to read and to share. This crowd judging and crowd sharing has changed the balance of power between the editors and the readers. The accumulated hit rate and online viewership of any news item depends on the crowd, not the editors.

Also, the 24 hours real time functioning nature of the highly transparent digital news world renders media self-censorship extremely difficult. If a news room chief in Hong Kong decides to ban a piece of newsworthy digital material from publication, he or she may soon find the material spreading like wildfire on the Internet, and the decision to censor it will quickly become a news story in itself.

For young people who grew up in the digital age, they can acquire the invaluable communication skills necessary in the new era much more quickly than their senior news managers or executives. They know how to push the gist of the news to their readers’ smartphones apps or their social networks. They know how to make it sticky and catchy. In just a few years, they would have accumulated online news making and spreading experiences that cannot be matched by traditional journalists, even those with 20 years of experience.

Diving into the digital news world might be a risky business for some media organizations. Subscriptions are hard to find. Until recently, advertising revenue was thin. But the scene is quickly changing. Online advertising has been growing at a double digit year on year since 2013. Readership migration from traditional to digital is unstoppable. In the coming few years, digital first will no longer be a slogan. It will become a business necessity. Young journalists have nothing to lose if they dive into this trend right now.

So, in this respect, now is the best time to be a journalist of the new media in Hong Kong.

Source: www.humanrightspressawards.org
Editing: bc magazine

Joshua Wong: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Joshua Wong: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Honourable Chair and honourable members of the Standing Committee,

I am Joshua Wong, Convenor of Scholarism, a 18-year-old University Student now. Thanks for the Canadian Parliament’s invitation, giving me the opportunity to be one of the Hong Kong representatives to share here.

Today, from a student’s perspective, I hope that I can share my experience and exposure in these social movements since my age of 14, illustrating how the Central Government of China oppress the future of the next generation in the aspects of political systems and education. I hope my sharing will help to enhance the international concern about Hong Kong’s democratic progress.

On July 1st 2003, there were 500 thousand Hong Kong people walking out on the street to protest against the Article 23 of Basic Law which oppressed freedom of speech. In addition, the People also strive for the realization of the Universal Suffrage. The huge participation in that incident did not only cause the stepping down of Tung Chee Hwa who was then the Chief Executive, but also the withdraw of Article 23 on Basic Law.

Since then, we can observe that the Central Government began to have a strong feel about a need to strengthen the Hong Kong people’s identity recognition to China or the Chinese Communist Party. As a result, focusing at the identity issue of the young people and students, in 2011, the Education Department announced that all Primary and Secondary schools in Hong Kong must launch the subject of National Education in their curriculum.

In that National Education subject, there were quite many parts emphasizing the student’s need to establish the obedience as well as the pride towards the Chinese Communist Government, with the standards such as students were expected to feel touched with tears in front of the National Flag during the ceremony. That means, the National Education subject was in fact more than education subject, but a brain washing tool!

If the nature of the Education was to develop the young people’s independent thinking capability, this National Education subject definitely violated this education principle. It illustrated that the Central Government just viewed Hong Kong as a ruled obedient, without any respect towards the youth and students’ right to attain a proper citizenship, including the right to criticize the government.

Since then, I had a strong awareness that not only political parties and teacher’s unions protest against the National Education Subject, therefore, 4 years ago, at the age of 14, I established a student organization, Scholarism, gathering a few hundreds secondary students who supported the core values of democracy and freedom. We walked onto the street, protesting, promoting our values and expressing our requests, gaining a lot of supports from the Hong Kong People in a very short time.

Later, with the exposure of the Government’ brain-washing education material to the public, called “The China Mode”, which described the Chinese Communist Party as an “advanced, selfless and united ruling organization”. With that exposure, the whole city’s protest temperature against the National Education was raised rapidly. With the hungers strike of students and 120 thousands people’s occupation at the Central Government Office, the Government was forced to put a side the National Education Subject. At that time, I was only 15.

Previously, people thought that political movement can only be lead by political parties and worker’s unions. No one could imagine that secondary school students could plan a social movement. After the success of the Anti-National-Education Movement, more people showed their concerns and give support about the social actions from the student organizations.

Many people began to discover that it was the students’ energy, persistence, determination and courage which had enabled them to stand upon the stage of History for a more equal political system. This was why after the Anti-National-Education Movement, Scholarism continued to strive for the Universal Suffrage.

Last year, there were various joint activities with Federation of Student, expressing our dissatisfaction against the 31,August decision, including student strike jointed by more than one thousand students and ten thousand university students and the Septermber 26’s action of re-entering of Civil Plaza which triggered the Umbrella Movement.

In the nearly 80 days’ Umbrella movement, there is not yet any achievement, regardless of the participation of 200 thousand Hong Kong People. But through my experience in the participation of social movement, I want to tell every honorable congressman here and all the Chinese in Canada, after going though the days from Anti-National-Education Movement and the days of the Umbrella Movement, the lives of students in Hong Kong is no longer the same.

The generation of extensive political awareness has already begun. This is the reason why I still have hope even though there is none of achievement from the Umbrella Movement, even though those pro-China people are continuously oppress academic freedom, even though there are continuous political legal prosecutions against the protesters.

All the honorable congressman here, you may think that in a democratic country, maybe politics should be the professional participations of political parties and politicians. Social movement in the street should only be organized by a minority group of idealistic university students. But from 4 years ago till now, the age of social movement participants are declining in Hong Kong.

The phenomenon in the Umbrella Movement is that: Some 13-year-old children would participate in student strike on the street, and some 14 year-old girls would stand firm against tear gas equipped with googles and masks , while some other 15 year-old students would be arrested due to civil disobedience. Junior Form student become activist.

I understand that there are many calculations related to international politics, every day you may attend to this kind of hearings as routine and perhaps there won’t be much impact on your next election no matter you care about issues in Hong Kong or not.

But please think in different position, the children participating in the Umbrella Movement, actually are similar in age with your sons and daughters in your houses.

Maybe you have difficulty in understand why these students, living in an international financial centre, would rather risk their future to push the social reform, regardless of the risk of being blacklisted from entry into China or leaving offense record which may affect their career.

Although the young people understand that the participation of social movement may affect their future career, yet when they also discover that they can’t see any future in the current system, changing the current social system should be the only way out!

I hope that Canada Congress can continue to concern about Hong Kong’s situation, and exert the influence and pressure to the China Government since maintaining international oversight and engagement is an effective way for supporting democratic freedoms and human rights in Hong Kong.

This is the end of my sharing.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/posts/834264353332741

———————————————

我是學民思潮召集人黃之鋒,現時是一個十八歲的大學一年級生,在此感謝加拿大國會的邀請,讓我能夠成為其中一個香港代表,有機會在此與各位國會議員作出分享,過往因著參與反國教運動和雨傘運動,促使我成為一個學生運動領袖,盼望今天能夠以學生角度,向大家分享我從14歲參與社會運動至今的所見所聞,述說中央政府怎樣在政制和教育層面壓制香港下一代的未來,盼望增加國際間對香港民主進程的關注。

自從2003年7月1日50萬名香港人走上街頭,反對壓制言論自由的《基本法》23條立法,並要求落實普選,促使當時的特首董建華下台,以及《基本法》23條無限期擱置,引致中史政府一直認為香港必須加強港人對中國的身份認同,特別針對是年輕人和學生人心未回歸的身分認同問題,結果促使教育局在2011年宣佈翌年必須在全港中小學推行國民教育科,固然香港現時作為中國的一部份,推行國民教育在本質上不是問題,但當課程內容多番強調學生必須建立對中共政權的順服和自豪感,甚至誇張得表示學生看到國旗流淚才是符合標淮,只反映這個科目不單是國民教育,更是洗腦國民教育。若然教育的本質應是培訓年輕人擁有獨立思考,但國民教育科卻是違反原意,政府這種強行灌輸愛黨情懷的做法,可見政權只視香港為被統治順民,從不尊重學生和年輕人擁有公民意識和權利去批判政府。

從那個時後開始,我深信不只是政黨和教師工會方可以反對洗腦國民教育科,便在四年前創立學生組織學民思潮,與數百個支持民主、自由等核心價值的中學生走上街頭,透過遊行、示威和街頭宣傳表達訴求並爭取市民支持,最後因著政府的《中國模式》洗腦教材曝光,描述中國共產黨是「進步、無私和團結的執政集團」引致全城反對聲音越演越烈,終學民思潮的中學生絕食以及12萬人佔領政府總部的情況下,迫使政府擱置國民教育科,而那個時候的黃之鋒只有15歲。

過往港人認為政治運動只能夠由政黨和工會帶領,無人想象高中生也有能力策劃社會運動,學生在媒體曝光策劃行動完全是難以想象,但自從反國教運動成功以後,便有更多人關注學生組織的動向,發現學生的年輕、堅持、決心和勇氣也同樣能夠讓他們站在歷史的舞台上,為著香港未來爭取更平等的政制而發聲,這也促使了學民思潮在反國教後繼續爭取普選,並在2014年與學聯一起組織各種行動表達對「人大八三一」決定的不滿,包括是過千名中學生和以萬計的大學生罷課,以及9月26日的重奪公民廣場行動促使雨傘運動的出現。

在雨傘運動近八十天的佔領裡,即使有著二十萬港人參與其中,也尚未能爭取甚麼成果,但我想透過我參與社會運動的歷程,告訴各位加拿大的國會議員以及華人,從反國教走到雨傘運動,香港的學界以已經活得不再一樣,全面政治化的年代已經開始,這也是在運動未能取得成果後,縱使親中人士打斷打壓學術自由,透過政治檢控打壓抗爭者,我還抱有盼望的主要原因。

各位身處民主國家的國會議員們,在民主化的國家,政治也許是政黨和政客們的專利,即使是街頭運動也只是由部份抱著理想主義的大學生策動,但從2011年走到2015年,香港參與社運的年齡不斷下調,雨傘運動呈現的狀況是13歲剛升上中學的孩子便會參與街頭罷課、14歲的小女孩帶著眼罩、口罩及安全帽抵禦催淚彈,以及15歲學生參與公民抗命繼而被捕。

即使我明白國際政治充滿著數之不盡的利益和計算,每天參與這些聽證會也只是你們的例行公事,可能關注香港事務與否跟你們的選票也沒有太大影響,但請你們切身處地思考一下,在香港曾參與雨傘運動的孩子,其實和你們家中兒女年紀也差不多,也許你們不太明白這群居於國際金融中心、經濟發達城市裡的學生,為何不惜被列入黑名單不能前往中國大陸、留有案底難以找到工作,也要奉上自已的前途去促成社會改革,但當中共政權從承諾2007年落實普選,待至2017年也只是給一個假普選香港人,只因即使年輕人能明白自已參與社會運動會影響前途,但當年輕人根本見不到這個社會體制給予他們甚麼前途,改革這個社會體制便是唯一的出路,盼望你們能夠繼續關注香港的狀況,透過製造國際輿論向中央政府斯壓。

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development Of the House of Commons of Canada

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

The continued prosperity and stability of Hong Kong as one of Asia’s international city under the “One Country Two Systems” concept with a genuine respect for the Hong Kong systems and core values, such as freedom of the press, rule of law, clean and efficient government is beneficial to the whole world including Canada. However this is currently under threat with the lack of progress towards genuine constitutional reform and universal suffrage.

For many years, Hong Kong has been waiting for universal suffrage. It was promised for 2007 and 2008, ten years after the handover from Britain to China. This was denied by the decision of the National Peoples’ Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) in 2004. We waited for 2012. This was again denied by the NPCSC decision of 2007 which promised universal suffrage of the CE in 2017.

When the government first began the consultation for the method of CE election in 2017, the paper was headed “let’s talk”. So Hong Kong people talked about the methods we would like. Yet our hopes were dashed by the Decision of the National Peoples’ Congress Standing Committee made on 31 August 2014 (the 8-31 Decision). It came up with a method that no Hong Konger, not even the most conservative, has dared talked about.

Based on the 8-31 Decision, the Hong Kong government has recently announced the proposal which will be put to a vote by our Legislature towards the end of June.

There will be no more than two to three candidates and they must be endorsed by the Nominating Committee (NC). The NC is what we call a “small circle” made up of 1200 people (only 0.01% of HK total population). Its composition is the same as the Selection Committee (SC) which used to elect the CE. From past experience, the great majority of its members are heavily influenced and controlled by Beijing. For example, in 2002, despite the overwhelming public dissatisfaction with the incumbent CE, Mr. Tung, almost 90% of the members of the SC endorsed Mr. Tung as the only candidate and he was declared elected by the SC as the only viable candidate.

Nomination will be a two step process. First you need to be endorsed by 10% of the NC, so theoretically there can be as many as ten candidates. Then there is a second step pre-election by secret ballot where only the top 2 to 3 who get the majority support of the NC can become a candidate for the CE election. This means a prescreening of candidates by Beijing to ensure only those accepted by them can go through. This method of election has been compared to North Korea and Iran.

The 27 democrats in the Hong Kong Legislature have sufficient votes to block this proposal and they have already vowed to do so as it fails to meet international standards for universal suffrage guaranteed by our Basic Law. The Government told the public not to have illusion of any last minute changes. They would not even propose changes which are open under the local law, for example changing the corporate votes to directors votes, adjusting the distribution of seats so some sector like agriculture and fisheries would not have a disproportionate 60 out of 1200 seats in the NC, allowing two rounds of votes to ensure the pre-screened candidate would have majority public support or allowing protest votes to be counted etc.

Not only is the long cherished hopes of democracy dashed, the lack of mandate makes governance extremely difficult, if not possible. The proposal, whether it can be passed or not, will only cause even greater rift in the society and does nothing to alleviate the “deep rooted divide” which is acknowledged to exist in Hong Kong.

Instead of tackling the real problem, the government blames the media, youths, and foreign influence. It believes that the solutions lie in interference with the media, manipulation of university appointments, the introduction of braining washing national education or Mainland exchange experience and high handed arrests and prosecutions.

Many students and ordinary citizens have been arrested, and later prosecuted arising from their participation in the Umbrella Movement or related protests. Not surprisingly, hasty prosecutions led to acquittals and the judges criticized the police for giving testimony proven false by the videos taken by members of the public. However this led some pro-establishment legislators to criticize judges with the remark “Police catch people but judges release people”. The former Deputy Commissioner of ICAC who was one of CY Leung’s campaign team even said that judges should be required to declare their political stance.

In contrast to the many arrests and prosecutions, the Commissioner of Police has refused to disclose the names of 7 police officers involved in the brutal attack of one peaceful protester (for completeness I declare he is a member of my party). His hands were tied behind his back and carried facedown to a dark corner where one officer stood guard and the others took turns to kick and punch him for some 4 minutes whilst he was lying motionless on the ground. Although the event took place more than 6 months ago on 15 October 2014, no prosecution has yet been brought. The 4 minutes attack was captured by a television crew and the footage was aired on their station in the early hours of that morning. When the senior management woke up that morning and saw the clip, instead of commending the scoop, they chastised the news team. It led to removing the person responsible to a different post and other repercussions for the news team. That also tells you something about the state of our press. In their 2014 report, the Hong Kong Journalist Association said “The year under review has been the darkest for press freedom for several decades, with the media coming under relentless assault from several directions. There have been attacks on journalists, sackings and personnel changes affecting critical personalities and the withdrawal of advertising, which places pressure on the editorial integrity of publications.”

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce described Hong Kong as “the most Canadian City in Asia” as well as “Canada’s gateway to China”. They emphasize their belief in “free enterprise, rule of law, ethical business practices, entrepreneurship, social responsibility and environmental responsibility”. I believe we share common goals. The current impasse on universal suffrage poses a serious threat to Hong Kong as we know it.

We hope Canada will join hands with the International community for stronger engagement with Hong Kong at both government and civil society levels in ensuring that the Sino-British Joint Declaration with respect to “One Country Two Systems, Hong Kong People ruling Hong Kong with a High Degree of Autonomy” is honoured and respected, and that Hong Kong has the constitutional reform that meets with international standards and that will ensure that we continue to be a vibrant city.

Audrey Eu
2nd May 2015

Source: https://www.facebook.com/audrey.euyuetmee/photos/a.480482554434.260991.197345194434/10153218767224435/