Tin Mei Avenue – 12 June, 2015

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127552918&k=TxZ52qr

Over the last 6 months the Tin Mei Avenue protest site has grown and evolved, there’s a kids area, library, art area, recycling, church, art installations, solar power to provide electricity… Tomorrow or so the rumour goes the police will look to clear the tents and everything else under the premise that the goods have been abandoned by their owners. An interesting skirt around the law, which has taken the government lawyers six months come up. Some of the tents do look pretty manky, but others are very well cared for and obviously inhabited by protestors.

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127542890&k=vFggndZ

The earlier ‘clearances’ were carried out backed by questionable court injunctions and the police displayed an obvious relish in destroying peoples property – sometimes without even checking if a tent was empty. So a question for our lawyer readers, do the police have a duty to exercise care and attention when removing ‘property they claim is abandoned’ or can they just destroy and damage it with impunity? Guess we’ll find out.

Click on any photo to access the full gallery of images

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127553640&k=t9WsZN7

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127559124&k=PTJpXTS

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127545165&k=6k5xRvV

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127561391&k=4M8bNQh

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127552096&k=4qkxWDV

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127554233&k=FBhrxtZ

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Tin-Mei-Avenue-12-June-2015/49900290_h6S2fm#!i=4127555644&k=phGNQR3

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》

Anodyne Attempt to Rewrite History

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063384701&k=fcsrMtW

The ‘Umbrella Festival’ opened today at the JCCAC in Shep Kip Mei. You’ll have noticed the inverted commas I put around the festival name, yes the festival poster is yellow and has an umbrella on it – but that’s about all the ‘festival’ has in common with 2014’s umbrella protests. When one of the festival’s curator’s Prof. Katrien Jacobs stands on stage and starts joking about making her speech notes on a post-it like on the Lennon Wall before continuing with “As a foreigner I found the protests sexy and fun and that’s what we want to do with this festival, keep the fun going…”

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063376599&k=tJJfR6G

The Umbrella Festival is an anaemic poorly conceived joke. An insult to the HongKongers who stood up for their beliefs and voiced a desire for Universal Suffrage to precipitate the removal of the morally corrupt politicians and civil servants who are destroying the Hong Kong we love and call home with their arse-licking of the mainland amidst the lining of their own pockets.

The JCCAC is an interesting space and there are mini-exhibits and photos spread over it’s 9 floors. I didn’t see the words universal suffrage anywhere, not a single mention about the underlying reasons for the protest. Not a mention of the police violence – there was one photo of the tear gas. The only comment about police violence was in a theatrical piece by FM Theatre Power (see video) that was part of the opening ceremony, but even that was tempered when the police become ‘caring mothers’ and embraced the demonstrators.

There is a mini-Lennon wall – but no explanation of the what it symbolized or how it got started… You can add you own post-it, but the ones already posted were banal and safe, as were the chalk drawings. For ‘fun’ as Professor Jacobs described it, get a poster and walk around to get ‘umbrella’ stamps at different parts of the building…

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063397027&k=GBDQS5g

Another of the curators claims as they opened the festival was to celebrate the Umbrella protests art… the protest zones were vibrant artistic and discoursive hubs with new things being created and revealed everyday. Yet almost none of that is here, why not?

There are some interesting close-up photos – but no photos which show the scale or size of the protests. In fact I couldn’t find an exhibit which even explained that there were three protest zones.

What could have been a fascinating examination of the protests and the art that emerged over the 79 days instead reeks of a government funded snow job, an attempt to rewrite one of the seminal moments in Hong Kong’s history.

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063380757&k=ZbwQphB

Umbrella Festival @ JCCAC – 17 May, 2015

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063370553&k=n5V8CMV

The Umbrella Festival opened at the Jockey Club Creative Arts Centre in Shep Kip Mei
Click on any image to see the full gallery of images

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063366462&k=2Pf2vB7

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063372125&k=dbW8s8d

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063394343&k=DqWBBv4


http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063367559&k=CtGPL4b

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063367706&k=dZFv4fm

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063382705&k=crmQQSP

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063379376&k=3JSvfDH

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063371681&k=CXZDw9P

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063392153&k=9TqQQg5

http://bcmagazine.smugmug.com/Bcene-photos/2015/Umbrella-Festival-Opening/49316366_5Ctxzg#!i=4063390822&k=9S8pgz2

Police Ramp Up Scare/Intimidation Tactics!

Where are HK Police getting their strategy plans from? Could it be the People's Armed Police and their Tibetan strategy?
Where are HK Police getting their strategy plans from? Could it be the People’s Armed Police and their Tibetan strategy?

The Hong Kong Police really are showing that they come from the Tibet/Xinjiang school of policing now rather than any sensible rational approach. The top brass at HKPF have met and are now sending out what they think is a ‘scary’ message that groups of just three people could be arrested for public disorder offences. Plus, if that doesn’t scare people enough, they’ll bring out the big-bad, anti-terrorist PTU teams again.

YAWN!

This new draconian approach will change nothing in Hong Kong politically other than to highlight more of the contradictions and fractures within society.

The police neither have the ability or the judgement to discern fairly who represents a public order nuisance and who doesn’t. Gangs of violent, Blue Ribbons, will still roam free while the police target people based on the assumption that they oppose the government politically. This will be their only mandate for implementing these new measures or,

Are you a young person, that sympathises with the new wave of political protest in Hong Kong? If yes, proceed to intimidation, arrest and physical violence if required.

Religious festival in Amdo, Tibet. If Andy Tsang and CY get their way, is this what protests in Hong Kong will look like?
Religious festival in Amdo, Tibet. If Andy Tsang and CY get their way, is this what protests in Hong Kong will look like?

This is political persecution at its finest. Young HongKongers are now on the same par as Tibetans or Uighurs within the Great, Chinese Motherland; unable to raise their voice without facing overwhelming intimidation from the security forces.

After all, the police don’t need this new law to stop people from kicking over carts or acting violently. They can arrest people for this type of action whenever they see it. We do have extensive criminal laws and fairly impartial Courts in Hong Kong! But alas, these really don’t function too well when you’re in the business of political persecution.

Instead, just like during Occupy, Andy Tsang is formulating police strategy based on quelling a popular, political message that is in opposition to a malign government. It never works Andy, stop masturbating over all the weapons and gear you think you need and read some real history for once. What kind of path are you walking on when you now choose the same style of policing as Lhasa or Urumqi?

The sad fact is that these types of measures are only ever enacted by the most embattled of illegitimate governments protected by deranged and out of touch police forces in order to scare people off the streets. Or, screw the lid down tighter, allow no form of dissent and let’s carry on as though everything is ok. More popular outrage can only be met with more oppression.

The reality is that Hong Kong has a goon police force that has doubled down on a goon government and the people are not scared any more. The more force the goon government orders, the more powerful Hong Kong people get.

So, bring your draconian laws and your elite PTU, it only makes the people stronger and the government weaker!

As Albert Camus said, “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”

Why the Secrecy?

Obfuscation and non-answers cast doubt on honesty and truthfulness. So why the secrecy? If the opinion poll is accurate and CY Leung is happy enough with it to quote the results and use it to justify his policies… Why won’t the government publish details of poll it says shows majority of public back its universal suffrage proposal?

In Legco Frederick Fung wanted to know why and asked the following questions. He received a written non-reply by the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Raymond Tam, in the Legislative Council on March 18:

Question:
It has been reported that on February 28 this year, the Chief Executive (CE) told reporters that the results of a public opinion survey recently commissioned by the Government showed that more than half of Hong Kong people were agreeable to the selection of CE by universal suffrage in 2017 to be implemented in accordance with the Decision made by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on August 31 last year on issues such as the selection of CE of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region by universal suffrage. Yet, he did not provide any details of the public opinion survey. Some members of the public have complained to me that the Government has recently disseminated results of public opinion surveys to the media in a selective or incomprehensive manner from time to time, making it difficult for them to judge the credibility of such survey results. They also query that the employment of such a practice by the Government was an attempt to manipulate public opinion.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the details of the aforesaid public opinion survey regarding (i) the organisation commissioned to conduct the survey, (ii) the content of the questionnaire, (iii) the method and form of the survey, (iv) the number of respondents and the response rate, (v) the distribution of age, gender and political attitude of the respondents, (vi) the raw data, and (vii) the analytical results of the survey data;

(2) whether it has assessed the consequences of CE selectively disseminating a particular result of the aforesaid public opinion survey, including whether it has resulted in the credibility of the survey results being questioned and the Government being accused of manipulating public opinion; if it has not assessed, of the reasons for that; and

(3) whether it will consider disclosing concomitantly the relevant details when it disseminates the results of Government-commissioned public opinion surveys in future; if it will not, of the reasons for that?

Reply:
President,
In consultation with the Chief Executive’s Office and the Central Policy Unit (CPU), our reply to the questions raised by Hon Fung is as follows.

The opinion poll which the Chief Executive referred to on February 28 was conducted by a professional agency commissioned by the CPU. The CPU commissions professional research agencies to conduct opinion polls on major social, economic and political issues from time to time. Such polls are for Government’s internal reference only, and relevant details are generally not made public.

link to the official Lego release http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201503/18/P201503170712.htm

Professional Groups Publish Advert Protesting the Government’s “Abuse” of TV API’s to Push it’s Political Agenda

against misProfessional Groups Publish Advert Protesting the Government's "Abuse" of TV API's to Push it's Political Agendause of adverts

These five professional groups Frontline Tech Workers前線科技人員議政小組, Médecin Inspirés 杏林覺醒, Progressive Lawyers Group 法政匯思, Progressive Teachers’ Alliance 進步教師同盟, Reclaiming Social Work Movement 社工復興運動 took out and advert to protest about the government’s abuse of the television “Announcements in the Public Interest” (API’s) program to promote the governments position on political reform.

The text of the advert reads:

Joint Statement on the Government’s Misuse of Announcements of Public Interest 

1. The broadcasting of political advertisements is unlawful in Hong Kong. A broadcaster was penalised for carrying advertisements advocating universal suffrage as part of the 2010 electoral reform process.

2. The Government requires radio and television broadcasters to broadcast “Announcements in the Public Interest” (“APIs”) for free. Typical APIs include messages such as those involving public health, road safety or weather information like a typhoon or rainstorm.

3. In recent months, the Government has required radio and television broadcasters to air the following advertisements without payment as if they were APIs:
(a) “有票,真係唔要” (Your Vote, Don’t Cast it Away!) from 7 August 2014;
(b) “有票,梗係要” (Your Vote, Gotta Have It!) from 2 September 2014; and
(c) “2017 機不可失” (2017, Seize the Opportunity) from 10 January 2015.

4. These advertisements are different from APIs. They carry a strong bias to advance the Government’s political position on electoral reform, to the exclusion to any other position. They are neither factual nor educational. These advertisements are no different from the unlawful political advertisements referred to above.

5. As such, these advertisements are not APIs. They are unlawful political advertisements which cannot be broadcast on radio or television. The Government’s unlawful abuse of its exclusive powers to broadcast APIs has also unjustly distorted the public debate on electoral reform.

6. We therefore condemn the Government’s broadcast of political advertisements under the guise of APIs. It must cease doing so immediately. To continue do so is not only unlawful, but also hypocritical in light of the Government’s recent repeated insistence upon “acting in accordance with the law”.

Frontline Tech Workers前線科技人員議政小組
Médecin Inspirés 杏林覺醒
Progressive Lawyers Group 法政匯思
Progressive Teachers’ Alliance 進步教師同盟
Reclaiming Social Work Movement 社工復興運動

Three More Corrupt Hong Kong police!!

three dirty cops

Hong Kong’s Finest – Not!!! – These three Hong Kong policemen framed innocent people
The 3 cops tried to frame ‘the protesters’ in Mongkok. Said they were assaulted by the protesters but in fact they just picked on innocent people. The defending lawyer pointed out that the evidences given are controversial. One of the cops even admitted he has given false statements 14 times before and had been disciplined for falsifying reports.

The days of being hailed as Asia’s finest as sadly long gone.

And it is sad!