(v4.0)

Section 1 of 3:  Recommended Photos/Videos/Reading

Global (in English) Greater China (in English) Greater China (in Chinese)
41% of Trump Supporters want to bomb Aladdin and Jasmine Informed Comment
The Chinese elite at Columbia Columbia Spectator
How Walmart Keeps an Eye on Its Massive Workforce Susan Berfield, Bloomberg Businessweek
Why the new Vatican leaks scandal is diffeent Alexander Stille, The New Yorker
Mexico: The War on Journalists
Alma Guillermoprieto, NYROB

The Chinese Home I never knew Andrea Yu, Salon.com
Hersh, Gauthier and the Coming of Terror in Xinjiang
Peter Lee, CounterPunch

Spectacular photos of China Daily Mail
The Umbrella Movement, one year later The Big Picture
China Rising: Parsing the Big Parade
Peter Lee, CounterPunch

《宋淇传奇》:是为君子 和而不流  新京報書評周刊
对话张爱玲(少帅)背后团队:为什么我们不做书城模式 Tech.163.com
宋家父子看「雨傘運動」 馮睎乾,蘋果日報
輕逸與深情讀《宋淇傳奇》郭梓祺
我讀《宋淇傳奇》  馮睎乾

Section 2 of 3:  Brief comments

[This is a collection of information on the Occupy Central movement/revolution (also known as the Umbrella movement/revolution) in Hong Kong. This is not comprehensive coverage by any means. Many perspectives are already available in abundance in English (see, for example, Reddit on Umbrella Revolution), so there is no need for me to duplicate them here. Instead, the focus here is on popular Chinese-language materials that are not otherwise available in English. Most of the information is gathered from mainstream media, social media (Facebook, YouTube, discussion forums (mainly Hong Kong Discussion Forum, Hong Kong Golden Forum, HKGalden, Uwants and Baby Kingdom), blogs and polling data). The YouTube/Facebook videos have people speaking in the Cantonese dialect and the discussion forums often use uniquely Hong Kong Internet language that is not even comprehensible to mainland Chinese citizens. My contribution is to compile and translate into English these otherwise unknown materials to provide a fuller view of the Occupy Central movement.]

(AFP) 'Umbrella Soldiers' take seats in Hong Kong elections. November 23, 2015.


Kwong Po Yin (L), member of Umbrella soldier group Youngspiration, is hugged by her election partner, Yau Wai Ching after Kwong won a district council election at Whampoa West in Hong Kong, China November 23, 2015. "We will prove we're serious," added Kwong Po-yin.

So how serious are they?  Kwong Po-yin who was the sole Youngspiration candidate to win said that she will maintain a street booth and an Internet presence in order to actively reach out to residents. Of course, she will maintain a district councilor's office. By the way, she is a doctor at a public hospital. It will be interesting to see how she finds time to do everything. Meanwhile Yau Wai-ching will be working as an assistant to Kwong Po-yin and planning to become a candidate in the 2016 Legislative Council elections in the Kowloon East district.

(Wen Wei Po) February 5, 2016.


Kwong Po-yin looking bored during a committee meeting

According to information, Kwong Po-yin participated in the first full district council meeting on January 5 and signed up for three committees (Leisure Services and District Facilities Management, Traffic and Transportation Committee, Food and Environmental Hygiene Matters) but did not attend any more full district council meeting. Her district councilor office is being run by two assistants, including Yau Wai-ching of Youngspiration who lost her own election.

Our reporter made observations in the Whampoa West district last month. Kwong Po-yin's main public activity is the signature campaign "to oppose bars on the ground floor of residential buildings." There was also the Whampoa Street Run promotions which showed a number of photos on Facebook to create the impression that Kwong Po-yin has been working diligently for the people. But our reporter observed that things may not be what they appear. For example, on January 18, the Facebook posted at 5:15pm photos of Kwong Po-yin holding a signature drive to oppose early morning liquor sales at the corner of Hung Hom Road and Tak Man Street. But nobody was there at the time. Fifteen minutes later, Kwong Po-yin appeared and very few people signed up. The booth was shut down at about 6pm with Kwong Po-yin making only a 40 minute appearance.

Kwong Po-yin is an emergency room doctor at the United Christian Hospital. After her election, reporters asked how she was going to reconcile the long working hours at the hospital with her district work. At the time she said that even though she is very busy at the hospital, she will allocate the time to do both things. Furthermore she has the support of the Youngspiration team. Therefore she is confident that she will do her district councilor job well. "Others can handle the paperwork and administrative work. But I feel that I must deal with the meetings, preparations and citizen contacts myself."

But our observation is that Kwong Po-yin rarely shows up before her office opened January 21. She sporadically organized some street booth activities as district councilor. She lives in Sham Shui Po, she works in Kwun Tong and her district is in Whampoa West. After her office opened, she also did not spend much time serving her constituents. Our observation is that during the 11 days from January 21 to January 31, she did not show up for three days at either the office or the street booth. Her average daily district appearance time was only 2 hours 45 minutes.


Clocking in Kwong Po-yin at the office and the street booth, January 21 to January 31

Thus Kwong Po-yin's promise that she will spend more time on district work does not hold up. According to one Whampoa West resident, "Kwong Po-yin's office has other workers present. But it does not mean that she can loaf off. A clinic has nurses, but the patient is there to see the doctor and not the nurses. Since she is the district councilor and she promised to spend more time to serve the district, she should keep her word. Why else would we elect her?"

On February 3, our reporter asked Kwong Po-yin for a response to the above. Kwong refused to be interviewed by our reporter and told us to address our inquiries with the Youngspiration media relations people.

(Wen Wei Po) February 5, 2016.


Kwong Po-yin's district councilor office

Kwong Po-yin's office opened on January 21. The office hours are Monday-Friday 9am-6pm, Saturday 9am-1pm. The office is located inside a commercial building on Wuhu Street. The office is about 300 square feet in area. Because there is no sign outside the building, passersby cannot tell that there is a district councilor's office inside this building to serve the people. Our reporter randomly asked residents and almost nobody knew where the office of this newly elected district councilor is located. "I walked by this building every day and I don't know it. I don't know how to use the Internet. I don't know how to find Kwong Po-yin in case I need to." Another long-time resident has heard of the name Kwong Po-yin but had no idea that her office was just several tens of meters away from his home.

Our reporter observed the office from January 21 to January 31. The office is manned mainly by Yau Wai-ching and a man named Eddy. It never opens on time. Even during the officially open hours, it is frequently left locked and unmanned.

On January 22, Yau Wai-ching and Eddy showed up at 934pm. The two went out together at 2pm and left a PLEASE WAIT sign on the locked door. They returned 90 minutes later. This meant that the office was closed for 2 out of the 9 business hours.

On the morning of January 25, Kwong Po-yin, Yau Wai-ching and three others manned the street booth. That meant the office was closed from 9am to noon. They came back at noon and then went out to lunch together. So the office was closed between 115pm and 215pm. This meant that the office was closed for 4 hours that day.

(Wen Wei Po) February 5, 2016.

In the Kowloon City district council, there are five committees. Of the 10 newly elected councilors, 9 of them joined all five committees. Kwong Po-yin joined only three of the committees. The Kowloon City district council meets together once every two months, and so do the committees. Therefore these meetings do not take up too much time.

At least 20 district councilors (including the 9 newly elected ones) signed up for all 5 committees. Even Executive Council member, Legislative Councilor and DAB chairperson Starry Lee signed up for 4 committees. Kwong Po-yin is the only one with just 3 committees. This is enough to make one wonder how much time Kwong Po-yin is willing to spend to serve the people.

(Wen Wei Po) February 5, 2016.

Yau Wai-ching parachuted in to challenge incumbent Leung Mei-fun but lost the election. Afterwards she became the assistant of Kwong Po-yin. Afterwards she did not seem too enthusiastic about her job. Based upon the observations of our reporter, she never stuck to the business hours of the office. She is usually late by 30 minutes and on most days she only works three to four hours (at the office/street booth).

At 11am on January 31, a dozen or so Youngspiration volunteers and the office of Kwong Po-yin set up a street booth on Bulkeley Street in Hung Hom. Yau Wai-ching showed up hurriedly half an hour late. When she got there, she did not immediately get to work. Instead she sat down and had breakfast first. After breakfast, she worked for a dozen or so minutes. Then she stood behind the volunteers and played with her mobile phone. That was what she did for the next few hours.

Our reporter checked the official Facebook for Kwong Po-yin's office. On that day, there was one post at 12:43pm about that day's activities with six photos. Yau Wai-ching's Facebook had two more photos in addition to the ones from the official Facebook.

Even so, our reporter observed that Yau Wai-ching was very diligent on her own political activities. Last month, she went to set up voter registration booths in Mong Kok, Lai Chi Kok, Ta Kok Tsui and other locations in the Kowloon West district. On January 25, she spend her working hours to handout Lunar New Year couplets at the Hung Hom street market. Now the market is in the Ka Wai district, which is separated from the Whampoa West district by the Hung Hom Bay district. A Whampoa West resident said: "She was elected by the Whampoa West voters to serve their district. Isn't she busy enough? Why does she go to promote in another district? Clearly she is using her working hours to canvas votes for Yau Baby."

Internet comments:

- An emergency room doctor at a public hospital has to put in 36-hour shifts. How was she going to find time to be in the district councilor's office, the street booth and the district council meetings? This was always a joke. Pity the poor sods who voted for her.
- Well, according to the Yellow Ribbons, the masses are Hong Kong pigs anyway so there is no need to sympathize with them.

- The same old story with Cyd Ho when she ran and won the district council election. She found the process of electioneering much more interesting than the reality of serving the constituents. So she gave up after one term and her constituents learned to never vote in another pan-democrat ever again.

- Kwong Po-yin was elected so that she can filibuster at the district council. There is no expectation that she should have to provide service to the constituents or otherwise contribute anything positive. In that sense, she is doing her job exactly as she should.

<Last night, I was involved in a race-hate incident at Hong Kong University> by Johnson Yeung Ching-yin, Masters student of human rights laws.

I struggled for some time before I decided to write down what happened last night. I am not a nobody. No matter what your impression of me was, this experience actually happened to me. Last night, I was involved in a race-hate incident at a snack restaurant on U-Street, Hong Kong University.

(1) The incident inside the snack restaurant

The clock said that it was 10:20pm. I was standing in front of the snack restaurant waiting for the the rice noodle with the squid fish ball plus cheese. Standing in front to my left was an obese student who was standing behind two other students. I actually didn't pay attention to them until the obese student said to the person on his right: "You have the nerve? Pok gai!" At the time, I thought that they were fellow students who knew each other and that this was merely a minor dispute. (I can't remember the ensuing words but they went approximately like this.)

"I'm talking about you, mainlanders!"

"Fuck your mother!"

The two students on the right had their backs to me and I couldn't see their faces. I only saw that they turned around to look at the obese student but they didn't say anything.

"What the fuck are you doing here? This is not your place! Go back to the mainland!"

By this time, I had already realized that they didn't know each other and I saw witnessing one party insulting another party. The obese student had turned around to face the two mainland students on his right. I can clearly see him. He carried a backpack with decoration, and his veins were bulging on his forehead as he hollered to them: "Fuck your mother! Intruders!" The old social experiment ABC television program "What would you do?" flashed through my mind. I hope that this was merely a reality show. But the obese student continued with his tirade. So I finally interjected: "Enough already! How can you say things like that" "They didn't provoke you. They only came here to buy something to eat."

The obese student became even more excited. He pointed at the mainland students: "What do you mean no? Their entire race has done so! They invaded Hong Kong! Invaders!" I continued to reason with him: "Do you know how to respect people! Why don't you leave?"

"They are invaders! They stole our places at the university!"

"Listen to me. They are ordinary students. Hong Kong students have a number of places. Each student also has a fixed number for international students. The number for international students does not affect the number of Hong Kong students."

"Are you Hongkonger or Chinese? What are you helping them? We Hongkongers pay our taxes!" These words hurt me. I am a Hongkonger. Just because I interceded does not mean that I am protective about people from elsewhere.

"They came here to study and pay more than one hundred thousand dollars per year. It is several times more expensive than what Hongkongers pay."

"That's different! We pay our taxes and so we should have the right to education! They don't!"

After going on for a while, the obese student took his instant noodles and left. I looked in front of me. Mainland student B had used his mobile phone to record the entire incident. As the obese student passed by, he used his hand to hit student B so that the mobile phone flew two meters away onto the ground. I immediately hollered. Student B tried to pursue but Student A stopped him. The obese student disappears.

After settling down, the mainland students thanked me. I replied: "Please ignore him. Most students don't think that way." But I knew that this was not true. The fact is that the people of Hong Kong hate China more and more each day. This incident last night is not an isolated one. Then I told student B: "My status is somewhat embarrassing. I would be grateful if you don't post the video onto the Internet." That is because I know that if the video were posted on the Internet, I would be targeted. People will scold the leftist retard Johnson Yeung for selling out Hong Kong.

(2) I hate myself

As I left the snack restaurant, I really felt bad. My eyes were filled with tears. But I had to go to a meeting. So I took a deep breath and went back to the Student Union upstairs. I continued with the meeting as if nothing had happened. But my thoughts were completely taken over by what had just happened. The Hong Kong-China conflict is frequently seen in the streets; but it was the first time that I had come across an inexplicable conflict at Hong Kong University. During this meeting, somebody showed a video of the anti-parallel trade protests. The video showed both sides cursing each other with "Fuck your mother!" just like in that incident earlier on. I almost broke out in tears before the dozen or so persons. After the meeting ended, I bade farewell to the other students. Then I took the elevator to the Hong Kong University MTR station. But that time, I broke down. From the corridor to the train platform until I reached Jordan station, I used up a packet of tissue paper. Fortunately it was past midnight and not many people noticed me.

Sorrow does not adequately describe how I felt at the time. It was more like a pain that split my chest in half. Because without knowing it, my city has been filled with so much hatred and conflicts.

But I hate myself even more. I hate myself for not being to resolve the conflict better.

As my friends know, I don't like to quarrel. As I get into a quarrel, I become stronger and stiffer. If I am insulted in a police station, I will scold the other side. Last night, I did not want to treat the obese student as an enemy and scold him. "Stealing resources", "stealing university places", "mainlanders" ... the obese students hated these mainland students in front of them probably not because he is a racist but because his experience over the years and the information that he received made him think that the Chinese people are the enemies that he must eradicate. I understand his views, so I cannot scold him as if he was an enemy.

But I still hate myself.

After studying four years of political science, social ethics and moral philosophy and another half-year in human rights laws, I did not know what reason to use to assuage his anger. I ended up using the reason that they paid three times as much in tuition to try to persuade him. Did I intervene because they paid their tuition on time? Of course not.

When I spoke up to stop the obese student from insulting the mainland students in front of the snack restaurant, I did so because I believed that the two mainland students were innocent. I was also worried that the two mainland students would start to hate Hongkongers and join the tide of Chinese nationalism. I was worried that this kind of hatred would spread within the two groups so that is became a self-fulfilling prophecy that they become enemies who attack each other. I did not want to see my beloved city enter this state. Therefore I intervened.

The city of Hong Kong is living in anxiety and restlessness. We are afraid that our values will be taken away by the Chinese Communists. Young people and middle-class people work every day but they don't feel safe because they don't know if they will be poor when they are old. The demand to increase the number of university places was ignored for years. The democratic system was shattered by the police batons. Earlier, the Neo Democrats tried to reduce the number of international students because this will increase the number of local student places. What happened? The government did not respond and nothing happened. The Chinese Communists are too faraway to be influenced. The Hong Kong government act against its citizens, and convert its responsibilities into civil conflicts. Is the government unable to solve the parallel trader problem? No, it merely refused to enforce the law and thus forced the citizens to find their own way to express their anger and then used public opinion to create the impression of chaos in Hong Kong.

Therefore, even if I find the obese student to be wrong in his insulting manners, I did not detest him because I know the source of his restlessness and his fear of the future.

(3) Hatred is a burden

When I got home, I couldn't sleep all night. I opened the computer and brought up <American History X> to watch. This is a movie about black-white hatred in America. Once hatred is built up, it became 10 times, 100 times, 1000 times harder to re-establish mutual trust. I don't want to see those fellows who live in Hong Kong be hurt and their self-respect be stripped away.

The movie ends with these words: "Hatred is a burden. Life is too short. Don't be angry all the time." This is the same as the sentence in <Ten Years>: "What we have heard most often these years are conspiracy theories. We have lost mutual trust in each other."

My city is living in hatred. The object of hatred is not Hongkongers versus Chinese, but different ideological camps and different factions. People are criticizing, scoring and attacking each other, and gradually escalating too.

I used to like to criticize and scorn others. Several months after the Umbrella Revolution, I found this unsustainable. Often I feel that the other side are leftist retards right retards local retards communist agents. But was it because we really know or witness what they did, or whether we received certain signals and jumped to conclusions? Even if we have different stances, do we have to criticize and rake each other over without any room for mutual understanding? Will hating each other make things better or worse?

Studying at Hong Kong University for this half year, I have met different people. In the classes, there are Hongkongers but also other students from South East Asia, Europe, China and so on. Some of these are refugees, some are from totalitarian countries, and knowing them has broken down my rigid understanding of those places. During the defense of Hong Kong University over the past several weeks, I have discussed and charged alongside what are grouped as Localist students. More or less I have known them better and know that we can accommodate each other.

All the grand blueprints and ideals of politics lead to the hope that we can live better, and individual are guaranteed to fulfill their goals.

Last night I asked the mainland students not to post the video on the Internet because I was afraid of being targeted. I did what I thought was the right thing, but I still did not want it to be known. That was actually hard to bear. Yet being silent in the face of hatred will only make my city even worse. Therefore I wrote down these words to share my self-reflections with you. Maybe you think that I did wrong. It does not mater, because I have at least communicated with you and I hope that I can continue to communicate with you. Thanks.

Internet comments:

- (Bastille Post) Lo Wing-hung.

The conflict between Hongkongers and mainlanders originate from the complex relationship between two political systems. The One System of Hong Kong is different from the One System in mainland China, and when these differences are magnified by opposing forces, they became sources of conflict. This particular case appears to be about university openings. The obese student said that the mainlanders "are invaders who have snatched away the positions of Hongkongers." In the past, the Hong Kong government allocated 20% of all student positions to outside students (including mainlanders), of which at most 4% carries subsidies and at most 16% are self-financed. Since outside students pay a lot more in tuition, this policy has economic and social benefits.

Economically speaking, the government is setting up tertiary education as a sustainable industry. Such a policy is copied from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. When many Hong Kong parents send their children to study overseas, they are patronising the tertiary education overseas. Socially speaking, the government holds to attract high-quality overseas students to come to Hong Kong. When they graduate, they may be allowed to stay if they can find jobs within one year. This is a way of attracting high-quality young immigrants in an ageing society.

But just like the Individual Visit Permit, such a policy can have some side-effects. When many mainlanders come on Individual Visit Permits, certain areas become very congested. This caused xenophobia to rise and this became hatred in the hearts of young people who are incited by politicians. This is the cause of racial hatred among university students. Such effects should not be taken lightly, because they will eventually bring about bloodshed in race wars.

- (Ming Pao) Kevin Lau.

... The authorities who are insistent on struggles should see that the seeds of hatred have been sowed on the soil of Hong Kong-China relationship over the past two years of struggles. The Chief Executive and the university council members can depend on police protection. But hundreds of thousands of mainland tourists, mainland students and mainland business people have to put up with unreasonable insults and discrimination. When these incidents get reported in the mainland by the media, millions of Hong Kongers who live or travel to mainland China will have to put up with the retaliations and attacks. Is this the ending that the Beijing leaders want to see?

The university students who are in the midst of active resistance should be able to see that it is right to refuse to negotiate, to not give up, to not accept their fates, to not be silent. Please insist on. But please do not open the gates for hatred, do not let hatred take over the campus, do not let hatred into your hears. If for nothing else, then do this for the freedom to continue to live in with love in your lives.

- Another example of Hongkongers' xenophobia:

https://www.facebook.com/100010173139247/videos/210957175920052/ Hong Kong man upset at a mainlander child for making too much noise on a subway train.

Man: Shut up! SHUT UP! Huh! Can you hear me!?|
Woman: Do not scare people like that.
Man: You are disturbing other people do you know? You can push him out. Do you know?
Woman: There is no need to be so loud. The child is care.
Man: What is he scared of? The way you teach your child. He makes so much noise so as to annoy everybody. You are so annoying. Everyone in the car is looking at you.
Woman: I am trying to calm him down.
Man: You take him outside. He is beyond control. Do you know?
Woman: I know.
Man: If you know, you should take him outside.
Woman: You have no public morals.
Man: Is that how you teach your son? Drop dead!
Woman: You drop dead!
Man: Do you think that you are still on the mainland?
Woman: Crazy!
Man: I may be crazy, but not as crazy as your son.
Woman: You have no loving in your heart.

(EJ Insight) Why is there a boycott drive against Wong Jings latest movie?  February 4, 2016.

Hong Kong is a free economy. You can do whatever you like, buy anything you want or go anyplace as long as it is within the bounds of law. No one can force you to do or not to do anything.

But recently, some internet users are encouraging Hong Kong people not to watch the latest movie directed by outspoken director Wong Jing in a bid to show their anger at the filmmakers pro-Beijing political stance, as well as the Hong Kong peoples solidarity in the face of what they consider as Chinas growing assertiveness in interfering in local affairs.

More than 5,000 internet users have joined a Facebook community page called Hong Kong people dare to boycott Wong Jing.

The page accuses Wong of attacking Hong Kong people to show his loyalty and devotion to Beijing authorities. The page urges people to stand up and say no to Wongs rubbish movie.

The organizers of the boycott campaign are referring to Wongs latest movie From Vegas to Macau 3″, which will open in Hong Kong cinemas on Friday.

Many internet users are closely monitoring the advance ticket sales in various cinemas that will screen the movie, to see whether the boycott call is having any impact.

Based on the advance bookings, the movie doesnt seem to be doing very well. Several theaters have not sold any seats for some screenings, while some of the most popular cinemas were only able to sell less than 10 tickets.

All in all, advance sales account for less than 30 percent of available seats in selected cinemas across the city for Friday and Saturday.

But its still too early to say the boycott campaign has been a success, considering that most moviegoers prefer to just go to cinema without any advance booking.

So whether the boycott is success or not will be reflected in the actual box office figures to be released by producers and distributors of the movie.

For his part, Wong appears unfazed by the campaign. After all, Hong Kong just represents 1/25 of Chinas total box office sales, he remarked.

Last year there was a similar boycott call, but my movie still ranked first in the box office, Wong said.

The coming Lunar New Year is considered one of the most important periods for the Hong Kong movie market. 

It has been a tradition for Hong Kong people to go out with their families and friends to enjoy the holidays, and one of the activities they want to do is watch comedy and feel-good movies in the cinema.

During last years Lunar New Year, Wongs From Vegas to Macau 2″ earned HK$14 million in the box office in just four days, ranking third on the list of top-grossing films.

Starring Chow Yun-fat, From Vegas to Macau 3″ could prove to be another top grosser for the season, given the enormous popularity of the lead actor.

Supporters of the boycott campaign, mostly youngsters, could only hope to exert minimal pressure on the movies box office. Many people can readily separate Wongs political stance from his movies.

Wongs negative comments about Hong Kong cannot stop movie lovers from watching his latest offering.

But although the film director himself remains unfazed, other quarters appear to be worrying about the possible impact of the boycott campaign.

Cinema operators are giving away free tickets on their social media fan page.

The pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong has reserved a huge bulk of tickets to be resold to the community at a price of just HK$25 each, a discount of more than 50 percent to the original price of HK$70.

That should help fill the empty seats in cinemas in case the boycott campaign gains massive support.

Many Hong Kong people have been shocked by Wongs transformation from a movie director with no clear political leanings into a rabid Beijing supporter.

In 2012, he wrote a glowing tribute to student leader Joshua Wong on his Weibo page, praising him for his militant advocacy of student rights as founder of the student activist group Scholarism.

But during the Occupy civil disobedience campaign, Wong Jings political stance appeared to have changed overnight.

When Joshua Wong was arrested at the height of the protests in November 2014, the student leader complained that police officers tried to injure him in the groin. Wong Jing remarked on social media: Is it because his penis is too small police couldnt locate it?

Since then, the movie director has been making rabid comments against the opposition camp. He also said unlike his generation in the 1980s, todays youth are wallowing in failure.

In the Greater China region, Wong Jing is not the first one in the entertainment sector to display loyalty to Beijing authorities.

Many artists and directors would rather not make comments about politics, even if the issues affect their lives and the future of their city, and would even declare their support to the central authorities in order to protect their interests in the worlds biggest market.

In Taiwan, Huang An, a singer from the 1990s, made use of every opportunity to slam fellow artists who are not showing their patriotism to China.

Huang even assailed a 16-year old Taiwanese singer, Chou Tzu-Yu, after she was caught on camera holding a Taiwan national flag, accusing her of supporting calls for the islands independence.

His comments sparked outrage in Taiwan and a boycott of his songs and video products. Many called for the removal of his songs from karaoke systems and record bars, and said he was not welcome to come back to the island.

It is said that the Chou incident also resulted in a landslide victory for the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party in the elections last month.

In the case of Wong Jing, many people could not understand his change of political stance. Was it because of the success of his movies in the mainland? 

The simple fact is that Chinas authoritarian regime does not tolerate dissent, and if you are an artist who enjoys success in the mainland, it would be better for you to toe the line for the sake of your career. 

So the only possible explanation is that Wong wants to show his loyalty to the Communist Party regime in order to ensure his success in the China market.

The boycott campaign against Wongs movie is the result of that perception among Hong Kong people.


Hong Kong Democracy Online
Emergency Appeal
Do not go to the cinema and watch Wong Jing's movie


Call4van
Emergency appeal
All those who plan to watch From Vegas to Macau III
Please unlike this page yourself


Watch Wong Jing during the Lunar New Year and may your entire family suffer ill fortune


Civic Passion
Cleanse the filth away on Lunar New Year's Eve, chase Hong Kong bandit Wong Jing away
Battle all over Hong Kong to boycott Wong Jing
Time and location:
1700-2000 iSquare Tsim Sha Tsui
1700-2000 Ocean Termina Tsim Sha Tsui
1700-2000 Broadway Mong Kok
1700-2000 Langham Place Mong Kok
1800-2100 Jade & Pearl Plaza Causeway Bay
1800-2100 Windsor House Causeway Bay


Oops! An analysis of manpower resources has reduced the list of locations to 3 out of the total of 60:
1700-2000 iSquare Tsim Sha Tsui
1700-2000 Broadway/Langham Place Mong Kok
1800-2100 Jade & Pearl Plaza Causeway Bay

Videos:

From Vegas to Macau III trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znlEkgjJkUs

From Vegas to Macau III: Theme song sung by Jacky Cheung
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2SQft_X8M

Passion Times
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043661902363643/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043696365693530/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043663929030107/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043681692361664/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043692852360548/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043698019026698/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043707149025785/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043712552358578/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043713735691793/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043715412358292/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043717865691380/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043721719024328/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043724889024011/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043735309022969/
https://www.facebook.com/passiontimes/videos/1043742209022279/

Shop Nono
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I95TsT8iJDs

Internet comments:

- Remember when Huang An picked on Chou Tzuyu, the pro-democracy/freedom Internet users rose up to defend the freedom of speech of entertainers? Now the same pro-democracy/freedom Internet users are rising up to boycott director Wong Jing's new movie From Vegas to Macau III. Nothing is more inspiring and reassuring than consistency of position.

- The EJ Insight writer went from "More than 5,000 internet users have joined a Facebook community page called Hong Kong people dare to boycott Wong Jing to "The boycott campaign against Wongs movie is the result of that perception among Hong Kong people." This is just like Audrey Eu's banner about "98% of Hong Kong University alumni don't want Arthur Li Kwok-cheung!" The truth was that of the 2% who bothered to show up, 98% voted that way. Those who didn't show up were "represented" without authorization. In like manner, 5,000 internet users became "Hong Kong people."

 

- Wong Jing has come out and says that what happens in Hong Kong matters not much because Hong Kong is only 1/25-th of the China market. For From Vegas to Macau II, the gross in Hong Kong was HKD 28.4 million while the gross in mainland China was CNY 974 million.

- Well, what are your options this week anyway?
Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Road Chip (American cartoon)
Deadpool (American action)
Dirty Grandpa (American comedy)
The Good Dinosaur (American cartoon)
The Monkey King 2 (mainland Chinese special effects)
From Vegas to Macau 3 (Hong Kong, Wong Jing)
Mermaid (Hong Kong, Stephen Chow)
The Gigolo 2 (Hong Kong)

The Hong Kong movies that are scheduled to run this week are the ones considered mostly likely to succeed at the box office. Lesser movies would be scheduled at less competitive periods.

- So do you want the young Yellow Ribbons to give up From Vegas to Macau 3 to watch Alvin and the Chipmunks instead? In reality, they will watch neither because they will go to the mainland Chinese bittorrent sites to download whatever it is that they want to watch.

- If From Vegas to Macau 3 should rake in HKD 30 million, then the Civic Passion and the rest of the Yellow Ribbons deserves to be insulted the people of Hong Kong. Not only can they not stop Wong Jing, but they also gave him a way to denigrate their influence.

- Wong Jing said that there won't be a From Vegas to Macau 4. The difference between From Vegas to Macau 2 to From Vegas to Macau is the additional cast.

From Vegas to Macau 2, the main cast is:

Chow Yun-fat as Ken/Ko Chun
Nick Cheung as Mark
Carina Lau as Molly
Shawn Yue as Vincent
Jin Qiaoqiao as Aoi

From Vegas to Macau 3, the main cast is:

Chow Yun-fat as Ken/Ko Chun
Nick Cheung as Mark
Carina Lau as Molly
Shawn Yue as Vincent

plus

Andy Lau as Michael "Dagger" Chan (from the Knight of Gamblers)
Li Yuchun as Ko Fei
Jacky Cheung as Yik Tin-hang
Charles Heung as Lung Ng
PSY (of Gangnam style)

Wong Jing basically has nowhere to go because he has rounded up just about everybody.

- Wong Jing's weibo

A fool is calling on all the people of Hong Kong not to watch my movies. I estimate that you bastards have fewer than 200,000 supporters, most of whom are poor and/or unemployed just like the political troublemakers. Last year after Occupy Central, people called for a boycott of myself, but From Vegas to Macau 2 was still the top grossing Chinese-lanugage movie. This year, you guys are losers but you still want to play this game? It is easier for you to eat shit! If I am number one once again, will you leap into the sea?

- Tiffany Chen's weibo

Anger! Somebody has openly insulted and challenged the movie directed by Wong Jing. I know that it is a turtle led by Raymond Wong Yuk-man but doesn't dare to show its head. These Hong  Kong independence elements want to make money off this opportunity. We oppose Occupy Central, we love Hong Kong, we love the police brothers and we love the motherland! But did we get in the way of the young people who continue to poison and hurt Hong Kong? Is this wrong? Our government tolerated you but it doesn't mean that they are afraid of you. They just don't want to hurt innocent Hongkongers, they don't want to cause chaos in the Hong Kong economy. You Hong Kong independence people have gone too far! You will pay! We have the support of the people of China and we are not afraid of you.

The reason why I am angry is that director Wong Jing called us to apologize. He said that his love Hong Kong-China actions have caused the pro-Hong Kong independence elements to retaliate against From Vegas to Macau 3. If this should affect Hong Kong box office receipts, he would be letting down the bosses and the actors. I have known him for 30 years. He is a good man. He has never cursed anyone out during this work. He is also grateful and appreciative. He is apologizing to the movie houses and also to the nearby malls and shops. Why bother? Sigh! Are these people worse than triads? Especially that Wong XX who is worse than an animal! This is going too far!

- Tiffany Chen is the wife of Charles Heung Wah-keung. The peculiar thing is that (1) Charles Heung is alleged to be closely tied to the Sun Yee On triad; and (2) legislator Raymond Wong Yuk-man is alleged supported by the Sun Yee On triad. How to reconcile these odd facts?

- Is Wong Jing panicking with a telephone call to Tiffany Chen? Tsk tsk tsk. The key fact is this: Tiffany Chen is making these posts on weibo (for China) and not Facebook (for Hong Kong). So while the Civic Passion wants to attack the box office in the 7-million Hong Kong market, Wong Jing and company are using that fact to boost the box office in the 1.3 billion mainland Chinese market. They couldn't have asked for better promotional help. You have to wonder if Raymond Wong was working with Charles Heung on this one.

(Headline News) February 1, 2016.

Previously HKU vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson promised to arrange for the students to meet with HKU Council chairman Arthur Li within 10 days. The HKU Strike Committee met yesterday afternoon and decided to stop the class strike temporarily. They also came up with three conditions for the meeting.

According to Strike Committee member Yvonne Leung, the three conditions were (1) the meeting shall take place on the Hong Kong University campus; (2) council members Timothy O'Leary and Cheung Tat-ming shall be invited to attend the meeting; (3) HKU Campus TV will be allowed to attend. The university has already rejected the first two conditions.

Yvonne Leung said that Mathieson and Li are respectively the vice-chancellor and the council chairman at Hong Kong University. So there is no reason to rent another venue outside the campus for this meeting. Therefore she questions whether the university is sincere in having a dialogue.

Yvonne Leung also said that the students are very sincere in having a dialogue. As to whether the meeting will take place, it will depend on the sincerity of the university in accepting these three conditins.

Yvonne Leung denied that the reason for stopping the class strike was due to the poor participation rate. She said that the movement is now moving into the dialogue phase. She emphasized that the siege of the council members last week and today's meeting were attended by sufficient number of students.

(SCMP) Arthur Li adds fuel to the fire at University of Hong Kong. By Alex Lo. February 1, 2016.

Arthur Li Kwok-cheung is a fighter. His natural instinct is to confront his antagonists. And that is exactly what the new council chairman of the University of Hong Kong is doing by denouncing student protesters and pan-democratic politicians who allegedly goaded them on.

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying is also like that. Which is why he handpicked Li to head the council after the failed tenure of Dr Leong Che-hung, a conciliatory and honourable man who was trapped between the intransigence of student and staff leaders on the one hand and that of the leftist press on the other.

Lis suitability for the job is in question. If his goal is to contain and roll back campus radicalism, he has just added more fuel to it. Many Hong Kong people, including yours truly, were turned off by the student protesters. Li could have waited a few days before meeting the students, during which time plenty of public criticism would no doubt come forth against the students mob mentality. But Li called a press conference the next day and made HKU chief Peter Mathieson sit beside him. I just felt sorry for Mathieson, who has so far managed to remain on relatively good terms with the student radicals. But after the chaos this week, and his open denunciation of their mob antics, he has evidently picked a side.

Instead of playing good cop, bad cop, now you just have two bad cops. They didnt host the event on campus, but at the Bankers Club. That shows:

1. HKUs two top leaders cant hold meetings on their own turf.

2. The location just draws attention to Lis privileged and elitist background.

The press meeting, in which Li directed his venom against his own students and the Civic Party, simply refocused public attention on his own immoderation than that of his foes. No, Prof Li, the students werent on drugs. I wish they were, which might have made them more fun-loving and peaceful people.

Rather, they, and their supporters, suffer from an excess of self-righteousness, fighting for abstract principles like academic freedom which scarely affect them. Thats why their demands are virtually unlimited because their idealism is unbounded.

Good teachers know how to channel such idealism in their students towards worthy lifelong pursuits. Li is just channelling all their anger at himself.

(SCMP) February 1, 2016.

An urgent meeting among University of Hong Kong (HKU) staff to discuss whether to support the students call for a class boycott had to be cancelled due a surprisingly low turnout which could reflect a lack of support for the cause, the South China Morning Post has learned.

This emerged as students decided on Sunday night to temporarily suspend their boycott over the appointment of Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as HKU council chairman and their call for a review of the institutions governing structure.

The HKU Academic Staff Association called an extraordinary general meeting for last Friday to allow its 500 members to vote on a motion to support the strike. However, fewer than 25 people turned up at the lunchtime session lower than the required quorum.

Association chairman Professor William Cheung Sing-wai confirmed the vote had been cancelled, but would not speculate on the reason behind the low turnout. It is hard for me to guess why the members did not attend the meeting since they did not show up to convey their thoughts, Cheung said. I guess it is possible that some people are not interested in the matter, or that some just dare not show up and express their views.

This was the first time that the association had called an extraordinary meeting to vote on an urgent subject, he said. Members were notified a week beforehand. An HKU staff member who preferred to remain anonymous believed it suggested that HKU staff had grown tired of the ongoing conflict and now wanted to focus on teaching and research activities.

(Hong Kong University) Response by the University of Hong Kong Council regarding a proposed meeting between the Chairman and the Students Strike Organizing Committee. February 2, 2016.

The Chairman of the University of Hong Kong Council Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, after agreeing in principle last Tuesday (January 26) to hold a meeting with student representatives within ten days, has been working through University management with the students on the detailed arrangements.

Unfortunately, after setting the time for the meeting and booking of venue, the students concerned raised a number of conditions.  The students insisted on holding the meeting on campus and to have teaching staff members and campus media present. 

Taking into consideration what happened at the Sassoon Road campus where the Universitys last Council meeting was held, the University is of the view that safety concerns should be the first priority when considering the meeting venue. It is the Universitys responsibility to exercise due diligence in protecting the safety of those involved, including meeting participants, as well as staff and security personnel. Since the HKU Students Strike Organizing Committee has provided neither assurances nor suggestions demonstrated to be effective in guaranteeing safety on site, we regard it more appropriate to hold the meeting out of the campus due to safety concerns. That is why we have already booked an alternative venue.

The aim of the meeting is to provide an opportunity for an exchange of views between the Council Chairman and students. In this regard, it is inappropriate to include teaching staff members at the meeting.  The President Professor Peter Mathieson, who is also a member of the Council, has agreed to sit in at the meeting. His presence will satisfy the demand by students to have Council members present at the meeting.

The University has been in due course liaising with television news outlets for a live video broadcast of the meeting, so as to ensure that the meeting will be held in an open and transparent manner. Campus and other news media outlets will be able to view the discussions live. Representatives of students campus media outlets can also be included as student representatives at the meeting. 

Professor Arthur Li has shown his greatest sincerity in reaching out to the students for a meeting in the past few days. The students had made the demand for a meeting with the Council Chairman in the first place but they then added conditions to that demand. It is reasonable to cast doubt on the sincerity of the students for genuine engagement. 

- The Strike Committee said that the university unilaterally booked a hotel for the meeting without the concurrence of the students. The three conditions from the students were offered on Wednesday and therefore they are not additional demands. The Strike Committee said that the students found the university's response unacceptable. Furthermore, the conditions named by the university are at odds with what the Strike Committee meeting came up with. Therefore the students will need more time to consider. The Strike Committee said that the fact that the students have not suspended the dialogue meant that the students want to continue to push for reforms in governance. They hope that they can have a constructive dialogue with the university before the next council meeting. The Strike Committee was scheduled to have the dialogue with Arthur Li on Wednesday. But the Strike Committee has canceled the meeting because the university refused to comply with the conditions that they demanded.

(SCMP) Students and junior staff at the University of Hong Kong have fallen through the looking glass. By Alex Lo. February 2, 2016.

Some people have a one-track mind. The incoming student union president of the University of Hong Kong says one of her goals is to revamp the institutes governing council. Althea Suen also says she will follow in the footsteps of her predecessor Billy Fung Jing-en by breaching confidentiality rules whenever she considers it is in the interests of justice and the public to do so. Umm, what is justice and public interest anyway? Perhaps the third-year social work student can enlighten us.

What this means in reality is that we can expect more rallying of students against council members hijacking meetings, disrupting classes, and falsely detaining and harassing university personnel.

Somehow I dont think thats the purpose of a student union. Such groups used to help improve the quality of life on campus, organise parties, demand better amenities and more student subsidies and scholarships, and fight any fee hikes. At least that was the case when I was a student.

Since when has the HKU student union thought it was its job to revamp the decision-making council? I think it should be the other way round. But what do I know. The students are not there to learn, but to teach their elders how to do things.

Likewise, the HKUs Academic Staff Association, run mostly by the more junior staff suffering from serious envy of their more professional and accomplished colleagues, has been busy following the lead of the student union. It tried to get members to a meeting to support the students class boycott. No one showed up. Even student leaders were forced to call off their boycott. As one HKU professor wrote to me, the job of the association should be to focus on matters such as promotion, tenure, contract extension, salaries, medical benefits, health and job safety.

Why does it think it should involve itself in wider politics and bring the citys conflicts to the once tranquil campus of our oldest and most respected university?

The union and association say they are fighting for institutional autonomy and academic freedom. But these mean nothing if your school becomes too mediocre to matter. This is the real danger your school is facing. What you are doing is not helping to improve HKUs academic standing and reputation, and will only bring more disruption and acrimony to your school.

(SCMP) February 4, 2016.

A proposed meeting between University of Hong Kong students and council chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung to discuss university reform remains up in the air as the rift between the two sides has widened.

Wednesdays scheduled meeting was cancelled, with students and Li blaming each other, and a council member complained of how she suffered when protesting students besieged a council meeting last week.

The two sides were in talks to set up a meeting after the council, under pressure from student protests, agreed in last Tuesdays meeting to address their demand for a review panel to discuss reforming HKUs governance structure.

While Li said he doubted students sincerity, a class boycott committee, which held the student protest last week, said in a statement late on Tuesday night that they had been wronged.

The committee has borne in mind the interests of the university and has tolerated the unreasonable acts of the council many times, the statement read.

Students claim reform is necessary to prevent further political interference into the council, which entered a political storm last year in the wake of Occupy Central. It rejected pro-democracy professor Johannes Chan Man-muns candidacy for a university managerial post despite a search committee recommending him for the post.

Students want a review to strip Hong Kongs chief executive of his default position as HKU chancellor, and of his power to appoint council members.

In the talks to set up the meeting with Li and HKU vice chancellor Peter Mathieson, the students have demanded the meeting be held on the campus in the presence of two teachers who sit on the council and that the campus TV be allowed to broadcast proceedings live. But Li insisted the meeting be held outside campus for security reasons.

Internet comments:

- I've seen this script before:
(1) You fucking sit around for a while and nothing is happening
(2) You decide to get some physical exercise, so you fucking get up and charge a few rounds without getting anywhere
(3) You decide to hold a dialogue and you fucking get nowhere with the word games
(4) In the end, you get fucking nothing whatsoever.

- This gets to the same point at the end of Occupy Central -- there are no cards left to play.
- There are more cards (such as setting off bombs) but they are too scared to play them.

- Never in the history of Hong Kong student movement has there been such a miserable failure.
On day 1, they called for a general student strike and a couple hundred out of 30,000 showed up.
On day 2, they got fewer than 100.
On day 3, they didn't even bother to meet.
On the day of the council meeting, there were 200 people of which more than half were professional demonstrators from outside the school.
The Strike Committee needs to call for a 20,000-person march to force the university to accept the three conditions for the meeting. OR ELSE!

- And who picked the schedule anyway? The students are ready to leave for the Lunar New Year holidays. Who is going to hang around for this meeting? This is like asking bank workers to strike on Sunday!
- They could have kept the strike going through the Lunar New Year period. After all, there are no classes and therefore the strike can be pronounced to be totally successful.

- Why does the Strike Committee insist that Timothy O'Leary and Cheung Tat-ming must be present at the meeting? What is their role in this meeting? I think that the concern must be that the students won't be able to deal with Arthur Li. Like the Council meetings, this meeting will be conducted in English. That would render current HKU Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en speechless, because his English is terrible by his own admission. Fung's role will be to send text messages to people on the outside. Chances are only Yvonne Leung can hold a dialogue in English. But she will be nowhere as familiar with the details and subtleties of the issues as Arthur Li. That is why they will need help from the 'adults' Timothy O'Leary and Cheung Tat-ming. However, the university will say that this meeting is with the students, and not any other persons.

- (Ming Pao) Strike Committee member Yuen Yuen-lung just said that the Strike Committee will select five student representatives to attend the meeting. He said that there will be Strike Committee members but not including former Student Union president Yvonne Leung, former Undergrad deputy chief-editor Wong Chun-kit or himself. Also, the Strike Committee has not yet decide whether they will demonstrate outside the meeting place, or to blockade the place and prevent Arthur Li and Peter Mathieson from leaving.

- The university has agreed to let Campus TV be present. Why? Because they are confident that Arthur Li will win and they want the entire proceedings to be publicly available instead of a "he said, she said" situation.

- Why won't Li and Mathieson meet the students on HKU campus? Because they don't want to go through another round of false imprisonment by professional demonstrators from the outside. And everybody knows that it is bad thing to have to summon the police to come into the campus. Hehehe.

- The students say that the council meeting must be aired live for the sake of transparency. Meanwhile when the Strike Committee meet, they do so in a closed room with the windows taped up.

- Margaret Ng has just called Arthur Li the Communist Party secretary. So now the Strike Committee is putting the party secretary under shuanggui -- Li has to report to appear in front of the authorities at "the appointed time and place."

- Why do the students insist that they must have Timothy O'Leary and Cheung Tat-ming present at the meeting, or else the meeting is a no-go? They say it's because the reform in governance involves the teachers and staff as well and therefore they must have their representatives.

There are two flaws in this argument.

Firstly, if you believe that the teachers and staff members are stakeholders, then why these two and not the other teachers and staff members on the university council? For example, Lo Chung-mau was elected by universal suffrage of the teachers. Why can't he be included in the meeting? The answer is simple: O'Leary and Cheung have been sympathetic to the students, and the students was two sympathizers who will be said to 'represent' all the teachers and staff members at the university.

Secondly, the students know that a student strike is hopeless at this point. The highest number for the strike committee meeting is 300 on day one according to the organizers. But if the students can drag the teachers and staff members into the battle, things will be different. If one teacher calls off a class, then the entire class of students will be automatically on 'strike.' When the academic staff association called for an extraordinary general meeting, nobody showed up because they don't want any part of a losing cause. Getting Timothy O'Leary and Cheung Tat-ming into the meeting will hopefully ignite the teachers and staff members if they get into an argument with Arthur Li.

- Since there is no class boycott and no dialogue, I want genuine hunger strike!

- (Local Press) Wan Chin: Hong Kong will come under the domination of the child soldiers. February 2, 2016.

Late last year, students of Lingnan University had also surrounded the school council. At the end, the council members came out and held a dialogue with the students, and the crisis was over.

Now, what attitude has university council chairman Li Kwok Cheung taken towards the students who have demanded a dialogue with the council? How could he make a meal out of the matter, letting things get completely out of hand?

Leung Chun-ying of the clan of local commies has sent along these veteran boxers to play practice matches with the radical young people, creating for Hong Kongs elderly generation a stereotypical impression of corruptness and haughtiness, all for the purpose of provoking in Hong Kong generational clashes, which would spur the young people to usurp political power. The Beijing regime has been watching the whole drama with very mixed feelings.

With the rootless young generation of Hong Kong increasingly gaining ground, and the whole middle-aged generation of worldly-wise successors ousted, Hong Kongs political arena will face a break in its intellectual lineage as well as its knowledge lineage. As a result, Hong Kong will come under the domination of the child soldiers.

Child soldiers such as those of Scholarism and Youngspiration are certainly unable to fight, but they would listen to the words of the US, and they would also take instructions from the wily old birds behind the scene. This is Leung Chun-yings political mission, which is exactly the mission Lee Teng-hui had in former times when he was with the Kuomintang. His mission was to bring about a rout of Kuomintangs middle-aged successors, clearing the deck for the child soldiers of the DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) to take over control, a crucial step to place Taiwan under the sway of the US.

(note: To fully understand this posting, an IQ of 130 is needed.)


Civic Passion
Do not have any contacts with the gangsters, stay far away from the Police Force
18 years after the transfer of sovereignty, the Hong Kong Police has become a tool of political oppression with frequent scandals.
After the Umbrella Revolution, police authority has been expanded to a new high. At the same time, the crime rate is also the highest in Hong Kong. The Police has returned to the era of "licensed gangsters." Yet many people still think that they can join the police to carry out justice, or else they think that they can join the Police for a 'job'. To ensure that young people do not end up in the wrong path in life, Civic Passion will proceed this Sunday (January 31) to the Wanchai Police Headquarters on Police Recruitment Day to call on everyone "not to have any contacts with the gangsters and to stay far away from the Police Force
Date: January 31 (Sunday)
Time: 2pm-4pm
Location: Wanchai Police Headquarters

(Oriental Daily with video) January 31, 2016.

About a dozen or so Civic Passion members demonstrated outside Wanchai Police Headquarters. On the way, they charged out onto Locke Road but the police chased them back onto the sidewalk. There was a mild physical clash. After the Civic Passion members returned to the sidewalk, they heaped obscenities on the police. In the afternoon, the Civic Passion members engaged in a megaphone-enhanced war of words with members of Defend Hong Kong Together and Treasure Group across the road. The police separated the two sides which continued to shout and yell at each other.

The two pro-Police groups had 30 to 40 persons. They were petitioning the police to say that certain political parties in Hong Kong have become organized crime gangs trying to smear the police. The groups thank the police for defending Hong Kong/China. They also asked the police to enforce the law against those persons who incited the students and imprisoned the council members during the HKU council meeting.

Videos:

Good News Hong Kong Facebook https://www.facebook.com/HongKongGoodNews/videos/1021411434599459/ Lots of "Fuck your mother"s from the screaming gangsters who are caged behind police metal barricades.

Oriental Daily https://www.facebook.com/bbtauseeworld/videos/448478675349515/ About

Passion Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhMfMoBJR-A Arguing with the police to be allowed to proceed to Wanchai Police Headquarters. Plenty of shouting of "Down with the Communist Party!"

Passion Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlJQHeZxZ-Y Shouting match against the pro-Communist demonstrators across the street.

Passion Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-NNODG0K-Y Interview with a westerner who was protesting along with the pro-Communist demonstrators.

Institute of Studies on Hong Kong Independence Young Wastrels Facebook https://www.facebook.com/443826885806614/videos/467738820082087/ The pro-Communist counter-demonstrators chant "Civic Passion, Hong Kong sinners." Who's got more people?

Internet comments:

- I watched the videos and I was expecting to see a huge show of force by the gangsters. But there were only a dozen or so foul-mouthed gangsters dressed in black. Their leaders were elsewhere taking a group photo:

Or were they burning joss sticks to Lord Guan?

- Okay, I get that Civic Passion hates the police canines. (Hong Kong Free Press) October 14, 2015. But what did Civic Passion when protestors showed up at the Passion Times office? They called the police uncles for help.

- Okay, so I watched the videos and I have a question: Is repeating "Fuck your mother's stinking cunt" many times really going to bring the Communist Party down?
- The Chinese Communist Party is based in mainland China, and they can't even hear you yelling in Wanchai, Hong Kong Island. In order to be effective, these Civic Passion people need to cross the border and do it inside mainland China.


Hong Kong Indigenous
2016 January 31 3pm
Sheung Shui
Nothing happens

(Oriental Daily with video) January 31, 2016.

Hong Kong Indigenous started a Recover Sheung Shui movement this afternoon. About 30 members started at 3pm from the Sheung Shui MTR to the parallel trade distribution centers in the Advanced Technology Centre industrial building and the dispensary-filled Hong Chai Street. Some of the participants wore face masks. As soon as the demonstrators what looks like a parallel trader, they rush over and curse. When they find merchandise stacked outside a dispensary, they yelled "Obstructing traffic!" with obscenities added.

During the demonstration, one female suspected of being a parallel trader got scared, discarded her wares and tried to leave. The demonstrators stopped her and ordered to "pick up the trash." So she had to pick up her wares in a cardboard box and left. The demonstrators spotted five individuals suspected of being parallel traders getting into a taxi with a lot of merchandise. So they stopped the taxi. The taxi driver was angry and came out to have a war of curses with the demonstrators. The police came to separate them. Later, the demonstrators went back to Sheung Shui MTR station. They declared that they will Recover Sheung Shui every day. Then they dispersed peacefully.

Videos:

Born in a Time of Chaos Facebook https://www.facebook.com/1640482902830291/videos/1689322787946302/ The clash with the taxi driver. The police came, inspected the taxi, declared that there were five passengers with four suitcases (not merchandise) and let the taxi proceed.

North District Parallel Imports Concern Group https://www.facebook.com/1640482902830291/videos/1689324307946150/ The suspected female parallel trader.

Lost Dutch https://www.facebook.com/LostDutch/videos/1521164744845949/ Bullying a senior citizen

Internet comments:

- The Chinese term 示威 for 'demonstration' literally means a "show of force." The strength of that force is reduced if you wear a mask, because it shows that you are afraid (of being identified and then subjected to retaliation).

- Been there, did that. But things have gotten worse now because the parallel imports industry has matured. The driving factor is the establishment of a full distribution network on the other side of the border which these demonstrators can do nothing about. This network can accept any and all goods brought across the border and quickly locate buyers. There is no uncertainty left. Meanwhile the parallel traders who carry the goods across the border are increasingly Hongkongers who are being paid $600 per day. That's $18,000 a month compared to the average starting salary of $11,000 per month for university graduates.

- They were able to call up 30 people on a Sunday for two hours. What does it mean for them to say that they will be back every day from now on? How many will come? Numbers matter here. When you have 30 people, you can bully 1 taxi driver. When you have 2 people, the 4 dispensary guys will beat the crap out of you.

- If these Localists are genuinely concerned about the plight of the people, they should be chasing after the South Asian criminals that are running amok in the streets. Most of the parallel traders are Hongkongers now, and they are trying to make a living without having to go on welfare.

- Where are the Localists on this one?
Hong Kong Island MTR train
February 4, 2016 7:30pm

- (Kinliu)

On Sunday, some localist organization with about 30 members went around Sheung Shui to curse out suspected parallel traders, tossing joss money to harass shops, preventing taxis from leaving with suspected parallel trade goods. Apart from the one courageous taxi driver who dared to object, the shopkeepers shuttered their gates and passersby fled.

It was not as if the police were absent. All the police officers present were there to watch, even as these people were suspected of criminal intimidation and disturbing the peace. The police made not attempt to deter or arrest anyone.

The behavior of these people are no different from triad gangs. If these were triad gangs, the police would have busted them very early on. However, these people carried the title of "Localist something or the other" and "Democratic something or the other." That is why the police stood still.

So my advice is that the triad gangs should rename themselves. Thus, Sun Yee On should become "Localist Sun Yee On," 14K should become "Democratic 14K," Wo Shing Wo should become "Freedom Wo Shing Wo," etc.

The Vice-Chancellor finally wakes up!

(Hong Kong Free Press) Mob rule: HKU vice-chancellor condemns students for surrounding governing Council meeting venue. January 27, 2016.

The president and vice-chancellor of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) has condemned student protesters for surrounding the venue of a governing Council meeting on Tuesday. In an email sent to staff members, students and alumni on behalf of HKUs Senior Management Team, Peter Mathieson said that the behaviour of HKU students and other protesters put the safety of Council members, including him, and the university and security staff at serious risk.

This is not the way to achieve progress: we will always be willing to engage in rational discussion and debate with students but we cannot condone mob rule, said Mathieson. Previously, Arthur Li had said that he accepted his new role as chairman as he did not want mob rule in Hong Kong.

Mathieson added that the students actions were totally unnecessary. [B]ecause the Council had earlier, as announced in a press statement at the end of the meeting, unanimously agreed to commission a review into the Universitys governance which was one of the central demands that the students had made publicly.

The scenes last night will have further damaged the Universitys reputation and they bring no credit to those involved: HKU students should be capable of better. Mathieson concluded by writing that Video images were recorded and will be made available to the police.

However, HKU Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en said on Wednesday morning that it was hard to avoid chaotic scenes, as the Council did not respond to their demands. The students actions were very reasonable, there were more police on the scene than students, and I have seen an officer pointing a pepper spray canister at students, Fung said, adding that students only wanted to talk to the Council members.

(SCMP) We cannot condone mob rule: University of Hong Kong vice-chancellor condemns students who besieged council meeting. January 28, 2016.

The University of Hong Kongs vice-chancellor has condemned as mob rule the siege of a governing council meeting on Tuesday night. Professor Peter Mathieson said the scenes would not bring credit to those involved and that HKU students should be capable of better. He has offered to hand over videos of those involved to police.

But Billy Fung Jing-en, president of the HKU Students Union and a member of the school council, said their actions were reasonable, though he himself had voted for conducting the evaluation in two months. He denied his actions and words were contradictory, saying he was trying to get the best from a defective system.

In an internal email to HKU staff members, students and alumni, Professor Mathieson, said video images of the protest were recorded and would be made available to police. I condemn the behaviour last night of HKU students who [among others] put the safety of council members, including me, and university and security staff at serious risk, and besieged the building in which the council had met so that we were unable to leave for several hours, said Mathieson. This is not the way to achieve progress: we will always be willing to engage in rational discussion and debate with students but we cannot condone mob rule.

The council on Tuesday had unanimously agreed to set up a review panel to study the governance and effectiveness of the institution. Students had demanded that in the wake of a series of controversies surrounding liberal scholar Johannes Chan Man-muns rejection for a key managerial position, which many saw as the result of political interference.

Fung revealed that it was Li who opposed the idea of conducting an immediate review. The chairman had said that such an evaluation should be done after the release of the University Grants Committees consultancy report on governance of all the citys universities, which is expected in two months. I think the students demand to conduct an immediate review is fair ... as the school could first conduct a self-evaluation ahead of the release of the report, Fung told Commercial Radio on Wednesday morning. He said he still decided to vote for the resolution to delay the review because he was the only one on the council to press for an immediate evaluation, whereas the council had accepted his suggestion to include the students three key demands for the panel, including a review of the rule which stipulates the chief executive is the schools default chancellor.

Fung also said that the students demand to meet Li on Tuesday night was reasonable. There is a need for Li as council chairman to explain the councils decisions to students. He also has the responsibility to try to address students demands, Fung said during an RTHK talk show. He added that the students had remained calm when Professor Mathieson spoke to them. He said the question should be why students had had to resort to besieging the meeting. The students initially wanted Li to respond to them. I think this was a fair demand ... Communication is two-way. When he did not start a conversation, then students tried to start one, Fung said.

Fung told Commercial Radio that Li conducted the meeting in a sterner fashion than his predecessor, Dr Leong Che-hung. Li would urge speakers to conclude their speeches and would even interrupt, while Leong allowed members who had different views to freely express themselves, Fung recalled, which he believed was important. Fung also hoped the coming meeting with Mathieson and Li, promised by the former to take place in 10 days, would bear fruit.

Separately, council member Eric Cheung Tat-ming said he did not think the councils decision to set up the review panel two months later was a delaying tactic as perceived by some students, though he found their protest understandable as they had lost trust in the council because of the previous controversies.

(Hong Kong Free Press) HKU council chair says irrational students acted as if on drugs, Student Union president a liar. January 28, 2016.

University of Hong Kong Council Chairman Arthur Li has said that students were who were protesting on campus on Tuesday night were like people who took drugs and were poisoned. Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, Li said that the students were very idealistic and had been misled. Sadly, these small number of students are rather like people whove taken drugs, whove been poisoned by drugs theyve been manipulated, and once youve taken drugs, your behaviour can become very irrational, he said.

On Tuesday, students besieged a meeting of its Council demanding reform of its structure following controversies last year regarding Lis appointment as deputy head.

Li called HKU Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en a liar, saying that he gave false information to the students that Council members refused to set up a review panel to examine the Councils structure, when in fact they had. This is a blatant lie, and yet the students believed that and took radical action, he said, adding that he welcomed students opinions and was willing to listen to them.

Li said that political forces were manipulating students, namely members of the Civic Party and other pan-democrats. One of them is [the Civic Partys] Alan Leong Kah-kits intern she started a class boycott because Johannes Chan was not appointed to the position they wanted, Li said. You cant force me to meet you by pointing a gun at me, he added, claiming that the Civic Party had threatened the Council.

Li denied that reports in the pro-Beijing Wen Wei Po newspaper about the nomination of pro-democracy scholar Johannes Chan were political interference. The Council rejected Chans nomination with Li taking the HKU Council chairman position last December.

Apple Daily everyday criticises everybody you know, any pro-government, any pro-establishment, any pro-Beijing, any faction, is this political interference? he said, stating that Hong Kong has freedom of speech, and anyone can write anything in newspapers. Li also denied that his appointment as Council chair by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying was a form of interference, saying that as the Chancellor Leung had the power to make such appointments.

Vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson stood by his earlier condemnation of students but said that the vast majority of students are respectful of authority, well-behaved, and conscientious. He also said that he relied on Li to identify political party members as he was unable to recognise them. Mathieson said that he felt safe when visiting the student protest camps during 2014s pro-democracy Occupy demonstrations, but he did not feel the same on Tuesday: Its a miracle that there were not more serious injuries. Li said that Mathieson and HKUs Senior Management Team will decide whether to punish the students involved in Tuesdays protest.

(SCMP) Hong Kong University students behaved like they were on drugs says Arthur Li. January 29, 2016.

The embattled chairman of the University of Hong Kongs governing council yesterday accused students of behaving like they were on drugs when they besieged a meeting he was holding on Tuesday, and openly blamed pan-democrat politicians for manipulating them.

Two days after Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung and other council members were trapped for hours by hundreds of students demanding a review of the governing bodys structure, the former education secretary called a press conference to hit out at them.

Sadly, this small number of students are rather like someone whos taken drugs, whos been poisoned by drugs, Li said. And theyve been manipulated.

He named the Civic Party as the culprit, saying it had poisoned the students minds and was responsible for political interference. To back his allegations, Li noted that Civic Party heavyweight Audrey Eu Yuet-mee was there at the Tuesday siege which she promptly denied.

Li was also suspicious about the participation of HKU student leader Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, who had worked as Civic Party lawmaker Alan Leong Kah-kits intern. And he pointed at the presence of radical lawmaker Long Hair Leung Kwok-hungs assistant and other pan-democrats at the rowdy protest.

Those he blamed were outraged. The students denied being controlled by any politician and said Li had impaired mutual trust. The Civic Party denied involvement and demanded Li apologise to students and alumni.

Li, dubbed King Arthur and Tsar by critics who see him as a heavy-handed agent planted at HKU by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, said he did not believe there had been political inteference in the running of the university through pro-Beijing newspapers. They had broken the news about pro-democracy law professor Johannes Chan Man-mun being shortlisted for a pro-vice-chancellors post at HKU, and published a series of articles attacking him.

Chans appointment was eventually rejected by the council, putting some students and alumni on the warpath as they felt pro-establishment members of the governing body had victimised the liberal scholar.

Vice chancellor Professor Peter Mathieson, who was previously seen as sympathetic to the students grievances, continued with the harder line he has taken since Tuesday night. He said he did not know which parties were at the protest because he did not understand much Cantonese, but he asked people to trust Lis judgment.

Li accused student union president Billy Fung Jing-en, who also sits on the council, of inciting a riot by sending a false message by phone to protesters that the council had declined to start a review into university governance when members had unanimously agreed to go ahead with it. [Fung] is a liar. He gave the undertaking of confidentiality and he immediately broke it, Li said.

Noting that protesters wanted the review panel to be set up immediately, Li said it would take time to search for internationally renowned scholars to join.

Mathieson said police were investigating Tuesdays siege and the university had provided them with closed-circuit television images of a damaged door at their request. Mathieson, who earlier condemned the siege as mob rule, said he felt his life was at risk on Tuesday night a feeling he had not experienced even during the chaotic and much bigger Occupy protests.

Several council members have also condemned the students actions, but others questioned whether handing over videos to police was necessary. Students have defended their actions as being forced by Lis unwillingness to meet them in person after the council meeting.

(Hong Kong Free Press) HKU Council members, lawmakers oppose new chairman's accusations of students. January 29, 2016.

Members of the governing Council of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) and lawmakers have responded to its chairmans accusations of its students, who said they were like people who were on drugs and were controlled by the Civic Party.

Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, who was appointed as the Council chairman by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying last year, was opposed by many of the schools students and staff members, who opposed his hardline approach or his role in the rejection of law scholar Johannes Chans appointment as the pro-vice-chancellor.

A student committee was formed to launch a week-long class boycott last week. They also protested on Tuesday night, surrounding the Council members at the meeting venue, demanding the Council respond to calls for reform.

Timothy OLeary, a member of the Council, said the incidents on Tuesday were very unfortunate and unnecessary given that the Council unanimously decided to initiate a review of its own operation. This was fulfilling one of the students demands. However, I do not believe it is true to say that the students were manipulated by a political party, nor that they have been poisoned, OLeary said in a statement. Their actions, I believe, can be largely attributed to a breakdown in communication, impatience, an understandable mistrust of Council, and a passionate commitment to the core ideals of HKU. He urged the HKU community to work together to ensure that future Council meetings can be carried out and concluded in a way that fosters calm, open discussion and mutual respect. It is time to move beyond blockades, accusations, and public name-calling, OLeary said. It would take time to review the Councils structure, the Council and Li needed to improve the methods and channels of communication, and students needed to exercise patience and trust.

Alan Leong Kah-kit, leader of the Civic Party, said on a radio programme on Friday that he was shocked by Lis speeches. Even parents could not control a 22-year-old daughter, he said. Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, a member of the class boycott committee, had interned at his office four years ago, but they were merely friends on Facebook after that and nothing more. He added that the HKU Alumni Concern Group, who were closer to the students, had not managed to communicate with the organisers during the class boycott, so they could not have controlled them.

Li accused former Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet-mee of commanding the students at the scenes on Tuesday. But Leong and Eu confirmed that she left at 5pm that day for a party meeting. Li also accused HKU Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en of giving false information to the students, which led to the protest on Tuesday night.

But Council member Eric Cheung Tat-ming said on the radio programme that Fung was giving the correct information to students that the Council would not set up a review panel immediately. Students did not accept the delayed establishment and protested. You cannot twist his words saying he gave false information, this is unfair, Cheung said. He considered Lis words were provocative, that they could not solve problems and were inappropriate.

Fung also said on the programme that Lis words had a bad influence on society, and that he was smearing the students, although they only wanted to defend the schools values.

(Hong Kong Free Press) HKU class boycott committee rebut Council chair smears; deny they are controlled by political party. January 28, 2016.

Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, an HKU student and member of the class boycott committee, said that Lis criticisms towards her were baseless. I was an intern at [the Civic Party] office of Alan Leong Kah-kit four years ago, I wasnt even enrolled in the university, and I dont think that interning at a political party represents any further relationship with the party, Leung said. She added that social science students at HKU have to do internships at various political parties in Hong Kong, and that it should not be seen as political interference by the parties. She questioned whether Li is qualified to be the chairman of the Council, if he did not know of such policy.

Li called HKU Student Union president and Council member Billy Fung Jing-en a liar at the press conference, saying that he gave false information to the students by suggesting Council members had refused to set up a review panel to examine the Councils structure. Li said this caused students to surround the meeting venue.

But Leung said that, although Fung was in favour of a review panel, he was voting on the intention of setting one up. There was no way for him to know whether the Council would delay its establishment. Thats why after he cast the vote, the students are waiting for the Council chairperson, as well as the Council members, to give an account as to why the detailed terms of reference, or the time frame, were not discussed, Leung said. She added that Fung was trying to create a dialogue between students and Li.

Leung said it was not an unsafe environment for Li to communicate with students, as no one wished to hurt him. She said that Li left the venue accompanied by police and did not want to talk at all.

Li also criticised referendums at HKU opposing his appointment last year, saying they were not representative, as only about 4,000 people voted against him out of some 160,000 alumni. He totally disrespects democratic procedures, he is worse than a year one student, said Lam Chak-kong, member of the committee. Referendums are merely opinion polls, and 97 percent of those who voted were against his appointment, if the rest supported him, they should have voted.

The students also said they felt sad that vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson did not defend them against untrue accusations. Mathieson had said earlier on Thursday that he relied on Li to determine whether students were controlled by political parties as he has little knowledge of the political scene in Hong Kong.

(SCMP) University of Hong Kong controversy: Arthur Li accusation dubbed complete fabrication. January 29, 2016.

Arthur Li Kwok-cheungs accusation that party politicians manipulated student protesters at the University of Hong Kong over a siege on Tuesday night are a complete fabrication, politicians and students say. The new chairman of the HKU governing council also faced criticism from some fellow council members, who said his comments were unfair to students and he should improve his communication methods.

At yesterdays press conference, Li fired shots at the Civic Party, saying its chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee was at the scene when students started to besiege the council meeting venue at about 8pm on Tuesday. But Eu said she left at around 5pm after joining a protest by an HKU alumni concern group for an hour. What Li said was complete fabrication, Eu said. This is just typical of him, taking a provocative attitude and making up allegations. Our members who have joined previous petitions are all HKU alumni.

Eus colleague and party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit, who Li said was also behind the scene as a student protest organiser was his legal intern, also hit back: Even a parent cant 100 per cent control their kids. How can I manipulate an intern I had four years ago? The intern, Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, stressed she was not a Civic Party member. Her fellow members in a class boycott committee also denied they were manipulated by any organisation.

The students accused Li of evading dialogue by mud-slinging, adding that Li had impaired mutual trust. All we wanted was dialogue at the buildings lobby. I saw no fellow students intending to hurt the vice-chancellor, said Leung.

The students said they were saddened by Professor Peter Mathiesons remarks on his personal safety being threatened, questioning whether the vice-chancellor was under pressure to turn his back on student demands for reform. The students also rejected another claim made by the council chairman, who said student union president Billy Fung Jing-en had stirred up the riot.

Li said Fung, who sat on the council, gave false information to the protesters right before the siege that the council had refused to establish a panel to review HKU governance, while the council unanimously agreed to do so. Leung refused to say exactly what Fung had told the protesters, while saying he had wanted the council to immediately discuss the composition of the review panel in the meeting, and the council did not.

Speaking on a radio show on Friday morning, Fung said: I did not deliver any false messages. Outside the meeting venue, I told fellow students that the council would set up a task force to review governance, but it would wait for a University Grants Committee report before doing so. That means the task force would not be immediately set up, which is not what the students wanted. It is normal for the students not to trust the council.

Meanwhile, council member and law lecturer Eric Cheung Tat-ming said Lis claim of manipulation by politicians had a flimsy basis and was provocative. Another council member, Professor Timothy OLeary, said Li, the council and the university need to improve the methods and channels of communication with staff and students and be transparent and timely in explaining council decisions. He also called on students to be patient and trust in the review process.

(EJ Insight) January 29, 2016.

Its now clear that the University of Hong Kong is the latest political battlefield between the pro-democracy camp and Beijing authorities.

The confirmation came from no less than Arthur Li, the newly appointed chairman of the universitys governing council, who accused the Civic Party of instigating the recent student protests on the campus such as the campaign in support of the appointment of former law dean Johannes Chan as pro vice chancellor and Tuesdays rally outside the venue of the HKU Council meeting.

Speaking in a press conference on Thursday, the former education chief maintained that only a handful of students were participating in the campaign for a review of the structure of the HKU Council and questioning senior management appointments.

Most of the students did not care about those issues, Li said.

But if that is true, why is King Arthur so eager to condemn the Civic Party in front of reporters for alllegedly interfering in the schools internal affairs and mobilizing students for protests inside the campus?

This early, he is showing that getting back at his critics will be a key mission of his administration as head of the HKU Council. 

At the press conference, Li also chided the students for lacking calmness and decorum, which he believes are needed in any productive discussion of issues affecting the university. He also said the Civic Party was behind the student protest on Tuesday night.

Lis method of handling critics is nothing new. Its a tactic so often used by the Communist Party in dealing with its enemies: labeling them as instigators or plotters and condemning them in public.

Beijing has used the same approach in fending off criticisms from former governor Chris Patten and former Taiwan president Chen Shui-bian, among many others that it had attacked in public for standing up against the Communist Party.

And so in virtually declaring war against the Civic Party, King Arthur is following the script written by the central authorities in Beijing.

Lets review what Li said in the press conference, and see if there is any substance to his allegations against the Civic Party.

First, he accused Civic Party leader Alan Leong, and his predecessor Audrey Eu, of inciting the students to revolt against the university council. He didnt bother to cite instances that would support his allegation.

Unsurprisingly, Leong and Eu fired back at Li, accusing him of peddling lies and adamantly denying that the party had anything to do with the universitys internal affairs.

So what does this declaration of war mean to the HKU and Hong Kong people?

For one thing, the HKU will now become a political battlefield between pro-democracy forces, on one hand, and Beijing and its followers in Hong Kong on the other.

Its now a matter of gaining control of this prestigious university and its proud heritage to secure legitimacy and moral high ground in the post-handover era.

So that makes King Arthur not only the chairman of the HKU governing council but also the head of the universitys struggle committee.

A struggle committee is a group of pro-Beijing activists who organized labor strikes and violent attacks to challenge the British rule during the 1967 riots.

What Li said during the press conference reminds us of the approach used by the pro-Beijing activists in their political struggle.

The HKU population the students, faculty, alumni and non-teaching staff must stand with the leaders, otherwise they will be labeled as part of the opposition camp and will be attacked by the loyalists.

In such a polarization of forces, the student activists cannot expect to have reasonable debate or discussion with the university officials, but censure and intimidation.

Some Hong Kong people may think that it is better for the students to go back to their classrooms and study, instead of protesting.

But the fact is the students are getting hurt by the changes being instituted in the university, and the creation of a pro-establishment, pro-Beijing environment on the campus.

The students are aware of these creeping changes, and they feel the need to raise public awareness regarding these issues. It is not only for the sake of the university, but in the interest of the entire community.

Such changes wont appear in black and white, but through subtle moves such as the appointment of council members, the intake of more mainland students, the recruitment of mainland teachers, and handsome donations from pro-Beijing tycoons.

All these will only have one goal, which is to make HKU a pro-Beijing institution.

Now, King Arthur has shut the door for a dialogue with the students, which is understandable. He could gain more by widening the influence of the Beijing camp in the university.

So even if the HKU Council has called for a review of the schools governing structure, students cannot expect much from it. Such a move could be a tool to divert the students attention and offer them false hopes that the governance of the school will improve.

It is sad to see this respected institution being dragged into the political battlefield. But it wont stop, and other sectors should brace for similar upheavals.

Beijing is determined to take control of Hong Kong society, and will spare no effort to achieve its ends.

Unlike before when dialogue was the preferred mode of interaction, the present administration led by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying is ready to resort to confrontation in dealing with opposition.

The more chaos in the city, the worse for Hong Kong, but the better for the authorities who will now have more reason to tighten the reins.

A chaotic environment will allow them to be more aggressive in rolling out pro-Beijing policies and thus earn the confidence of top leaders in Beijing.

Not all Hong Kong people are HKU graduates, but they share in the achivements and glorious history of the university.

What would happen to this precious heritage if it is thrown into the mire of politics?

(EJ Insight) A sinister plan. By Stephen Vines. January 30, 2016.

Everything appears to be going nicely to plan.

The installation of a much hated chairman for the University of Hong Kongs governing council has predictably stirred protests, democrats in the Legislative Council are being blamed for stalling legislation that affects peoples livelihoods, and, as an added bonus, fear and dismay are spreading in the wake of the disappearance of the five booksellers.

Is it excessively paranoid to describe this sequence of events as a plan?

Had that question been posed a little while ago, I would have argued that it was more realistic to imagine that it was little more than a case of government cock-ups.

However the notion that mere incompetence is at work is hard to sustain.

Whats happening in Hong Kong is, unsurprisingly, very much a reflection of whats happening in the mainland, where the Xi Jinping regime is pursuing a hardline ideological and control strategy not seen since the Cultural Revolution.

Clearly the excesses of the Cultural Revolution are not in evidence right now, but many of its characteristics are back in play.

The mass round-up of dissidents, real and imagined, is well underway.

The gruesome parade of sinners mouthing carefully crafted self-denunciations is back.

The even harsher treatment of minority groups within the mainland, notably Uyghurs and Tibetans, continues apace.

Overshadowing all this is a mass purge within the party itself under the guise of an anticorruption campaign.

And then theres the personality cult being fostered around Xi himself, something no leader since Mao has dared emulate.

Little wonder, therefore, that reverberations of this upheaval on the mainland are being felt here.

The leaders in Zhongnanhai must be happy that Hong Kong did not end up under the leadership of the willing but largely hapless Henry Tang Ying-yen.

Instead, their man is the far tougher Leung Chun-ying, who can be relied upon to follow the hardline guidance from Beijing with both enthusiasm and ruthless intent.

In December, Xi publicly warned Leung to guard against deviation and distortion from the one country, two systems concept but made it clear that the one country part of the equation was the more important.

Leung hardly required any elaboration of this message.

If anything, it propelled him further along the hardline path he was happy to tread.

He positively relishes the prospect of confrontation as a way of fulfilling his mandate from up north.

What does this mean in practice?

Take the example of HKU. Leung could easily have found another hapless yes-man to head its council, but he insisted on installing Arthur Li Kwok-cheung despite almost universal opposition to his appointment within the university community and in the full knowledge that it would spark protests.

The Communist Party has long pursued a tactic of flushing out its opponents and, rather than argue with them, forcing them out onto the streets, where the advantage lies with the power of the state both to suppress the protests and to promote the narrative that opposition leads to disorder and chaos.

Meanwhile, back in the legislature, the growing gridlock of legislation and funding for all manner of projects could be rapidly cleared if the Leung administration did not insist that its most controversial measures had to be passed before any of the many far less controversial matters are dealt with.

Here again, we see a determination to paint opposition legislators as being no more than obstructionists who will sacrifice progress to make a political point.

In fact, the democrats have offered to process these other matters, but their offer has been turned down flat, because it does not follow the script of painting them as wreckers.

The administration actually wants this stalemate to fester.

The extent to which it is prepared to sacrifice the publics interest to pursue its hardline political agenda was most vividly illustrated by its initial reluctance to tackle the lead-in-water scandal purely because this matter was brought to the publics attention by a Democrat legislator.

Looming over this, and indeed a host of other issues, is the intentionally chilling saga of the five disappeared booksellers who had been engaged in the highly sensitive business of producing and selling books that are banned in the mainland.

There is little doubt that their disappearance was masterminded across the border, giving rise to the question of whether the Leung administration was a willing accomplice in an act that transgresses the Basic Law or whether the Chinese state security apparatus is so contemptuous of the Hong Kong government as to feel emboldened to simply ignore it.

Neither explanation is favorable for Leung and his colleagues.

Meanwhile, the big picture is that the Leung administration is anxious for confrontation, both to emulate the crackdown on the mainland and also because previous pathetic attempts at gaining public support have failed.

As Theodore Roosevelt vividly and crudely put, its a case of if youve got them by their balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

The Chinese government, which is not usually attentive to other US presidents, appears to have followed this precept with great enthusiasm.

A grab to the nether regions appears to work well in a society where concepts of liberty, freedom of expression and rule of law have never prevailed, but in Hong Kong these concepts are deeply implanted in peoples hearts.

The Chinese government is seriously misinformed if it believes that Hongkongers will relinquish these treasured cornerstones of their society without putting up a fight.

(SCMP) Stench of politics hits University of Hong Kong hard. By Michael Chugani. February 2, 2016.

Is there any way to talk dispassionately about how the stench of politics has so pervaded the University of Hong Kong that its becoming an embarrassment? Forget it. Our politics has become so warped that there is only black and white. If you condemn students laying siege to HKU council members, youre a lackey of chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, or worse still, of Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who appointed him. If you criticise Lis brazenly combative style, youre labelled a sympathiser of crazed students who storm meetings if they cant have everything their way.

All you can do in our poisoned political climate is to hold your nose and turn away. You can try using facts to make your point about the circus that HKU has become, but facts no longer count in our black and white politics. The morning after Li said a tiny minority of students who barricaded council members had behaved like they were on drugs, a Commercial Radio talk show host denounced Lis provocative words as worse than expletives. If it is worse than swearing to say students had behaved like a mob, then how to label students who try to smash open a meeting room door, blockade council members and prevent one who felt sick from leaving in an ambulance? Is such behaviour better than using expletives?

The morning after Li accused the Civic Party of manipulating idealistic students, party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit was asked on a Chinese-language radio show if the student blockade was justified. He replied that the question should instead be why they did it. Public Eye will answer that question. The students twice stormed and barricaded council members because they wanted former law dean Johannes Chan Man-mun to be appointed pro-vice-chancellor, didnt want Li as council chairman, and want to end the tradition of the chief executive as chancellor so Leung will no longer have the constitutional right to appoint the chairman and some members. Do we set such a low threshold for violence that not getting what you want justifies it? Well leave that thought with you.

There is now talk of suing Li for claiming without proof that the Civic Party had manipulated students. It reminds us of the proverb that people who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. Lis critics have claimed without proof that as chairman he would stifle academic freedom at HKU, that hes out to destroy HKU and that he opposed Chan as pro-vice-chancellor on Beijings order. If saying students had been manipulated is libellous, then surely saying all that is equally libellous.

Lets not make HKU a new battleground for the Occupy movement. As chairman, Li needs to prove he is a unifying leader by being conciliatory rather than combative. The students must understand they cant expect a total say in a taxpayer-funded university which heavily subsidises their education.

(Hong Kong Free Press) February 3, 2016.

Johannes Chan wrote in an op-ed for Ming Pao that the press conference was meaningless.

Arthur Li was fanning the flames, being extremely provocative  it will not resolve the conflict, it will only widen the rift between the students and the school, wrote Chan.

He added that Lis accusation that the students were being manipulated by the Civic Party was unfounded.

Li also reiterated at the press conference that Chan was rejected as the deputy chief of HKU because he did not have a doctoral degree.

However, Chan said it meant that the Council considered factors unrelated to the positions professional requirements, a position which primarily entails human resources management.

Chan also said that the Council did not allow him to attend a meeting to defend his academic work.

The Council did not do any serious academic assessment, did not even read one paper The assessment was made by some members who cannot even distinguish civil and criminal offences.

HKU vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson has condemned the students actions and said that the school has sent footage of the protest to the police. Chan, in turn, said that violence should be condemned, but he was disappointed by the schools reaction, questioning whether it was appropriate to involve the police.

Videos:

SCMP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn54TjziOJU Students in car park

Headline POP News http://pop.stheadline.com/content.php?vid=39897&cat=a Yelling match between 50 or so Treasure Group members and a dozen or so Civic Passion members outside Police Headquarters in Wanchai. The Treasure Group wants the police to arrest Billy Fung for inciting a riot, whereas Civic Passion wants young people not to join the Hong Kong Police Force.

Institute of Studies on Hong Kong Independence Young Wastrels Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/246409805474744/videos/924109607704757/
[This video is the best support for the statement: "If they represent Hong Kongs best and brightest, then God help us." The video was posted, went viral, got deleted and has now resurfaced.]

Time: January 26, 2016 8:30pm
Location: Hong Kong University campus

Hi everybody, hi everybody, you are welcome to watch the special edition of the Hong Kong U independence prick news. It is very fucking special today ... (interruption by another man) ... don't fucking listen to him.

So it is now time for the Hong Kong U independence prick news. Everybody has to realize that I am a genuine independence prick, I am not a fake independence prick. If you don't know me, there's nothing I can do. So I came to Hong Kong U especially today. What for? Actually, I heard that the bastard Arthur Li is inside and does not dare to come out. Therefore the students are fucking angry. They want him to come out so that they can fucking beat him to death. Therefore I want everybody to appeal to the citizens of Hong Kong to come up here and fucking kill Arthur Li. This fucking bastard was selected for a full year to become the university council chairman.

Your mother, Arthur Li Kwok-cheung. Your name is Li Kwok-cheung. You sound like an octopus. You love China, you don't fucking love Hong Kong. Your mother's stinking cunt! Why fucking become the Hong Kong U council chairman? You should go back to Tsinghua University in Beijing to become the head of the biological octopus department. Right or not? That is why I want the various friends to come here to support the students.

Well, I am a university student. I attended the university of society. Although I have not attended Hong Kong U, I hope that even non-Hong Kong U students can come here to support. That's because it is very fucking cold. Your mother's stinking cunt! It's very fucking cold. I'm very fucking afraid of the cold. I would rather embrace a girl and go to sleep. It's five or six degrees out there, and you want me to come up here. Therefore the spirit of the students is admirable. They deserved to be admired and esteemed ... the penis.

Therefore I hope that the friends will come here to support. If you are afraid of the cold like I am, you can bring a bottle of whiskey with you. You can drink while you protest. Or you can bring maotai if you like. ICAC came and looked me up. Of course, I think that Arthur Li is going to sleep upstairs tonight. So we will keep Arthur Li company tonight. I have to work tomorrow but I think I'll skip it. I'll sleep here tonight. Of course if my female fans want to come here and sleep with me so that I won't be so cold, I welcome that without any reservations. Of course. I am not the only one who hibernates. It's very fucking warm. Really. Right or not?

So I hope the various friends ... ultimately, this is a matter of urgency. I have to come to the important points. So here are the important points. Everything before this was just a fucking joke, stupid boy! So the important point ... actually ... there are a lot of fucking policemen surrounding this place. So I hope more friends would come down here to support.

Based upon my many years in social activism, my experience as a social activist punk, actually if you provoke the policeman, he will fucking get mad. Of course, if you work by yourself and the policeman catches you, you will be obviously be fucked in the arse. And you fucking deserve it. We need group action. Team cooperation. So I hope the friends will show up in threes and fives. That is, you only need to remember one thing -- it is easier to do something when there are many people. When we have the numbers, the police won't dare to come near us. Right. So that is the most basic wisdom from a social activist punk. Therefore I hope that various friends will come up quickly. As you can see, I am here already. I am absolutely not lying. Let show the scene. This is no lie.

There's a lot of fucking people here. Really. I am over here at Hong Kong U. I hope the various friends will come out very quickly ... Also Kui Cho Baby is here too ... I wanted to come here the last time. But this girl called me up to have dinner, so I ... Therefore, I hope that whether you want to support me or Kui Cho ... please come over here to support us. Right or not? Support the future pillars of society. These university students work very hard. Right or not?

They studied a lot of books. The first thing that they have learned is to fucking cheat the government and skip their student loans. That's awesome. I also want to attend university so that I can fucking cheat the government out of a sum of money. That's so fucking awesome. The first thing at university is to rip a sum of money out of the government. Very fucking awesome. That's a lot better than me taking out a credit card back then. Right or not? After all I only got a hundred thousand plus. Therefore I want the various friends to come up here to Hong Kong U.

Tonight we won't let Arthur Li leave. If he fucking comes out, we'll fucking beat him, fucking beat him to death. Therefore, I hope the various friends will come over quickly to support.

I am very fucking cold. I am going to fucking drink some alcohol. Very fucking cold.

Internet comments:

- Alan Leong (Civic Party) now says that he barely knows Yvonne Leung and they are merely Facebook friends. Here are the good old days of candidate Alan Leong being harangued by citizens with Yvonne Leung. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1jkhqVwQLg. Yvonne Leung explains to the videomakers who are filming that the law says that they are not allowed to film her but she can film them in a public place.

- (Kinliu) At the press conference, Arthur Li said that legislator Leung Kwok-hung's aides were involved in inciting the students. Leung Kwok-hung said that Arthur Li could not possibly recognize the League of Social Democrats members and he accused Li of smearing. Here are the Facebook statements from the two assistants:

Raphael Wong: Yes, Arthur Li, League of Social Democrats people were at Hong Kong University. But so what? When did you see us inciting the students? If the students are so easy to incite, why don't you try to incite them?

Napo Wong: On the night before yesterday, I responded to the HKU students' call and supported them at Hong Kong University. Arthur Li spotted me? By the time that I got there, I saw that HKU students were already so awesome in surrounding Arthur Li. Previously, they had already held several class strike assemblies without any help from behind the scene. Do you think that they are like you, Arthur Li, who are manipulated by CY Leung from behind the scenes?

So how do you reconcile what Leung said and what the two Wong said? Is Leung a compulsive liar? Or was he really unaware of what his two aides were up to?

- (HKG Pao) Audrey Eu, Alan Leong and Ip Kin-yuen are all saying that Arthur Li is smearing them. For example, Ip said that he is extremely angry and that Arthur Li's criticism of Audrey Eu is "a very serious case of libel." Well, you would think that Eu and Leong being past chairpersons of the Hong Kong Bar Association would be immediately filing libel suits against Li. But they don't? Why?
Leong response was that he does not have the ability to command the students. He said, "When parents can't even control their own children, how can they control the students?" Eu said that she left the scene at around 5pm and did not know what happened afterwards.
In the end, they chose not to fight this fight. If they were completely clean, they would have gone ahead. But in a court case, the defense has the right to demand to see the communication records between Civic Party and the students, the students will have to testify in court as witnesses, so that the magistrate can render a judgment. And they don't want everything to be shown to the public.
So it does not matter how Ip Kin-yuen wants to push this. The Civic Party just won't play.

- (Kinliu) Civic Party chairperson Audrey Eu was present outside the meeting building on January 26 in the company of legislator Ip Kin-yuen and Democratic Party's Yeung Sum. The Civic Party said that she left HKU in the afternoon. On her Facebook, she uploaded photos of the Love Hong Kong Voice people and so she was indeed there. The Civic Party also said that party chief Alan Leong was not there. At 11:48pm, Leong posted three photos from the scene with the comment: "If you don't come out today, you won't be able to do so tomorrow." So it is not true that he was attending a Civic Party and completely unaware of what was happening that night.

- (The Stand News) January 31, 2016. Peter Mathieson said that he doesn't understand much Canotnese and he is unfamiliar with the political parties, therefore he trusts Arthur Li's judgment about the role of the Civic Party. Civic Party chairperson Audrey Eu wrote him that being disappointed in Mathieson agreeing with Li. Yesterday Mathieson responded to Eu to say that he genuinely felt unsafe that night. He said that the conditions that night reminded him of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster in which 96 soccer fans were crushed to death in a stampede.

From: Audrey Eu [mailto:audreyeu@civicparty.hk]
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 10:06 AM
To: 'Peter Mathieson' <president@hku.hk>
Subject: untrue and serious allegations cannot be sideshows

Dear Professor (this is to indicate respect rather than distance)

Thank you for your prompt reply.
Safety is always important, but it does not mean everything else is a 'sideshow'. Given events in the past year, truth and justice are also values that we would like to see upheld by the University, particularly the Council as its supreme governing body, a body subject to the seven principles of public life including integrity, honesty, openness, accountability and leadership.
My point of writing the open letter to you was twofold. First, to point out that serious and false accusations had been made without a shred of evidence and more importantly, in this case, you were seen to be associated with it. Second, to point out that such inflammatory and provocative language may make what is already a bad situation even worse.
Whilst your reply has not addressed the second point, I am sure you are far more experienced in these matters than I am and there is no need for me to press.
As to the first point, I must say when the Vice Chancellor and the Council Chairman jointly gave a press conference (curiously at the Bankers Club rather than on campus) and made such grossly defamatory public statements, I would have expected some sort of basis or evidence instead of wild accusations, conjectures and mudslinging and when the falsity has been pointed out, I was looking for an explanation in your response, if not an apology. Unfortunately there was none.
You mention the Hillsborough disaster in 1989. At the time, the Liverpool fans were blamed for mob behaviour. However recent investigations showed that the real culprit was the Police who created the situation ripe for a disaster. My take on the Hillsborough disaster is that one often needs to look not only at what happened but also what caused it. To prevent possible disasters, it helps to take a step back, not just blame the 'mob' for their behavior, but also try to address the cause that created the situation in the first place.
Wishing you peace in the Chinese New Year
Audrey

---

From: <president@hku.hk>
Date: 30 January 2016 at 3:15:04 PM HKT

Subject: Your message
Audrey (if I may)
Thanks for your message: I always welcome hearing from our alumni. I will not comment on Arthur Li's remarks at the press conference or elsewhere: those are for him to justify. Regarding the SMT statement, I stand by my condemnation of the fact that safety, including my own, was put at risk on Tuesday and that this was unacceptable and brought no credit on the HKU students that were part of the crowd. I have been consistent in my attitude to the sanctity of preserving people's safety: that dominated my attitude to the Occupy protests and it was that which took me to the site of the protests with Joseph Sung on 2nd October 2014. When I was trapped in the middle of a large noisy crowd on Tuesday evening, having great difficulty staying on my feet, I thought of the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 when 96 football fans died. I genuinely thought there was a risk of death or serious injury. Whilst I am sure this was not the intention, the result was unpredictable and it is a mercy that no serious injuries were caused. I have not, as accused in the press, "taken sides": instead I have remained consistent on the primacy of safety considerations and I have condemned the crossing of a line in the behaviours that evening. The fact that the protest was unnecessary, and the allegations of who did or do not orchestrate the events, are sideshows: the main issue is whether that protest achieved anything to advance the aims of the students. In my opinion it did not. Instead it further damaged the reputation of the University that you and I both support.
With best regards,
Peter

(SCMP) February 2, 2016.

The University of Hong Kongs vice-chancellor offered his apologies to Liverpool FC supporters in Hong Kong after he was accused of using the Hillsborough tragedy for political gain.

In an email to the chairman of the club, Peter Mathieson said his remark was not meant to be unsympathetic or offensive. If I have caused offence to you or anyone else involved, I apologise unreservedly, he wrote. I am a football fan from the UK and like many I was deeply affected by the events at Hillsborough. Those memories came back to me when I was trapped in the middle of a large crowd the other evening: I sensed danger and I worried that there could be injury or loss of life, he continued. Instead I was reflecting my over-riding concern for safety: please dont take it any other way.

On Sunday, Mathieson said he believed he was in danger as hundreds of students tried to storm the universitys council meeting on Tuesday last week and that when I was trapped in the middle of a large noisy crowd, having great difficulty staying on my feet, I thought of the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 when 96 football fans died. The football tragedy arose from poor crowd control. Thousands of spectators at an FA Cup semi-final in 1989 were caught in a human crush that killed 96 fans and injured hundreds.

Mathiesons reply came shortly after Steve Parry, chairman of Liverpool FC Supporters Club Hong Kong, emailed the vice-chancellor to demand a written apology yesterday morning. Parry told the Post that Mathiesons comparison to Hillsborough was rather distasteful and somewhat desperate. Those [survivors and victims family members] I have spoken to are highly offended by his reference, he added. He said Mathiesons timing could not have been worse, as the Hillsborough inquests were now in their final stage. We accept his apology, although I believe it was used for political gain, Parry said.

- (HKG Pao) When Ip Kin-yuen made a statement, he did not rebut Arthur Li directly. He only clarified that he had no part in this incident. But Li never said that Ip was there; Li only said that Audrey Eu was there. But Ip responded that Eu was there for only 10 to 20 minutes. Meanwhile Eu came out and said that she was not there at all. And when Leong said that parents couldn't control their own children, he was obviously referring to the fact that his own children refused to take part in Occupy Central, or even expressed their support.
As for Yvonne Leung, a few days ago she had just asked "Who is Arthur Li?" and rhetorically called him a scum with no accomplishments in the field of education. But now she demands to hold a dialogue with him. The same thing happened during Occupy Central. One day their unconditional demand is for CY Leung to resign. The next day they want to sit down and hold discussions with CY Leung. This was all very confusing. The same script is being played out again. They never learn, do they?
As for that Cheung Tat-ming, he is very amusing. He came around the same time as Johannes Chan. He worked at a famous law firm and is now an HKU lecturer but not yet associate professor. Previously he had said that he heard that Arthur Li hates HKU. That's very amusing. As a legal 'scholar', he goes around handling out hearsay to the media. If you bring up hearsay in court, you will be hectored by the magistrate because that is not evidence. This is the reason why he still has not been promoted after many years, or so I heard.
After Arthur Li had his say, Cheung Tat-ming jumped out to defend Billy Fung. He said that Li was pouring oil on fire. Well, you have to have a fire first before you pour the oil. Who lit the fire? Cheung is therefore saying that the students set the fire. Furthermore, anyone with committee experience knows that the chairman speaks on behalf of the entire committee and you must support him. If you are concerned that he may say that wrong thing, you should advise him beforehand. If you think that he said the wrong thing, you can go over with him afterwards. If you can't stand it, you can resign and then you can say whatever your want. If you don't want to resign and you want the public to know that you are dissatisfied, you can hint to the media. If the chairman values your contribution, he will reach out to you. Otherwise, it is high time for you to resign.

- Cheung Tat-ming had not problems with leaving. He said that he went home after the meeting, had dinner and came back at 9pm to watch the continuing show.
- Cheung Tat-ming did not bother to learn the facts and make objective comments as required of a scholar. He declined to point out the mistakes of the students and correct their behavior. Instead, he criticized the people who were surrounded by the students to the point where they fear for their personal safety.

- (TVB) Today the Hong Kong University Students' Union stated that they are disappointed by the vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson's decision to hand over video tapes to the police. They said that instead of protecting the students, the university is smearing them as mobs.

- Well, Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-en said that the students acted in a reasonable manner. That being a case, there should be nothing to worry about. Let the police have the videos. They will find nothing. Case closed.

- But what if the police finds evidence of destruction of property, physical assault, false imprisonment, etc? And that cannot be allowed to happen, right?

- (TVB) HKU council member Joseph Chan said that the student did not need to charge: "You can sit down. If they come out and refuse to explain, can you resist then? Right now the process is reversed. They lay siege first and then they demand an explanation. Not matter how much you dislike Arthur Li, the meeting did accomplish two things that benefits Hong Kong University (namely, the review panel on governance and the panel on confidentiality)."

- (TVB) HKU council member Joseph Chan said that the student did not need to charge: "You can sit down. If they come out and refuse to explain, can you resist then? Right now the process is reversed. They lay siege first and then they demand an explanation. Not matter how much you dislike Arthur Li, the meeting did accomplish two things that benefits Hong Kong University (namely, the review panel on governance and the panel on confidentiality)."
- (SCMP) Professor Joseph Chan Cho-wai, a HKU professor, said he hoped both the student union and chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung would agree on a venue for a meeting soon.  If Li felt a threat about his personal safety to have the meeting inside HKU campus, the students should give him a guarantee on his safety, said Chan on TVBs show On the Record on Sunday morning. But once the students made such a promise... he should trust them on their word. This is how mutual trust is built. Chan also objected to suggestions that students be penalised for Tuesdays actions. Personally I do not agree that we should consider giving punishment to the students, he said. The school and students should solve the matter by communication, or else those being penalised would only hold a grudge in their hearts and further advance the distrust. How students should face the consequence of their actions, we should let the public opinion be the judge.
- And if at the meeting between Li and the students, the students surround him and refuse to let him leave until he sets up a review panel right there and then? What will Joseph Chan say?

- (Oriental Daily) January 31, 2016. The Hong Kong University Strike Committee has decided to suspend its class strike. According to spokesperson Yvonne Leung, the students have decided to postpone the class strike. She denies that this is due to the poor participation. Instead, she said that the movement has entered a new phase and the students are about to begin a dialogue with the university. She said that council chairman Arthur Li has already rejected two of the three student demands: meeting at HKU and attending the council meeting. About 100 students attended the fourth meeting of the Strike Committee which went on for almost 6 hours.

- Ronnie Hung's Facebook

From the Chief Executive to the university council chairman, everything follows the same formula:
(1) pick the most detested person to become the head ->
(2) initiate more provocations to rouse popular dissatisfaction ->
(3) make the more radical elements upset to the point where they can't take it anymore ->
(4) radical actions take place ->
(5) condemn the resisters for using violence and thus switch public focus ->
(6) cause the moderate majority to detest the resisters ->
(7) fewer and fewer people support the continuation of resistance ->
(8) the most detestable resisters continue their actions ->
(9) return to (2) and repeat infinite loop
And once the voices of protests become smaller and smaller, they can begin to persecute the silent majority.

- (HKU Campus TV @YouTube) What is the problem with the HKU students? At 46:12 of the press conference, the Campus TV reporter posed a question to Peter Mathieson in English. What was he talking about?

- (Speakout HK) The politicians named by Arthur Li said that he was making false accusations against them. The exact phrase is 含血噴人 which literally means spitting at people with blood in your mouth (which means that you are guilty to be begin with). But what does that mean? If the students were doing something righteous and lawful on behalf of the people, those politicians should be proud to claim credit. What would they use 含血噴人? Clearly they even think that the students were doing something very wrong and they wanted no part of it. This is their Freudian slip.

(Hong Kong Free Press) January 27, 2016.

University of Hong Kong (HKU) students besieged a meeting of its governing Council on Tuesday night, demanding reform. Most Council members did not speak to students before they left the meeting, though they agreed to form a panel to review its structure following controversies last year over the governing body.

Following the controversial appointment of Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as Council chairman in December, students started a week-long class boycott in protest.

Other than a review panel, students also demanded that the Chief Executive be dropped as the automatically appointed university Chancellor. They called for at least half of the Council members to be appointed from within the university, and for Council members currently selected by the Chief Executive to be appointed directly by the Council instead.

We demand a conversation! students said, as they surrounded the venue of the first meeting chaired by Li on Tuesday. Around 300 joined the protest at the Sassoon Road campus in Pok Fu Lam.

By around 8pm, students heard that the Council had agreed to set up a review panel but had not budged on other demands. They attempted to block the exits of the building, refusing to let Council members leave.

Police Tactical Unit officers, who were originally standing on guard outside the building, were deployed to help Council members leave. Police told Apple Daily that they acted after receiving three calls made from the campus. In response, students chanted police leave the campus! as some said they should not be operating within the university grounds.

Council member Leonie Ki Man-fung claimed that she felt like vomiting and requested an ambulance. Although she was blocked by students for around an hour, she was eventually allowed to leave in an ambulance. Li also attempted to leave the site through the front door, assisted by police officers, but it was blocked by students and was forced to go back.

By around midnight, Li and HKU vice chancellor Peter Mathieson were still inside the building. Police then charged into the car park saying that they needed to investigate a case of criminal damage inside the building, however students did not allow them in. Meanwhile, Li left through the other side of the building accompanied by police.

An hour later, Mathieson appeared outside the building and spoke with students. Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, one of the protest organisers, said that they would meet with Li and Mathieson in ten days and hoped students would join and give their opinions.

HKUs governance has been the subject of controversy during the past year due to the rejection of liberal law scholar Johannes Chan Man-mun as its pro-vice-chancellor. Lis appointment by the Chief Executive attracted widespread opposition from students, teachers, staff members and the public. In a press statement, the HKU said the Council unanimously agreed to set up a review panel to study the governance and effectiveness of the university. This would be in the spirit of the Niland Report issued in 2003 and 2009, which suggested such a review be carried out every five years. It would be issued at around the same time as a report on university governance by the University Grants Committee.

(SCMP) January 27, 2016.

Chaos erupted on the University of Hong Kong campus again last night as angry students besieged a governing council meeting, although members agreed to start a review of the institutions governance structure in the wake of a stormy political year.

By 10pm, about 200 student protesters remained at the Sassoon Road campus in Pok Fu Lam, refusing to let new council chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung and HKU vice chancellor Peter Mathieson leave.

Conversation! they yelled, demanding talks with them. The students stormed the venue upon an apparent misunderstanding that there would be no immediate review, but they were kept well away from the meeting room.

Police Tactical Unit officers were deployed to help council members leave. One female employee was injured and sent to hospital.

The council agreed to appoint Terry Au Kit-fong, chair professor of psychology, as the interim pro-vice-chancellor for academic staffing and resources, a post that the council controversially refused to let pro-democracy law professor Johannes Chan Man-mun take up last year. That triggered a storm, with critics complaining of political interference.

Although the university announced after the council meeting that it would set up a committee to review HKUs governance structure, Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, an organiser of the protest, said her group remained unconvinced.

We want a detailed timetable and a face-to-face conversation with Li, Leung said. Or else it would be just like an empty promise to deceive students.

HKU students had held a week-long class boycott before yesterdays council meeting, urging members to set up a committee to review how the university is governed and prevent any further political interference.

They demanded that the chief executive should no longer be the default chancellor of HKU and be stripped of the right to appoint members to the council.

In a press release, HKU said the council had unanimously agreed to set up a review panel to study the governance and effectiveness of the institution and to receive views from the public.

This would be in the spirit of a Niland Report issued in 2003 and 2009, which suggested such a review be carried out every five years, it added, and would also come about the same time as the University Grants Committee issued a consultancy report on governance of all the universities in the city shortly.

HKU was the centre of a divisive and emotional dispute throughout last year. Former education secretary Li, nicknamed the Tsar, was appointed by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying in December despite strong opposition from many students and alumni. The education leaders critics saw him as high-handed and unfit for the chairmans role.

Lis appointment came after the councils widely criticised decision to reject the candidacy of Johannes Chan, who was recommended by a search committee for the pro-vice-chancellorship. Li was one of the council members who spoke strongly against Chans promotion.

At the meeting yesterday, Li dismissed one of the agenda items, which asked the council to receive a letter from the HKU Convocation noting that more than 4,000 alumni had voted against him filling the chairmans post. Li was understood to have told members the vote was not representative because it only reflected a small percentage of the whole alumni body.

Council member Leonie Ki Man-fung was stuck in an ambulance for an hour before the vehicle found its way through the crowd blocking the area outside the building at about 11pm. She complained she was sick and requested an ambulance, but she was criticised by the students for abusing the services.

As of 12.30am, Li and Mathieson had not been seen and were believed to be still stuck inside the building with all exits surrounded by the students. At 12.45am, about four hours into the standoff, a chaotic scene erupted after hours of quiet standoff, when a dozen of officers approached the car park of the building, where they were confronted by students.

But the police move-in was immediately realized as a tactical distraction by students, with some seeing Li leaving the building and driven away in a black car after exiting through an alternate door of the car park. His departure was later confirmed by the university communication department.

At 1.30am, Mathieson appeared outside the building and started a 30-minute dialogue with students. Angry students said they were disappointed that Li had promised there would be a dialogue after the meeting but he ended up leaving in haste without notifying them. Mathieson said he and Li had agreed to meet the student representatives in 10 days, and said he supported the council decision to set up the review committee after the release of the University Grants Committees consultancy report on governance.

But Mathieson told the students that he and other council members were disappointed by the siege on the meeting venue. He said that he felt his life had been in danger. When I tried to leave the building [at] about half past eight, I felt my life was in danger, he said. I was in a crash, and I was in physical danger. And I was disappointed by that too. I dont think I or any other council members should have to put up with that. He added: I think it was a very unfortunate episode. I think it has damaged the universitys reputation. I dont think it actually helps the cause you are aiming to promote.

About 200 students stayed on after Mathieson left the site.

(SCMP) Hong Kong University chaos is unacceptable under any circumstances. January 27, 2016

The campus of the University of Hong Kong has degenerated into chaos again. Upset by what they saw as tactics to delay a review on the universitys governance structure, hordes of students clashed with police officers on Tuesday as they tried to block new council chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung and other members from leaving the campus in the late evening. This came despite a unanimous council decision to review governance with an independent committee.

In the wake of the perceived interference in the universitys independence and a class boycott by some 200 students, emotions are understandably high. But the circumstances can hardly justify irrational behaviour. Last summer, some students stormed a council meeting after the universitys highest governing body had voted to delay the appointment of Johannes Chan Man-mun as one of the pro-vice-chancellors, a move critics said was political backlash against the liberal scholar for his affiliation with pro-democracy Occupy protests organiser Benny Tai Yiu-ting.

What the students did this time was equally unacceptable. They besieged the venue, blocked passageways and clashed with police officers, apparently having been misled to believe that their demand for a review had been stalled. A council member feeling unwell and requiring medical assistance was blocked from leaving the campus. University chief Peter Mathieson later expressed disappointment over the students action, saying he felt his life was in danger.

The decision to set up a review panel should have been welcomed by the students. It was agreed by all council members, including the students elected representative. He said the outcome was a pleasant surprise, adding that he did not find it unreasonable to wait for a University Grants Committees consultancy report on university governance, which is due in one or two months. But other students feared that the council was dragging its feet, referring to their experience in Chans case.

Trust and cooperation do not come from antagonism and confrontation. The council has taken the first step to address students concerns. But this was not reciprocated with a positive response. As in the previous stand-off, the latest clash does not instil pride and confidence in our tertiary students; nor does it help restore the universitys reputation as one of Asias finest. A dialogue between Li and the students is expected to be held within 10 days. It is to be hoped that rationality can prevail.

(SCMP) January 27, 2016.

If they represent Hong Kongs best and brightest, then God help us.

More than 200 screaming University of Hong Kong students mobbed their own campus, illegally trapped university council members and staff inside buildings and confronted security staff and threw objects at police.

In most Western democracies, such behaviour would have meant being pepper-sprayed and thrown into jail for the night.

But hey, this is Hong Kong. So new council chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, the target of their protests, had to be sneaked out under police protection. HKU vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson, who had been encouraging students to speak up, said he felt his life was threatened. When even the ever diplomatic Mathieson said he felt unsafe, you can be sure you are seeing some seriously extreme mob behaviour.

But Billy Fung Jing-en, head of the student union, said all that was reasonable. I hate to know what he would find unreasonable.

A police officer was criticised for merely threatening to use pepper spray. Stricken council member Leonie Ki Man-fung was stuck in an ambulance for an hour as students blocked it from leaving. Students said it was all her own fault for abusing emergency services. How did they know Ki was faking it? Are they doctors?

The students said their demands were being ignored and that left them with no choice but to protest as a last resort. Never mind that Li had agreed to meet them. They demanded a meeting now, at that moment. Never mind that the council had set up a committee to examine the universitys governance structure. They wanted it done now, right this minute.

It looks more like they were backing the council and university administration into a corner rather than the other way round, as the students claim.

Basically, their demands are impossible to meet. And they know it all the more reason to continue their protests while claiming they were being ignored and repressed.

Frankly, its hard to see what they are doing or if the goals they claim they are fighting for in any way benefit the university or society at large.

I cant for the life of me see how most business conducted by the council remotely affects those students in their undergraduate careers or restricts their freedom.

Videos:

TVB News http://news.tvb.com/local/56a8966b6db28c6319000004/ Television news report

SCMP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tytxr_0TGv0 Woman down on the ground

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZRrT3kNids Students broke through the outer ring with metal barricades and enter to demand a dialogue with Arthur Li

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5AS6ZWOb_I Hong Kong University students surround Arthur Li et al in order to hold a dialogue (beginning at 1:18)

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vk9XCwgBC6k Billy Fung gets the security guards to open the door and then calls on other students to join in a meeting with Arthur Li. This tape is evidence for property destruction as the door handle was bent.

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqQSJl_hjug Leonie Ki claims to be ill after being surrounded by students.

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0gpKY6A1WA The students won't let the ambulance carrying Leonie Ki leave.

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMV2FgFnpRw Police use diversionary tactic to allow Arthur Li to leave

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sMSAvaGDZg Billy Fung Jing-en left the meeting and then returned to tell the security guards: "I'm a council member. I'm returning to pick up something. Is there any problem?" The security guards opened the door. Fung holds the door, turns around and asks aloud, "Does anyone want to go in and look up Arthur Li?" Other students rushed over to struggle with the security guard over the door. And then Fung said aloud "Don't hold me!" as he left the scene, leaving it to the other students to fight the security guards.  By the way, the security guards are employees who are HKU stakeholders, even more so than students who graduate and leave in four years.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljU2A7QpwF8 Billy Fung Jin-en on RTHK: "The students' action a very rational thing.

0:18 (Cable TV) Students laid down on the road to prevent the ambulance from leaving.
0:22 (Cable TV) They kept chanting slogans. For ten minutes, Arthur Li could not move a step.

RTHK
0:32 Radio host: The method was to prevent the council members from leaving. Eventually they were able to leave under police escort after midnight. Is that going too far?
0:39 Fung: I don't think this is going to far. When you have a lot of people, it is obviously going to be crowded. That's all there is. It was relatively hard to come and go. Everybody had a hard time coming and going. So I don't think this is going too far.
0:49 Radio host: Not everybody found in hard to come and go. Cheung Tat-ming just said that he could come out. Some could, some couldn't.
0:52 Fung: It was a timing issue. Different times, different numbers of persons. When the time is different, the number of persons is different.
0:57 Radio host: But when only Arthur Li is left, it is hard to say that this was purely a timing issue. Some people were selectively allowed to leave. If you can accept his viewpoints, you let him leave. If you don't agree with his viewpoints or positions, you won't let him leave.
1:10 Fung: I'm not going to comment on who can easily leave and who cannot leave so easily.
1:15 Radio host: Let us say that there are people from different spectrum on the council. Everybody supported it. Actually, they were hoping that the review panel would be established immediately. Do you reflect on this sometimes? That is to say, you don't have to follow the students. That is to say, what everybody wants is the most reasonable thing. Sometimes as a student representative you may persuade the students to go in the opposite direction because you think that it is reasonable to do so.
1:37 Fung: To a certain degree, waiting for two months is actually quite reasonable.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYQIy8azgy0 Female voice on megaphone telling all those present: "A review panel has not been established."

RTHK
Radio host: At the time, did you explain to the fellow students about waiting two months for the report to come out first?
Billy Fung: I think that the responsibility for explaining this is on Arthur Li. Regrettably he did not explain it.

Arthur Li: The reason why I said that he is a liar is very simple. On the day before yesterday at the meeting, we voted unanimously to establish a review panel. But Billy Fung told the students that we have not established a review panel. Isn't that a lie? Within the council, he promised to maintain confidentiality. But as soon as he got out, he called a press conference to leak everything that we said. Isn't this a lie to the university council?

Man Cheuk-fei (HKU council member): After the council meeting, Arthur Li went into another room to draft a statement. Actually, we have a common understanding that the chairman will come out to speak. Billy Fung was there.
Host: So Billy Fung should know?
Man Cheuk-fei: He must have known more or less. He was close by us and sending out messages. He watched when we left. But as soon as they saw Chairman Li, they got very excited. There were a lot of offensive words. That is to say, the scene was out of control. There was no opportunity for Arthur Li to say anything or address the media.
Man Cheuk-fei: He selectively released information so that the students at the scene thought that the review panel was not established. It raised doubts and discontent. Why can't we talk about this inside? Why does he have to sue such methods to release misleading information? I went out and spoke to the students for a while. They said that they were unaware of the version that we were aware of. Afterwards, we found out that there was information asymmetry.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYUo9ZF0WNE

Billy Fung: I emphasize that all the information I sent out are complete and accurate.

HKU Student Strike Committee member Chan Wing-ki: Right now, there is no review panel.

Billy Fung: At the time, I told the students outside the meeting place that the university council will establish a review panel but it has to wait until the University Grants Committee report comes out first. So the fact is that the review panel has not been established ... when it is not established immediately, then it was not established ... to put is simply, if I agree to propose to you and you agree to marry me. Right? But are we married yet? Not married! Right or not? Because we are not married until we've registered.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i62LqHmOyLI A female student tried to wedged into the police line as the ambulance tried to leave, and then she accused the police of using violent force.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1X1dSoY9SM Ambulance corps workers enter with stretcher. Yvonne Leung, Alex Chow and Baggio Leung (Youngspiaration) refused to yield passage. Yvonne Leung yelled: "Please tell me who has been injured!" How did she get the authority to decide who can receive medical treatment or not.

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o5C97m1ALE According to the students, council member Leonie Ki Man-fung was faking ill and abusing the emergency service.

(Commercial Radio) Billy Fung: Ms. Ki is abusing the emergency service. She was very freely able to get on the ambulance and very smoothly by herself.
(Commercial Radio) Leonie Ki: The crowd had many lawyers. Three, four layers. More and more people came. They kept screaming and yelling. I could not breathe and I could not move. And also the problem was that I was very scared, because suddenly some of them said "Make her take a dive!" Someone hit me at the sensitive spot behind my knee in order to make me fall. Actually, I almost fell down on the ground three times.
(Commercial Radio) Billy Fung: Through the window of the ambulance, she scorned the fellow students.
(Commercial Radio) Radio host: You said that she scorned the students from inside the ambulance? What was the scene like?
(Commercial Radio) Billy Fung: Laughing. I couldn't see very clearly. I lost my glasses. But she ... that is to say, her condition does not appear to be illness.
(Commercial Radio) Leonie Ki: At the time, my blood pressure was very high. I normally take medication to keep the pressure down to 120. At the scene yesterday, it was 170. At first, I wanted to throw up and I was dizzy. But I didn't realize that it was so serious. Some student said that I was scorning at the other students. How do I have the time and energy to do that! I never uttered a single sentence, because I want to throw up. I couldn't talk. You could see that I kept my mouth closed, or I put my hand to cover my mouth. I wish the political parties and politics could stay far away from all the universities in Hong Kong, all the campuses so that they can study well. Because our next generation is a bunch of mobsters, then I think that our Hong Kong is really finished.

Also Oriental Daily https://www.facebook.com/bbtauseeworld/videos/446727375524645/

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APzqcLtPj1M When Leonie Ki was stuck in the ambulance for an hour because the students blocked the way, Yvonne Leung got on the megaphone and said: "I don't understand why we were only less than 20 meters away from each other, but Ms. Ki refused to come over here. Ms. Ki, our fellow students are waiting for your answer!" When Arthur Li came out, the students surrounded him with the familiar voice of Yvonne Leung leading the chant: "Shameful!" "Dialogue!"

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGL9c3eRXH4 Hong Kong University students versus the Evil Police? Well, here is a list of non-HKU students doing their valiant resistance act at the scene.
0:19 Ray Wong (Hong Kong Indigenous) blocking the ambulance from leaving
0:35 "Four-eyed Brother" Cheng Kam-mun setting up obstacles on the road and then quickly leave
1:03 Chin Po-fun (People Power member, Shopping Revolution mainstay)

Speakout HK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu0jnQbhnKc

Female voice: The police are not allowed on campus. Leave immediately!
Hooded man: Leave! Leave!

(dbc)
Senior counsel Ronny Tong: In terms of the law, the campus belongs to the university. But now matter whom it belongs to, under Hong Kong law, if the police believes there is a reasonable case that a crime has been committed, then the police can enter anywhere. So it depends on whether someone is smashing and destroying university property. On this night, I believe that the university security personnel asked the police to enter. Under such circumstances, the police has the right under the relevant laws to enter the campus to enforce the law, maintain order and prevent crime. I don't think that there is any particular issue here.
Ronny Tong: The students do not own the campus, and they are not responsible for security either. Strictly speaking, they do not have the right to enforce the law. I think that the students should not be besieging the council members, even not allowing them to leave. According to law, this may constitute false imprisonment.

Resistance Live Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrsemK6KAcw The title is "Hong Kong University students lay siege to the council meeting, the police charged into the scene to violently enforce the law."

https://www.facebook.com/359574464219603/videos/553160878194293/ A raving auntie in the middle of this student revolution. She is complaining about how dozens of police trampled over her. She tried to stop Leonie Ki from getting away in the ambulance but dozens of police blocked. They told her "Don't push" while they kept pushing themselves so that she couldn't breathe. Meanwhile the police kept kicking this demonstrator and another girl in the legs while saying "Don't kick! Don't kick! Calm down! Calm down! Very hypocritical!

Internet comments:

- (Man Cheuk-fei, member of the HKU Council What do the students want?

All eyes were on the the first HKU Council meeting of 2016, because this will be the first meeting chaired by Arthur Li after this appointment as chairman. Previously, the HKU students started a strike to target him. HKU Student Union member requested an item to be added to the meeting attention to review council governance. The world wanted to see the student demand would be met ...

Because the University Grants Committee was about to release a review report on university governance, most council members were inclined to wait until the report appears and then immediately establish a review panel at HKU to conduct a thorough review. The motion was passed unanimously, including the student representative.

When the meeting ended around 8pm, it was suddenly reported some students have broken through the security line and blocked the car parks in order to prevent the council members from departing. Most of the council members were perplexed: Have we satisfied the students' demands? Why do they still want to lay siege to the meeting site? As individual teachers left by foot, all those who came in by car were unable to leave. So they waited in another room for more information. During this time, Billy Fung Jing-en was watching every move of the council members and sending out messages to the outside. Chairman Arthur Li was in another room drafting a statement to tell the world what the council has decided.

At about 840pm, the university security chief said that their people have set up a human chain to allow the council members to leave safely. Arthur Li went in the company of another vice-chancellor to leave. When the students saw him, they got very excited and the human chain was immediately useless. The students surrounded the council members so that they couldn't move. I was standing next to Arthur Li and Peter Mathieson, and I experienced 20 minutes in which I was surrounded.

As vice-chancellor Mathieson recalled later, I also felt that my personal safety was being threatened. The security guards on my left tried their best to protect Arthur Li. Billy Jung Jing-en was standing on my right, and he kept trying to reach Arthur Li with his hands while he heaped obscene insults. I found it hard to believe that this came out of the mouth of a Hong Kong University Students' Union president. Another student next to him did the same.

I kept being pulled and pushed in the crowd. I was worn out. I could have easily fallen down on the ground. If someone falls down, there could be a stampede with unimaginable consequences. I was most concerned about 80-something-year old council member Rosie Yeung Tse-tse because she could not have endured the jostling. Fortunately she was able to leave safely. Another council member Leonie Ki felt ill and was taken to the hospital. Council member Patrick Poon Sun-cheong had his suit ripped. I was able to leave after 45 minutes.

Afterwards it was learned that the students went out of control because Billy Fung Jing-en released inaccurate information during the meeting, saying taht the council rejected the students' demands and stalled. By the time that the staff representative Cheung Tat-ming clarified, it was too late. Peter Mathieson's open letter was stern. He emphasized that the university will not tolerate mob rule and that the students' actions were totally unnecessary.

There are two student members on the university council. They have plenty of channels to speak up for the students. But did they do their duties? Billy Fung Jing-en voted to establish a review panel. Then without waiting for council chairman Arthur Li to announce the decision, he deliberately released inaccurate information to mislead the students and malign the council members such that clashes took place. Then he incited the students to charge into the meeting building to attack Arthur Li. What does he really want? Pardon me for not being able to understand.

- (Bastille Post)

Council member Leonie Ki wrote to Hong Kong University afterwards to relate what she went through. When the meeting ended at 8pm, the students had already surrounded the exit to the parking garage. So the council members had to stay in the waiting room.

After about half an hour, Leonie Ki and others were told that the security guards would form a human chain to escort them out onto a minibus outside to leave. Leonie Ki led the way, because she was most concerned about the personal safety of the elderly Rosie Yeung Tse-tse. She ended up being held up for more than an hour before the ambulance and the police came.

Leonie Ki said that she was "pulled, pushed and made physical contact" with many persons. Someone grabbed her jacket to stop her from leaving. She heard someone said "Quickly make her take a dive." "There were kicks behind my left knee to make me fall."

Leonie Ki said that it had rained that day and the grass and steps were wet. She tried to maintain her balance. She almost fell thrice. Fortunately a female police officer next to her held her up and told her that she not to worry because she will "hold her up." Leonie Ki said that she was afraid that if she fell, it might trigger a stampede with unimaginable consequences.

She said that she heard students cursing along the way. After 45 minutes, the emergency worker brought the stretcher to Leonie Ki. But the demonstrators immediately push it away. After another 15 minutes, Leonie Ki got near the ambulance. She was too worn out, and two emergency workers carried her into the ambulance. The demonstrators did not stop cursing. They said that Leonie Ki was faking it. They banged on the body of the ambulance. It took another 15 minutes before the ambulance was able to leave with police assistance. Leonie Ki was taken to Queen Mary Hospital for examination.

Leonie Ki said that the experience made her fear for her life. When the doctor asked if she wanted to be hospitalized, she said that she wanted to leave because she was concerned that the mob might charge inside the hospital and affect other patients. So she told her chauffeur to meet her at the back entrance to take her home. She made it home by 1130pm.

- (Speakout HK) When HKU council member Leonie Ki Man-fung tried to leave by ambulance, the students said that she was faking it and abusing emergency services. When a female student fainted, the students made way for the ambulance. So let us look at this fainted female student. This clip began with the TVB news report about a person fainting. But look at the slow motion video beginning at 0:38. When a security guard tried to provide aid, the fainted students looked up and used her hand to slap him away. And then she continued to be fainted.

- (Ming Pao) Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-en said that council member Leonie Ki did not need to use the ambulance. Fung criticized Ki of "abusing the emergency service." He said that compared to the students who froze in cold weather for six hours, Ki should be "okay and very normal" and she does not appear to be ill.

- The broom was used to block the exit door in order to prevent council members from leaving. This is a misapplication of the tool. It should have been used to sweep all the young wastrels out of the university campus.

- Why Arthur Li was unable to say even a couple of sentence ...

- Using plastic garbage bins to ram the police line

- The root of all evils is Chan Wing-ki

(Oriental Daily) January 29, 2016. Strike committee member Lee Tsz-ho said that they received the information that was consistent with what the university council did. But he admits that there was a "technical error" when they announced the meeting outcome, and this was clarified later. So who misled the students?

The person who was responsible for reading out the information from Billy Fung Jing-en was a female student with long hair, short stature, bespectacled and wearing a neck scarf. She told that students outside that "the university council has vetoed the establishment of the review panel." This was revised later to "although the university council has voted to establish a review panel, this will have to wait for the University Grants Committee's report." But by that time, the students were already charging. This female student is Chan Wing-ki, a member of the Student Strike Committee.

Our reporter called Chan Wing-ki. She admitted that there was "some confusion at the moment when the information was relayed, but we clarified it within one second." She denied that she incited other students to charge: "I don't think that students are as stupid as that. It is underestimating the wisdom of the Hong Kong University students to think that they would do so at the slip of the tongue."

TVB News 0:45 Chan Wing-ki's voice: "Right now there is no review panel." Immediately students sprint forward into the garage and block the exits.

Oriental Daily @ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlKMUHToLh4 Strike Committee member Chan Wing-ki being interviewed by telephone

- Are the students so stupid? You know the saying: "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." And this is the third time.

The first time around was when Shiu Ka-chun (Baptist University Social Work lecturer) got on the Grand Stage in Admiralty and told all those in attendance to rush over to Lung Wo Road immediately because the police has just used tear gas again. This led to a huge clash between police and demonstrator. Afterwards, Shiu said that he was merely repeating what someone (who?) told him and he had no idea whether it was true or not.

The second time around when someone told those people in Admiralty that the Legislative Council was review Internet Article 23 to kill off freedom of speech. Immediately people rushed over and broke inside the Legislative Council building. Those who led the way to break the door told others to enter while they slinked away themselves before the police arrived.

- https://www.facebook.com/gigi.mak.50/videos/10209017697266282/ Hong Kong University students surround and harass a mainland student for taking some photos of them, including making these demands:
(1) delete the photos/videos that he took. Under Hong Kong law, nobody has the right to ask others to delete what they filmed because this is part of freedom of artistic creation. If you feel that someone is breaking the law, you should call the police as opposed as forcing them to delete.
(2) prevent him from leaving. As Johannes Chan once explained, this person is being falsely imprisoned.
(3) claiming that a wallet is missing (implying that this man stole it). The police should be called in to arrest him.

(Sing Pao) February 1, 2016.

A young man is surrounded by demonstrators who yelled: "What is your name?" "Do you support the students?" A male voice said aside: "He is not a Hongkongers, he doesn't understand Chinese." The man looked terrified. He cannot move forward or backward. He could not say anything to explain. Then he said in putonghua: "I came here for fun. I just want to take a look." The demonstrators said: "Search his person." Another male demonstrator said: "Somebody has just lost a wallet. You are suspected ..." The man said in English: "Please." The demonstrator either did not know English or pretend to mishear, said: "Police ... you are pretending to be the police." The man clarified that he is not police. The demonstrator asked him: "Are you public security?" A number of demonstrators pushed and shoved him and prevented him from leaving. Finally, the man agreed to delete the photos in his mobile phone and was allowed to leave.

If the Hong Kong University Strike Committee is willing to allow outsiders to come in to demonstrate, then why won't they allow the public to come and film? The key point is that they demonstrators know that they are doing something wrong and therefore they don't want to be filmed doing so.

- (Salute to HK Police) On the first day of the class strike, the organizers claimed that there were about 300 attendees at the rally. On the second day, there were fewer than 100. On the third day, the class strike disappeared from the few. But at the council meeting, more than 200 people showed up. Based upon our reporters' observations at the scene and on the Internet, many of these were outsiders, including other universities (Lester Shum from Chinese University of Hong Kong, Nathan Law from Lingnan University, etc) plus some radicals (Cheng Kam-mun, Ray Wong, etc), Shopping Revolutionaries (Chin Po-fun, etc), post-Umbrella groups (Baggio Leung). In order to boost support, the memehk forum posted early in the morning: "Hong Kong University needs your support, the police have just applied pepper spray to the students." They received 725 Like's. More than three quarters of an hour later, they added an update at the bottom: "The police pointed a pepper spray device at the students, but it is unconfirmed whether it had been used."

- (Speakout HK) When Council member Patrick Poon Sun-cheong left, the demonstrators: "Chase after that guy in the western suit. Who is this? Who are you?" The demonstrators kept attacking Poon. The police officers opened the barrier to let Poon leave. But the demonstrators held on to his suit and refused to let him leave. Amidst the chaos the sit was ripped. A photo provided by Poon showed one half of the suit that he managed to keep.

- (TVB) Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-en said: "I was at the council meeting and I thought that it was reasonable to wait two months for the three demands of the students. But I could not push for an immediate establishment of the review panel. Therefore I hoped that more citizens and students could accomplish what I was not able to do or bring up in the council meeting."

I find this incomprehensible. Couldn't Billy Fung just tell the council members: "Look, guys, either you form the review panel this minute or else I am going to send a message to the students outside to block the exits and prevent you from leaving until you agree!"?

- (Hong Kong Police incident report)

At about 840pm that evening, the police received a 999 call from the security guards at Number 5 Sassoon Road, Western District. The report said that there was a dispute at the location. Later the police received calls from other security guards at the same location that the glass door at to the building has been damaged and many persons are entering the building by force. They requested for police assistance.

During the period when the police arrived and investigated, one woman complained of being ill and another complained about a foot injury. However, the persons present at the scene prevented them from getting onto the ambulances. Therefore police assistance was requested. The police helped the two women to get on the ambulance which took them to Queen Mary Hospital for treatment.

There were many individuals present at the location and they were blocking the entrances/exits to prevent the persons inside the building from leaving. The police appealed to those present and also helped out the staff members and security guards. During this time, certain individuals threw objects. The police stood guard with police batons and pepper spray on hand.

Furthermore, a glass door, a fire escape door, a security guard house and four lamps near the building were damaged.

Another woman was injured during the incident. After she came to, she was sent to Queen Mary Hospital for treatment.

The case was treated as one about citizens calling for police assistance and criminal damage of property. The case is being followed up by the Western District Crime Investigation Division.

Tai Mo Shan is the highest peak in Hong Kong, with an elevation of 957 meters. Due to the height of the mountain, Tai Mo Shan is claimed to be Hong Kong's most misty area, as it is often covered in clouds. In summer it is frequently covered with cumulus clouds, especially on rainy days, and in winter stratus clouds and fog often cover the peak.

(SCMP) January 24, 2016.

Dozens of frost chasers became stranded on the road down from Hong Kongs tallest peak after blistering wind and rain had made road conditions too slippery to walk, hampering rescue efforts. Firefighters had received around 20 calls for help this morning by 9am from Tai Mo Shan peak as crowds hoping to catch sight of rare frost in subzero conditions had clambered up steep slopes in the early morning and found themselves struggling in the freezing conditions. One sightseer was reported in critical condition, according to firefighters at the scene. At least four ambulances and three fire trucks were blocked from reaching the top as cars were all jam packed in the parking lot by 9:30am.

Everything was frozen up there, even the roads, said Danny Yip, a 23-year-old university student who had hiked up to 957m peak. It took Yip and three of his other friends four hours to hike to the top where it was a freezing -4 degrees at around 4am.

A steady stream of people, mostly youngsters bundled up in thick, ice-covered parkas, slid and slipped down slopes, even two ambulance personnel had to turn back after icy roads up to the peak proved too difficult to cross. There were a lot of winding roads, it was like going down a slide, Brian Kwok Chun-hey, a university student. Its really an unforgettable experience, I dont think Ill ever come back up again in such conditions, said Ma Wing-sin, whose wet ponytail was frozen with ice crystals. But were young, its when you should create memories.

(Apple Daily with video) January 24, 2016. [At 3:15am January 25, 2016, there were 868,248 page views, 19K Facebook LIKE's and 1,064 mostly negative comments.]

For safety reasons, the Hong Kong Police began to block the Tai Mo Shan Road around noon and stopped citizens from going up. At around 5pm, a man and a woman attempted to go up. Police officers stopped them. The woman dressed in a pink jacket became very dissatisfied. She took out a mobile phone and filmed the police officers. She yelled aloud: "Why are you restricting people's freedom?" The police officer explained that its was unsafe up there and called for the couple to leave. But the woman would not quit. She insisted firmly: "We will be responsible if we run into danger. Our lives belong to ourselves" and "It is your job to rescue people." The police told them repeatedly that Tai Mo Shan Road is blocked, but she insisted on going up. Finally the police officer issued a warning to her that she may be arrested if she crosses the police line. When she heard that, she did not take any action.

Once the couple realized that they couldn't go up, they turned their anger on our newspaper reporter who was filming on the side. She said: "Are you reporters? Where are your press passes?" Our reporter ignored her. She insisted: "I have the right to inspect it" and then she issued a challenge: "Let's see who has the higher hit rate on the Internet." As the couple left, they saw a fireman slip down and they gave a hearty laugh.

(Apple Daily) Transcript of video

Woman: Do you want us to take another route up?
Police: It does not matter. Do not go up there, please! Okay. Go back!
Woman: You are restricting us ...
Police: It is dangerous up there. Because it is dangerous.
Woman: If we are in danger, we will be responsible for it.
Police: It is dangerous. We are not letting people go up. Please.
Police: This is already blocked off. Let me repeat once more. It has been blocked off.
Woman: Rescuing people is your duty. It is your duty!
Police: Right! Yes, yes.
Woman: It is your duty!
Police: We will rescue you!
Woman: It is your duty! I will protect myself.
Police It is dangerous now.
Police: Because ... how about it?
Woman: You've tried to advise me, but I myself still want to go up. What about it?
Police: It has been blocked off. So you are not allowed to go.
Woman: That is, you want me to go up by some other way.
Police: I will certainly not let you cross over. Not this road.
Woman: You are telling me to take some other road to go up in order to rescue us.
Police: I didn't tell you! I told you that the way is blocked here.
Woman: You stop talking nonsense.
Police: It doesn't matter what you say. Anyway you cannot cross the police restriction line.

...

Woman: Do you have a press pass? |
Reporter: Yes. How are you?
Woman: Can you show it to me?
Reporter: Why?
Woman: Eh, you say that you are reporter. So I have the right to look at it.
Reporter: You film and I film. We are all in a public place. That's all. Right or not?
Woman: A reporter who won't show his press pass and he is filming others. Do you know Hong Kong law?
Reporter: Yes.

Videos:

Apple Daily https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL6nLoPav14 0:06 People sliding down the mountain
Apple Daily https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMbsZS_4XQs Fisheye lens view of how to slide down the mountain

HK01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsihuqI-r_4 Penguins sliding down hill?

Headline POP news https://www.facebook.com/bbtauseeworld/videos/446043365593046/ People sliding down on the icy road

Sing Pao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaI1InT-Kfc Fire truck skidding on the icy road

Oriental Daily https://www.facebook.com/hkfirenews/videos/1681272342085306/ Firemen evacuating a citizen by sliding down the icy road
Oriental Daily http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20160125/bkn-20160125000158755-0125_00822_001.html?eventsection=hk_news&eventid=4028828d524a39c40152541bb64a3cbd Police Tactical Unit members in iced uniforms slipping and sliding to rescue people

NOW TV http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=166302 Television news report on rescue effort

TVB https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHpzo6E-BUg Television news report on people coming down the mountain

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIhBqfVlDWI People slipping and sliding on the icy road
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFmB3-HtKT4 More citizens and firemen slipping and sliding on the icy road

https://www.facebook.com/lai.wing.94/videos/798572956921367/ Slippery slope

Headline POP news http://pop.stheadline.com/content.php?vid=39853&cat=a Here is a video of cows slipping and sliding on Tai Mo Shan. People can be heard giggling, but they didn't know that one cow had to be put away on humanitarian grounds after breaking a leg upon falling down.

Internet comments:

- What kind of person is this woman? Would you guess Yellow Ribbon or Blue Ribbon? Here is what some Internet users have found out:


(Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles backpack strap)

- Jenny Mak is the first Hong Kong Internet celebrity of the year. Congratulations!
- Pity the guy who hasn't been named yet. He didn't say a word but he will be immortalized in the annals of the Hong Kong Internet. But he is culpable because he did nothing to stop his companion.

- Two weeks ago, the Taiwan television host Kevin Tsai made an observation: Most of those people afflicted with the so-called Princess Sickness are not princesses -- they are merely sick.

- There is more than one Jenny Mak on Facebook. Tonight they have all had to delete their accounts. The collateral damage is regrettable.

- This woman's friend is trying to defend her behavior on the grounds that she was 'emotive' and therefore has no 'logic'. That is just making Internet users even more "emotional."

- She hates the police. When the 19-year-old Vivian Chan died in the Bangkok explosion, she gloated that Chan deserves to die because her mother is a retired police officer. Because she hates the police, she looked for this opportunity to demean the police and get some Facebook LIKE's from fellow Yellow Ribbons.

Jenny Mak: Right, if she is a Communist public servant, then not only her mother's mother's mother, but for all generations before and after her will stink for ten thousand years.
Jenny Mak: It is no joke that Vivian Chan was blown to pieces is no joke, but not so when her policewoman mother said that she passed away peacefully.


Denny Fok: Please show some respect for the deceased and her family
Jenny Mak: Very hard, because she is a police woman.
Denny Fok: Fucking forget it! One of these days it will be your tunr.
Jenny Mak: You first.
Denny Fok: Wait and see.
Jenny Mak: See how you die.

- The primal sin of this woman is so much that she spoke aggressively to the police officers, but that she was impolite to the Apple Daily reporter. Hell hath no fury like an Apple Daily reporter scorned.

- Conspiracy theory due to too many coincidences:
Why was there so many anti-police posts on her Facebook?
Why was she photographed in a Yellow Umbrella demonstration march?
Why was she filmed going up Tai Mo Shan and cursing out the police?
Why was her Facebook photos posted on the fifty-cent-gang forum Discuss.com.hk?
Did she set up this piece of theater in conjunction with the Evil Police?

- This woman does not even have the minimal sense of what she is going to face up the mountain. She is wearing a pair of blue jean shorts, stockings and boots. Look at the videos of what was happening up the mountain. So she is going to go up there, she is going to slip and slide because her boots cannot handle the icy road surface, she is going to scrape her knees, her stocking is going to get wet and freeze and she will be dialing 999 and wondering why the police isn't there yet to carry her downhill.
- And she was trying to go up at 5pm. It will be dark shortly and even colder.

- This has less to do with Yellow Ribbons versus Blue Ribbons. It has more to do with this woman being a disgrace to the people of Hong Kong.

- Many people (including my Yellow Ribbon Facebook friends) criticized this woman when the video surfaced. But as soon as it was uncovered that she is a diehard Yellow Ribbon, they became suddenly became quiet.

- This woman is going to surface a couple of days later and beg for mercy. She will say that she has been under a lot of pressure (with her family and friends and at Hong Kong Airlines where she works), and that she is going to commit suicide if this continues.

- Wait a minute, not all comments were negative against the woman. There were some trolls who said that they would file a complaint against the Evil Police for false imprisonment and violations of the Basic Law:

Article 27
Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike.

Article 28
The freedom of the person of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable.

No Hong Kong resident shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful arrest, detention or imprisonment. Arbitrary or unlawful search of the body of any resident or deprivation or restriction of the freedom of the person shall be prohibited. Torture of any resident or arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of the life of any resident shall be prohibited.

They also plan to lodge complaints against the Fire Department for laziness!

- (Ming Pao) The police blocked off the access roads to Tai Mo Shan, so that everybody who wanted to go up had to leave their vehicles at the bottom of the hill and try to proceed by foot. The police issued tickets to all the illegally parked cars, including the cars that belong to the media organizations. The police were meticulous, because the slipped the parking ticket into a plastic envelop so that it wouldn't get wet and placed the package underneath the windshield wiper.

- Oops, Apple Daily is trying to wipe the slate clean for the woman because she is a Yellow Ribbon. But as in the case of Lee Bo, the script has already been adopted by the broad masses of Internet users and anything that the principals have to say will not change any hearts or minds.

A couple attempted to go up Tai Mo Shan even after the police blocked access. The woman cursed out the police for restricting her freedom. In the end, she stopped only after the police threatened to arrest her. This incident drew popular response with Internet users calling her "barbaric." Some Internet users identified her, causing her to make her Facebook private.

This morning Apple Daily contacted the woman. She explained: "I don't think what was filmed was everything." She said that she wanted to go up the mountain because she has friends up there. She was also confident that she was properly equipped ("my pants was lied with fleece inside, I don't have to tell people that"). She said that she will not respond to the criticisms: "Saying more will only draw more response."

She said that she saw people going up the mountain in flat soles. "There isn't a problem with the police advising them to leave. They should leave if they were wearing flat soles." She believed that she was adequately equipped. "I was stopped even after I offered the explanation. His attitude made me very angry." She emphasized that "this is our freedom" and used the red flags on beaches as the analogy. "People still swim."

- Someone says that Jenny Mak is a worker at the HSBC branch on 82-84 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui district. Let's all go down there and visit her.
- Her Chinese name is Mak Kit-chun. Her mother is Thai. Her sister is Candy and her brother-in-law is Roy Leung. Let's go after all of them.

- (Oriental Daily) January 30, 2016. At around 7pm, a middle-aged man jumped on the train tracks to take selfies. Citizens informed the MTR workers who called the police to take the man back onto the platform. The man said that he dropped wallet and therefore went down onto the tracks to retrieve it. The man was talking to himself and he was taken to the hospital.

According to the Jenny Mak school of freedom, it is the man's freedom to walk on the tracks as he is responsible for his own life. It is the duty of the police to save him in the event that a train has to brake suddenly and people get injured.

The original script: Class Strike -> Hunger Strike -> Physical Action. The response to the Class Strike has been less than satisfactory.

(Oriental Daily) January 23, 2016.

On January 23, the Strike Committee held a meeting and announced that they will protest at the January 26 meeting of the university council when Arthur Li will attend in the capacity of council chairman for the first time. Strike Committee member Yvonne Leung described this as the Moment of the Final Battle.

According to the information, the Strike Committee saw that the class strike was joined by too few students and therefore the media and society did not pay any attention. Therefore, they decided to escalate their action. They believed that the hunger strike that they had previously discussed would not be "radical" enough. A Strike Committee member announced that they will charge into the meeting and their action will be even more radical than Hong Kong University Alumni/Students Occupy University Council Part 1 and Part 2 last time.

(YouTube) Interview with Tam Tak Chi (People Power)

1:47 I myself have some ideas. The university council is meeting on the 26th. Today there are about 200 fellow students sitting here. If you add all the other people around here, there is about 300 or so. The total is 500 persons. These 500 can swell continually. The movement should not be limited to just within Hong Kong University.

2:07 For the university council meeting on the 26th, I have some humble advice. That would be, a humorous kind of resistance. When all the university council members have entered and are meeting, these several hundred people will surround the meeting room and not let the council members leave. Certain council members will claim to be ill, "I need to see a doctor," "I am fainting," "I have gout," "I am experiencing a stroke," Lo Chung-mau and them will come out. They want to leave the meeting place on grounds of needing medical assistance.

2:36 I think that when the Hong Kong University students surround the meeting place, they can yell and shout, they can sing karaoke, they can sing anything, they can sing the HKU school song, they can sing the V-songs, S, S for sincerity, those halls have the stupid slogans, they make noise outside the meeting so that they cannot hold a meeting, so that the meeting becomes an embarrassment. This means going to this stage of resistance. They'll have to accept the big demands.

3:02 Of course, we don't think that we will get our four big demands by surrounding them just once. Getting a response. Getting a positive response. CY Leung will resign. This and that. That won't happen for sure. But it does not matter. We'll surround them. We'll make many of them look bad, they will need medical assistance, they will have to leave the meeting place. They will have to fake illness to leave the meeting place. That's where we want to be.

3:16 And if those people inside wants to eat food, defecate or use the toilet ... the Hong Kong University and the Hong Kong citizens surrounding the meeting place will move mobile toilets inside and guarantee that they have food, they have water, they can defecate, they can urinate. We're going to harass them. We can do this. We don't have to kick any doors, set fires, set fire to trash bins, we don't have to do that. It will be like <100 Mao>: resist the authoritarians humorously. This is the Czech experience. This can also be the experience of Hong Kong.

Internet comments:

- What happened with the strike? The reasons why the strike failed are very simple. Firstly, the timing is wrong. While the winter had been warm, a polar cold front has arrived. This is death knoll for a mass movement. The Strike Committee is not fighting against the authorities; they are fighting against Mother Nature. Of course, they come out losing.

Secondly, they over-estimated themselves. They believe that they are the centre of the universe and all 7 million Hongkongers will be focused on this ivory. So as soon as they hoist the flag to "defend Hong Kong University," tens of thousands will come to show their support. Unfortunately, political news is like overnight bread in a bakery -- nobody cares when it is stale. People's attention are drawn the case of the missing booksellers, the governance report, etc. How many people cares whether the Chief Executive serves as the university chancellor?

Thirdly, and most importantly, the striking students fail to recognize the situation for what it is. Hong Kong has seen any number of protests and demonstrations already. They are tired of this type of mass movement. After 79 days of Occupy Central, nothing was accomplished. So what can this student class strike accomplish?  The Strike Committee held a Constitution Deliberation Day and invited the students to establish a new university ordinance. Everybody knows that the university ordinance will not be easily amended just because a group of students sat down and drew a new ordinance. This is detached from reality. So it was no wonder that the number of strikers was dwindling, and the show of force because a show of weakness.

It is good for university students to be passionate. But there needs to be vision and wisdom in addition to passion. Rashness will only hurt themselves as well as Hong Kong University. Yesterday, the Strike Committee hung up a black banner for "Hong Kong City's First People's University." Did they think that more students will join the strike after seeing the banner? Did they think that denigration is a tactic that will be good for the university?

- In theory, there is nothing with students making demands to reform the system. After all, all systems will eventually be reviewed and reformed. The Chief Executive responded that the government has the right and the duty to appoint the council members in accordance with the law. So the students make a big show while the government responds tersely. If you don't know the details, you may think that it is up to the university council itself to take action and the students are striking to force the council to act.

Actually, the structure, responsibilities and membership of the university council are prescribed in the Hong Kong University ordinance. The universities have similar ordinances with variations that reflect local features. These ordinances are established and amended by administrative and legislative processes by the government and the legislative council respectively. The university council can at most make suggestions. So when the students pressure their council members and trustees, they are barking up the wrong tree -- the council has no legal way to deal with the demands.

There is also some misunderstanding about the role of the university council. The council is responsible for matters such as the hiring of the chancellor, the allocation of resources, the direction of future developments and other macroscopic matters. The council does not have the time or means to micro-manage operations in the academic and administrative departments. There are many layers in between the university council chairman and a teacher, so it is hard to imagine how Arthur Li could strangle academic freedom.

The past and present presidents of the Hong Kong University Students' Union are/were members of the university council, and they should know how the university is operated. So they have no reason to force the demands onto the council now.

- They are better off without the hunger strike, less they suffer the same scandal of the relay hunger strike by the pan-democrats during which someone had to be hospitalized for food poisoning.

- Of course, this is like Occupy Central -- there is no thought about whether this is effective or sustainable. Instead, they will do this because this is what they know how to do and because they have no other cards left to play.

- If they barge into the meeting and forward their demands, Arthur Li will tell them that the students demands are already on the meeting agenda if only the students would let them meet and discuss them. The council cannot say that they accept the demands without discussing and voting. In addition, another stalling tactic is that they will need legal advice because of possible ultra vires (acting in excess of its authority).

- Well, laying siege to the council meeting again would actually play into Arthur Li's hands. Because of the announced intentions by the students to disrupt the council meeting, Li would have demanded the executive branch (Peter Mathieson/Steve Cannon) to take preventative measures. If the meeting is nevertheless disrupted, those two will be held responsible and this becomes a way for Li to purge the two university officers who seemed disinclined to take action against the students last time. Here is the leaked recording on the security issue.

(Hong Kong Free Press) November 26, 2015.

Another recording of speeches made by Council members of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) has been leaked on a popular Taiwanese internet forum. The transcript and recording of an HKU Council meeting was uploaded the PTT forum at around 6pm on Thursday. The speeches were apparently made during an August 25 meeting, the one after the July 28 meeting in which students charged into the meeting room. The students were protesting the Councils indecision over whether to appoint liberal law scholar Johannes Chan Man-mun as HKUs pro-vice-chancellor.

Steven J. Cannon: Weve got photographic evidence that backs a lot of this up, weve reviewed the videos uh there are a whole series of disturbing scenes uh we have been looking at what legal options might be available to us. Uh

Arthur Li Can I just ask is it possible from your system that we can identify the students involved?

Steven J. Cannon: Certainly we can identify individuals we can identify the presence of individuals. Its what those individuals were doing. We believe that the number of potential offenses, disorder in public places, unlawful assembly, assault, false imprisonment, and nuisance committed in public places were all areas that if we chose collectively or individuals chose to pursue that would be

Arthur Li: So you have evidence

Steven J. Cannon: we could gather evidence around that and we would look to do that. But at the moment we are not we havent sought to do that. We are looking, really to get sound, the experiences but we do have written evidence from our people. We have video and photographic evidence. We have video evidence.

Chairman: Leonie?

Leonie Ki: OK. Id like to bring uh chairman, Id like to bring the situation to inform the council meeting of this on July the 28th, because I heard and it was possibly reported in the newspaper on the 27 or the 26 of July, that the student union chairman of HKU has announced that, if our re, their request was not mentioned, they would barge into the senate room.

So thats why I tried talk to Dr. Chau, Dr. Albert Chau, and I said we should not let the students come into the senate room because it is really a sacred place for Hong Kong U, and besides, I also sent you this email that the safety and dignity of the council members should be guaranteed as well as the image of the university.

But then Albert told me not to worry, because our students are very obedient, very good. And I keep reminding him of the incidents on 818 and 812, is, uh, the reverse, you know, because we also have other students from other universities.

Having said that, uh, it is, uh, because I my request is, because they already warned us of barging into the senate, I wonder why we still let them come into the 10th floor, because, they already give us a warning, we should not allow them to come onto the 10th floor. And I think that we, instead of coming here, we should be still having our meeting over there, instead of trying to be scared, because what we should do is warned the students or whatever downstairs.

And I also heard later on, that from the pan-democrats, they said that 13 people, the alumni, the Legco, they too have an agreement to stay downstairs, whereas students go upstairs. So then, its so chaotic because it is really like what Steve has reported, is organized and is also orchestrated. And I think we should be protected because we already heard of this alert, and we should take warning, you know.

Chairman: Steve, I would answer several questions after you tell us why students barged up to the 10th floor?

Steven J. Cannon: We were following essentially the 818 guidance and protocols that have been established and there have been several protocols, I agree that there had been a threat to enter the council. (Leonie Ki: its a threat announced) There had been several protests on, several council meetings running up to, to where we have quite a significant number of people on the 10th floor.

I think that we had a strong sense that the students would enter the council chamber. I think what we expected we also had a strong sense that would happen at the end, towards the end of the meeting after the vote on a particularuh, uh, item was taken. But the view was that they would enter in a reasonable manner and that the chairman would adjourn the meeting and general meeting (Chairman: if they dont leave) if they dont leave, we would appeal to them to leave, and the chairman would adjourn the meeting and then there would be an element of calm. What we didnt expect was the level of verbal abuse and physical abuse that took place and thats what we hadn t anticipated.

And that suggests to us that we need to revisit the original agreement if you like, which wasnt an agreement, the original protocol with our students about allowing zone demonstration areas, about close access to the council members which came out of the 818 incident.

Chairman: I don't mean to intervene this moment, first of all, we are now facing three problems, first of all is improving our so called security safety for visit the council meetings. Going back to a more decent meeting place, as I mentioned at the start, this is a makeshift issue, this university a decent meeting place, for council, senate, and Court EVP service unit in this week, to seek out of a possible way to have a more decent meeting.

One of the things that I am suggesting, is that, still council, uh, senate chamber, but we want to make sure that theres another door that members can leave should the only existing door be barricaded and somebody toss a firebomb or something on it. Im very, very strong that ... defend we need a proper meeting place and not just a makeshift thing.

Point number two is that the whole movement was based on the protocol decided on obviously said that needs to be changed as a result of this one incident. The reason that is safety and security in to come. I want to bring up two points. One is that there are evidence and we have actually received complaints that students eventually involved in barging into the senate chamber students while down in the car park, etc. or others people from outside central or other from both side there was a lot of controversies. Now weve identified students thatand take actions would be an issue perhaps the Vice Chancellor accept

Arthur Li: That would be against one student

Chairman: Because by protocol

Arthur Li: There still one student

Chairman: This is , this is just the starting point somebody complained one student

Arthur Li: I mean, I mean, I meanI dont know the name of the student

Chairman: I would, I would advise

Arthur Li: May I, may I, may I suggest this, chairman, let this be passed to the meeting, to identify the students involved to face disciplinary actions, has to report back to the council(?) for more actions (Chairman: accepting reporting to see if we agree with the actions or notbecause I m giving a very clear message I If we do not do it properly, any council member can take civil actions against the students, against this council, OK?

Because you are not protecting the council members

Chairman: That is what I am

Arthur Li: I can take civil actions against University of Hong Kong. I can take criminal actions against the students but I can also

Chairman: I am not disagreeing What Im saying is that There is already a receipt of one complaint of

Arthur Li: Yeah I dont want to

Chairman:one beginning

Arthur Li: Yeah but its not fair to single out one student

Chairman: Next thingwould be all over the facebook identify others

Arthur Li: Have we accepted.. thereport?

Chairman: Yes

Arthur Li:and then ask to deal with the consequences thereof

Chairman: Oh thats basically what it is.

Steven J. Cannon: The issue is yet between student discipline and general public offence, if you like. The student discipline under the ordinance of statute that students dedicated a complaint has to be raised within twenty-eight days of an incident, and it has to be specific and we have had one complaint and that goes to the Vice-Chancellor, and then....

- (HKG Pao) Yvonne Leung justified the Strike Committee's escalation plan by saying: "If Arthur Li has not done anything bad, then how come more than 4,000 students opposed him assuming any public post?" Very often Miss Hong Kong or the Best Television Actress may be voted upon. But using the vote to prove whether someone has done bad things is unheard of! She went on: "We ask the students to come personally on January 26 to express our demands ... if they even vetoed the establishment of a review panel to examine improvements for the university system, then we can be sure that the university system will not improved while Arthur Li is the chairman of the university council." This is a weird logic!

Firstly, the university council has 24 members including the chairman. By custom, the chairman does not vote (unless there is a tie). Therefore there is no direct relationship between Arthur Li and a council vote. Furthermore, not supporting a review panel does not mean opposing the issue, just as not liking a restaurant does not mean not eating at all. It is absurd to equate vetoing a review panel with refusing to improve the university system.

Furthermore the Strike Committee has four demands. The other three demands are directed at the changing the governance structure, and they are setting up the premise for the review panel. That is, the job of the review panel is to accept these other demands or else it will be declared a failure. However, the university council needs to prioritize and balance other aspects of the university and any improvement to the system will be made with the best interests of the university as a whole in mind as opposed to the preferences of a small number of individuals. Therefore, the university council has plenty of reasons to veto the student demands.

- (Bastille Post) January 25, 2016.

On Monday, the Strike Committee asked to meet the deans of the ten faculties and the student representatives of the ten faculties. None of the deans or student representatives showed up for the meeting. According to Strike Committee member Wong Chun-kit, the deans of the faculties of physics, social sciences, education, dentistry and the economics/business administration responded in writing but their deans did not attend the meeting. The other five deans did not respond. The Strike Committee took a "Defend institutional autonomy" banner and marched to the offices of the ten deans.

- (HKG Pao) January 25, 2016.

According to Strike Committee member Wong Chun-kit, some students think that the class strike is too "moderate." At the last meeting, someone proposed laying siege to the council members at the January 26th meeting. Furthermore, if the demands are not met, they will intercept the council members. Wong Chun-kit said that it depends on the number of students versus the number of security guards and police officers at the scene. "If the students want action, then they should show up tomorrow." He hopes that the number of participants won't be less than the number of strikers.

Wong Chun-kit said that he believes the HKU students will act in a restrained manner without any violence. He asked the council members not to "excite" the students.

Meanwhile Strike Committee member Yvonne Leung said that the Strike Committee will discuss next steps after the council meeting, such as continuing the class strike or using a judicial review to challenge the university ordinance on the automatic appointment of the Chief Executive as Chancellor. She said that the class strike was the first step. Afterwards, they will liaise with other university student unions to expand the action across Hong Kong.

- (Financial Times) More good news for the Strike Committee. Here are the 2016 global rankings for business schools.

#1 Insead (France/Singapore), #4 in 2015
#14 HKUST Business School (Hong Kong), #14 in 2015
#17 Ceibs (China), #11 in 2015
#26 CUHK Business School (Hong Kong), #30 in 2015
#29 Nanyang Business School (Singapore), #40 in 2015
#32 National University of Singapore Business School (Singapore), #31 in 2015
#39 Shanghai Jiao Tong University (China), #55 in 2015
#43 Renmin University of China School of Business, unranked in 2015
#44 University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong), #28 in 2015
#47 Fudan University School of Management (China), #55 in 2015

This proves conclusively that it is bad to have the Chief Executive serve as the Chancellor.

(Agence France Presse) January 20, 2016.

Students protested on the campus of Hong Kong's leading university on Wednesday (Jan 20) after a pro-Beijing official was appointed to a senior role, as fears grow of increasing political interference in education. Around 100 protesters left classrooms to rally at the Hong Kong University campus following the appointment of Mr Arthur Li, known to be close with the government, as chairman of the university's governing council last month. The appointment taps into wider concerns that academic freedoms in the semi-autonomous Chinese city are under threat, particularly in the wake of student-led mass pro-democracy rallies in late 2014.

"We are conducting a class boycott in order to target unfairness in the system. Students have raised opposition to the appointment but the school's autonomy is threatened," student leader Yvonne Leung told protesters through loudspeakers. "It's an abuse of power," she said.

(SCMP) January 20, 2016.

About 250 University of Hong Kong students staged a rally at the schools Pok Fu Lam campus on Wednesday in support of a week-long class boycott to demand an overhaul of the institutions governing council. The boycott will last until at least January 26, when the council is scheduled to meet and discuss university affairs.

The campaign came after chief executive Leung Chun-yings controversial appointment of former education minister Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as the councils new chairman at the end of last year.

The appointment followed the councils decision in September to reject the promotion of pro-democracy law professor Johannes Chan Man-mun to a key managerial post. Many students, staff members and people from the society viewed these events as the result of political pressure.

A source close to the information said the council had put into the meeting agenda boycotting students demands that the council form a committee to review whether the chief executive should be the universitys chancellor by default, whether he should continue to hold the power to appoint council members and whether the number of members from inside the university should be increased to account for at least half of the council.

Priscilla Chan, 21, a law school student, said she had been concerned about the universitys academic freedom since the rejection of the law professors appointment. She said she would boycott some classes but would attend ones essential to her grades. Its really tragic that students are forced to use class boycott to express their demands, said Chan.

Toby Ng Wing-chun, 19 and studying education and social sciences, said he would boycott all classes until the next council meeting.Weve used many mild ways to express our demands such as rallies and referendums, but the system still has not been improved, said Ng.

But Lida Liao Jing-wen, 20, a science student, said although she supported students cause, she believed they should protest after classes, or else they would give others an excuse to criticise them.

Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun said he would do his best to assist students. But he said people should consider whether it was sustainable to express opinions via class boycott.

Organisers called for more staff members to join the boycott. They said they would not count how many students joined the campaign. There are almost 28,000 at the university in total.

During the rally, about 10 middle-aged pro-establishment supporters staged a brief anti-boycott rally, shouting at the students that they should be expelled. Some students shouted back, asking them to shut up and ridiculing them as being paid to protest.

(The Standard) January 21, 2016.

About 300 University of Hong Kong students yesterday began a seven-day class boycott to protest against the structure of the institution's governing council. Participants said it is the only way to express dissatisfaction with the controversial appointment of Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as university council chairman by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying. They also oppose the default appointment of the chief executive as chancellor.

The protesters, many wearing black, gathered at Haking Wong Podium at 1pm to listen to speeches from organizers. Hanging over the stage was a large white banner proclaiming "class strikes show our determination." Another slogan said "HKU-ers share the same destiny."

Former HKU student union head Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, one of the 15 members of the HKU Students' Strike Organizing Committee, read out the declaration of the class strike, denouncing Li as a "notorious scum in the education sector." She said Li is underqualified for the council role, due to what she described as his poor record. Leung accused Li of threatening former Institute of Education head Paul Morris in an attempt to force through a merger with the Chinese University, and also reducing funding to public universities when he was head of the Education Bureau.

The students called on the school to set up a panel to review the HKU Ordinance. They also want university members to fill at least half the seats in the council, with the chairman appointed by the council instead of the chief executive.

Some teaching staff rallied behind the students, including electrical and electronic engineering scholar and HKU Academic Staff Association chairman Cheung Sing-wai, Public Opinion Programme director Robert Chung Ting-yiu and Fu King-wa, an associate professor of Journalism and Media Studies Centre. Current student union chairman Billy Fung Jing- en called on more teachers to join the boycott to support the students. But Cheung feared teachers could be accused of a breach of contract and fired by the council under Li's authority. Fung acknowledged the strike did not disrupt classes, but he was not disappointed at the turnout. Adrian Lau Chun-yu, 20, an engineering sophomore, said about 80 to 90 percent of students attended yesterday's classes.

A pro-Beijing group, Treasure Group, staged its own 15-minute counter protest, which led to a verbal fight between the two sides. The pro-Beijing protesters said the students were being influenced by a foreign power and called on HKU vice chancellor Peter Mathieson to step down.

(SCMP) Class boycott? Just get on with studying. By Alex Lo. January 19, 2016.

Lets play a little game of moral equivalence. Suppose the council or the administration of the University of Hong Kong decides to overhaul or abolish the student union and other student-oriented groups. What would you call that? Given the political agitations that student activists have been involved in recently, many people would not hesitate to call it political interference.

Now, lets turn that around.

Some HKU students have occupied the council, possibly illegally; chased and shouted down council members; voted in a fake referendum against the councils decisions and personnel, and fought and are still fighting against the appointment of Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as the new council chairman. Some are staging a boycott of classes. Is that not interference in something they really have no business in?

Sure, I used to boycott classes too when I was an undergraduate, usually from partying too hard the night before. But I didnt try to convince others to join me.

Even if you think the students are committed to the cause of democracy and improved governance, they are still making a mistake what philosophers call a category mistake.

I am sorry to say but not every type of human organisation is or should be run on democratic principles. A private company is not a democracy, but essentially an autocracy. A university may teach about democracy, but it is not a democracy.

But what about academic freedom and autonomy, some ask? Exactly whose research or work duties are being interfered with? I can name one Professor Li.

Students essentially have a limited role to play in how a university is or should be run. Thats because, contrary to the belief of some Hong Kong people that a students job is to protest and fight for democracy, they are actually there to study.

I just read it costs more than a quarter of a million dollars to educate an undergraduate student for one year. Assuming he or she receives no scholarship or any form of student aid, they still only pay a fifth of that for their annual tuition. For those who want to protest or boycott instead of study, I suggest they cough up, pro rata, the taxpayers money they waste and give it to those who want to study.

(Wen Wei Po) January 21, 2016.

The Strike meeting was held at 1230pm at the Haking Wong Podium, Hong Kong University. Strike Committee member Edward Leung got on stage and urged the students to "hold firm." He also shouted for the teachers to stop teaching. Hong Kong University Academic Staff Association chairman Cheung Sing-wai got on stage to explain that the teachers only have the legal right to strike if there is a labor dispute. Therefore he will not call on teachers to strike. The meeting ended about in about 2 hours and the participating students scattered (not to attend class, of course). About 10 Strike Committee members stayed behind to write posters, hand out leaflets and clean up. The entire scene was cleared in less than 3 hours.

Strike Committee member Wong Chun-kit said that 300 persons participated in this Strike. When asked if the number is too small, Wong said that "it is understandable that the number of participants is small because there wasn't much time to publicize." As for calling the teachers to join, Wong asked the teachers to "realize" that they are victims/stakeholders as well and that they "have the duties themselves to resist." He asked them to "recognize the seriousness of the situation" and "think carefully about" joining the students.

According to a first-year student named Fu, the classrooms are still filled with students. She said that she has read the leaflets and heard the call, but thought that the strikers were "somewhat rash and also not optimistic about their own actions." She said that the effectiveness of a strike depends on the numbers. Only if large numbers join can the action succeed. Also the one week duration is too short: "The strike is over before many students even know what happened."

According to an education student named Chan who was on the way to the canteen, he did not agree with the goals and he is worried that the action will damage the reputation of the university. Therefore he won't participate.

According to Faculty of Arts student named Lee, she disliked Arthur Li but that a class strike will help. So she is not participating either.

According to citizen Ms. Fung, "it is good thing that students care about current affairs, but their first priority should be to study." She suggested that the students should find some other way of expressing their demands.

(SCMP) January 21, 2016.

About 100 students continued to support a class boycott at the University of Hong Kong on its second day, with many calling for an escalation of the campaign. They gathered in the universitys Pok Fu Lam campus to attend a forum discussing changing the governing councils composition, which has been criticised for inviting political interference in academic freedom.

Benny Lam Kin-ping, 19, an engineering student, said he would continue to boycott all his classes until the council responds to students demands. The boycott is just the first step to raise students awareness, said Lam. He added that students should consider escalating their campaign, staging other activities such as a hunger strike.

Winnie Chan Wing-yue, 20, studying government and law, said the boycott would exert more pressure on the council if more people joined. She also believed that there should be some kind of escalation later, such as storming council meetings to express students demands. We have come to a point where the violence of the system is more serious than the violence of students actions, said Chan, when asked whether an escalation of campaign would invite criticism from the public.

(EJ Insight) January 21, 2016.

Student militancy appears to be fading at the University of Hong Kong, the citys oldest and most respected tertiary education institution, even as the newly appointed chairman of the schools governing council has taken an aggressive role in running its affairs.

Media reports have it that HKU council chief Arthur Li met all faculty heads on Tuesday, the eve of a weeklong boycott of classes organized by some students to seek to end the tradition of automatically appointing the Hong Kong chief executive as chancellor of the government-backed school.

Lis meeting with the 10 faculty chiefs was an unusual arrangement, raising concern that the new council chairman is trying to apply pressure on the academic staff to toe the line when it comes to university policies and decision-making.

Even HKU law professor Johannes Chan, whose nomination to become the universitys pro vice chancellor was shot down by Li and other members of the council, noted that Lis management style indicated that he would play a very active role in running school affairs.

Previously, Chan observed, the new vice chancellor would only visit the faculty chiefs individually and introduce himself to set an atmosphere of mutual respect and productive cooperation between the governing council and the teaching staff.

But Lis move to call for a meeting of the faculty chief has raised concern that he is trying to bypass vice chancellor Peter Mathieson and impress upon everyone that he will participate actively in the universitys daily operations.

In fact, rumors have been flying around the campus that Li wants to take Mathieson to task for his performance in the past two years and the fact that he had travelled abroad more than 10 times during the period.

Li also reportedly told all the pro vice chancellors to submit a detailed report on their individual capacity.

These actions have convinced many on the campus that he wants his role to go beyond merely presiding over the councils regular meetings.

That could also be the reason why HKU students and academic staff responded cooly to the boycott call. Only around 300 students took part in a rally on Wednesday to kick off the campaign, which is expected to last until the governing council holds its next meeting on Jan. 26.

The students, in calling for a boycott of classes, believe that the government is undermining the autonomy of the university, and what could be a better evidence of that than the rejection of Chans nomination to the pro vice chancellor post and Lis appointment as council chairman?

One way to insulate the HKU from political interference is to end the automatic appointment of the chief executive as university chancellor.

While the demand appears quite reasonable, the boycott leaders are finding it hard to convince students and teachers to join the campaign.

Just a few months ago, HKU students and alumni demonstrated their solidarity to oppose the rejection of Chans appointment as pro vice chancellor.

But why is it that the boycott campaign has failed to gain momentum? Have they failed to recognize the validity of their demand, that the campaign is but an extension of their actions in support of Chan, which is the fight for academic freedom?

Or has activist fatigue finally come to the HKU? Do the students now feel that nothing will come out of their struggle, especially after Lis appointment, and it is better to return to the classroom and focus on their studies? 

There is no question that their demand remains valid. Academic freedom is a worthy cause. Only a reform of the structure of the universitys governing council will ensure the schools independence from political interference.

But students and faculty seem to have lost their will to pursue the struggle. Is it a question of timing or of tactics?

The students and faculty members should not forget that it was the class boycott campaign that gained the attention of the public to the need for genuine universal suffrage. It was the boycott of classes in late September of 2014 that paved the way for the Occupy Movement.

It may be unfair to compare the two boycott campaigns, considering that the 2014 action was organized by various student unions under the Hong Kong Federation of Students and its agenda related to the entire community and not just to the students.

It will also be recalled that several student unions, including the one from HKU, withdrew from the HKFS last year, and that could be one of the reasons for the lukewarm response of students to the boycott campaign. The HKU campaign lacks full support from students from other universities.

It can even be assumed that many HKU students now feel tired after they failed to stop Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying from appointing Li as the school council head. They may have lost hope that their action could still put pressure on authorities to uphold academic freedom.

Whats the use of struggle against people who are intent on exercising their authority and imposing their will on everyone?

Such an attitude could only offer an opportunity for Li to deepen his influence in the university.

Li, of course, will not tell the faculty members and the rest of the academic community to refrain from anti-establishment activities or pro-democracy campaigns. Instead, he is more likely to put pressure on them to improve the universitys academic performance both here and overseas.

Some education insiders believe that he will focus on student performance, international ranking and other metrics such as number of dissertations published to determine the standing of the university.

With that approach, the academic staff will hardly have any time to join political activities and will concentrate on passing the appraisal.

Li cannot to faulted for seeking to drive the universitys academic performance for that is his job as the schools manager.

However, such an approach will only foster the image of the university as an ivory tower, detached from the concerns of the community. It will only create an institution that is silent and apathetic to the problems of society.

Is that the university that CY Leung wants in order to create a harmonious society? Is that the kind of university we want for our children? Is it the best way to harness our future?

(Wen Wei Po) January 23, 2016.

On the third day of the student strike, more than 10 Strike Committee members went to erect a banner saying that Hong Kong University has degenerated to become "Hong Kong City's First People's University." Their original plan was to adhere the banner onto the wall. But it was raining and the banner could not be affixed to the wall. So they had to use ropes to hang the banner down from above. It took them three hours to do so, more than the two hours of the assembly on the first day. Worst yet, there was a misspelling.

On Facebook, Yvonne Leung admitted that the response has been tepid and she asked the critics to come up with "more actions." Wong Chun-kit engaged in a Facebook fight with other students and accused those who opposed the strike as wanting to be on the 'moral high ground.' Meanwhile other radical students said that the strike is just the first step and they look forward to more actions such as entering the council meeting room and causing chaos.

Video:

SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbgH-5QJ_UQ English-language interview with Yvonne Leung

Internet comments:

- The international press coverage (such as Agence France Presse) does not clearly list the students' demands. (Kinliu) (January 20, 2016) said that the Strike Committee has four demands: (1) establish a special team to examine CAP 1053 University of Hong Kong Ordinance; (2) eliminate the automatic appointment of the Chief Executive to university chancellor; (3) reduce the proportion of outsiders in the university council; (4) the seven university council members (including the chairman) appointed by the Chief Executive should be appointed by the Council instead.

All four demands pertain to CAP 1053.

Section 12 Officers and teachers, their appointment, powers, duties and emoluments

(2) The Chancellor shall be the chief officer of the University.
(3) The Chief Executive shall be the Chancellor.

...

Statute XVIII. The Council

The Council shall consist of-

(a) 7 persons, not being students or employees of the University, appointed by the Chancellor, one of whom shall be appointed the Chairman by the Chancellor;
(b) 6 persons, not being students or employees of the University, appointed by the Council;
(c) 2 persons, not being students or employees of the University, elected by the Court under sub-subparagraph (ba) of Statute XVII;
(d) the Vice-Chancellor;
(e) the Treasurer;
(f) 4 full-time teachers elected in accordance with regulations;
(g) 1 full-time employee of the University, not being a teacher, elected in accordance with regulations;
(h) 1 full-time undergraduate student elected in accordance with regulations; and
(i) 1 full-time postgraduate student elected in accordance with regulations.

At present, what the Chief Executive CY Leung is doing is in accordance with the CAP 1053. Leung has the authority and the duty to make the appointments to the university council.

- (Bastille Post)

Baptist University vice-chancellor Roland Chin Tai-hong was the provost at Hong Kong University previously and is therefore considered to be more sympathetic to the demands of the students. Earlier this month, Baptist University began a three-month-long consultation on matters that include the automatic appointment of the Chief Executive as chancellor, the proportion of outsiders on the board of trustees, etc.

However, the trustee committee disclosed in its published minutes that there were many concerns coming from the trustees and alumni about legal issues. Therefore, it would be cautious and responsible to seek legal advice first before holding the public consultation meeting. So everything has been postponed until they have their legal advice.

According to a person in the legal field, the university ordinance makes the chief executive the chancellor and the board of trustees is regulated by the statues in that ordinance. If they want to examine the ordinance, it should be brought up by the government and voted on by the Legislative Council. If the regulated party wants to have changes, then they are exceeding their powers which is easily overturned by a judicial review. So as soon as even one Baptist University trustee offers one opinion, the board would need to seek legal advice whether they are exceeding their powers. So when the students pressure the university and when even the vice-chancellor is sympathetic, the cause may not be viable.

- (Bastille Post)

It is possible that the Hong Kong University Council will not hold consultation on the system in which the Chief Executive automatically becomes the university chancellor on account of ultra vires (acting in excess of its authority) which would bee easily challenged by a judicial review.

Former Faculty of Law dean Johannes Chan said that it was possible to file a judicial review from a different angle. Chan said that the Basic Law guarantees academic of freedom, but the Chief Executive becoming the chancellor of all eight universities may violate academic freedom. So this is a constitutional issue which can be subjected to judicial review. Chan said that if anyone goes through with such a judicial review, he is willing to provide legal assistance.

A person in the legal field said that Johannes Chan's approach is based upon Basic Law Article 11:

Article 11
In accordance with Article 31 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China, the systems and policies practised in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, including the social and economic systems, the system for safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms of its residents, the executive, legislative and judicial systems, and the relevant policies, shall be based on the provisions of this Law.
 

No law enacted by the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall contravene this Law.

When the court examines the constitution, they look at whether the action of the government violates the original intention of the Basic Law. When the Basic Law was drafted with the intention of guaranteeing academic freedom, the Hong Kong Governor (who is equivalent to the Chief Executive today) was the automatic university chancellor. When the Basic Law was drafted, no conflict was perceived or else the university ordinance would have been amended already.

Examining the constitutionality of an ordinance is sensitive because it involves the interpretation of the Basic Law. Under Article 158 of the Basic Law,

The power of interpretation of this Law shall be vested in the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress shall authorize the courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to interpret on their own, in adjudicating cases, the provisions of this Law which are within the limits of the autonomy of the Region.

The courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may also interpret other provisions of this Law in adjudicating cases. However, if the courts of the Region, in adjudicating cases, need to interpret the provisions of this Law concerning affairs which are the responsibility of the Central People's Government, or concerning the relationship between the Central Authorities and the Region, and if such interpretation will affect the judgments on the cases, the courts of the Region shall, before making their final judgments which are not appealable, seek an interpretation of the relevant provisions from the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress through the Court of Final Appeal of the Region. When the Standing Committee makes an interpretation of the provisions concerned, the courts of the Region, in applying those provisions, shall follow the interpretation of the Standing Committee. However, judgments previously rendered shall not be affected.

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress shall consult its Committee for the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region before giving an interpretation of this Law.

If a Hong Kong court rules to challenge the authority of the Chief Executive, the National People's Congress Standing Committee may intervene with an interpretation of the Basic Law. Therefore Johannes Chan's recommendation may create a constitutional crisis.

- (Oriental Daily) January 21, 2016. On the second day of the HKU student strike, about 80 students and outsiders attended a forum held at the Haking Wong Podium at noon. HKU Student Union vice-president Arika Ho said that the university ordinance can only be revised by the Legislative Council voting for a proposal offered by either the government or an individual legislator. The former won't happen and the latter has a near zero chance of success under the present political climate. Therefore, it will be hard to revise the university ordinance.

According to Baptist University Student Union's Cheung Kwun-yeung, many foreign universities have adopted the notion that the teachers should govern the university. For example, the Taiwan university councils are filled by insiders including 17 student representatives, and European countries such as Lithuania and Poland have half their councils being professors.

Well, this is the same argument as saying 32 countries in the world have civil nomination for their national leaders and so we must follow this international standard. Conveniently, you forgot to note that there are more than 190 countries in the world so the majority of them don't have civil nomination (including the major countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, etc). So when Taiwan, Lithuania and Poland are offered as examples, it means that the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, etc don't work this way.

P.S. Does Hong Kong aspire to be like Lithuania and Poland?

- (NOW TV) Robert Chung (Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme): "If the students are unable to attend class for various reasons ... or if the students can't attend class due to noble reasons ... I will make special arrangements ..."

- If you tape your lecture and let the striking students see the recording or if you repeat the same lecture in an extra session one week later after the strike, then there was no sacrifice on the part of the striking students -- the whole exercise was merely to produce the illusion of sacrifice.

- If you do not penalize the striking students for non-attendance, then you are being unfair to those students who showed up for class. You are rewarding truancy.

- Why is Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-en calling for more teachers to join the strike? It is a matter of efficiency. At most three hundred striking students were gathered outside the Wong Haking Podium. Spread across the entire university it means that one or two students went missing per class. That is not impressive and that is why the Strike Committee is adamant on not counting heads. But if a teacher refuses to teach, then the entire class is canceled and all the students in the that class are automatically considered to be on strike! If the average class has 100 students, then all it takes is for 3 striking teachers to have 300 striking students!
- When a teacher goes on strike, the onus is on the teachers and not on the students anymore. Of course, the students want the teachers to bear the responsibility!

- Hong Kong University vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson said that they will not penalize any students for taking part in a strike, but the students will bear responsibility for their actions. What does that mean? It means that if a student does not turn up for class, there is no direct penalty. This is the same for any student who slept in late after a wild party the night before or went to a movie instead.  However, the student will have to accept the consequences of not attending class. If the teachers go on strike, then all students won't attend class with the onus being on the teachers. That is why the students want the teachers to go on strike.

- The Strike Committee's assembly lasted for 2 hours starting at 1230pm. Subtracting one hour for lunch, this means that the striking students gave up one hour of their time.
- Where did the striking students go afterwards? I mean, between 230pm and the party tonight.

- (Wen Wei Po) January 21, 2016.

Our reporter cruised around various classrooms and buildings in Hong Kong University to see how the strike is going. Apart from the noon assembly at the Haking Wong Podium, there were also students shouting slogans and handing out leaflets at the MTR exits. Most of the students took the leaflets and then continued to walk straight through. Most of those who passed by the assembly area headed directly for the canteen.

After the assembly, our reporter went to the Chong Yuet Ming Amenities Centre to observe class attendance behavior. There was one group of students taking the stairs down after class and another group of students going up the escalator to class. It was very congested. Our reporter followed the students and entered a physics class. It was 5 minutes before class started, and there were more than 100 students seated already with their notebooks out.

- (Kinliu) January 20, 2016.

We visited the Hong Kong University campus two days in a row. We do not see the students actively discussing the strike. Most of those we spoke to, whether they said that they supported or opposed the strike, did not know what the purpose of the strike was. A student who intended to strike said: "University students frequently cut class anyway; at most, I go and study myself." When asked about the four demands, the student said "I know the details" but he also said that he "couldn't describe the contents."

Another students who said that she supported the strike but couldn't decide whether to strike herself thought that the Strike Committee's four demands includes the immediately resignation of Arthur Li Kwok-cheung. She was looking for friends to strike with her. "If nobody else strikes, I am not doing to do it by myself." She was also pessimistic about the effectiveness of the strike, "No matter how enthusiastic we are, we can defeat the established powers."

A student from Shenzhen said that the demands of the Strike Committee has nothing to do with himself. "The appointments of the university administration does not affect the students. If they think that the strike is worth it, they can do it. But I will be attending class as usual."

A foreign student said that he has not heard about the strike. He criticized the Student Union of only distributing out Chinese-language publicity material in both simplified and traditional characters while ignoring those foreign students who don't read Chinese. He felt excluded.

A Faculty of Arts professor said that he has never received a formal notice from the Strike Committee or the Students' Union and he only found out through media reports. This professor thinks that the strike will have no effect because the four demands are petty.

According to information, the next two weeks will be an add/drop period for students to choose majors. For example, if the normal course load is five courses, a student may start by taking attending seven courses. During the add/drop period, the student can decide whether to drop a course because of the teacher, the contents, or whatever other reasons without penalty, as well as add other course if all else fails. After this add/drop period, a student will be penalized for failing a course if they drop out. So if you don't attend class these two weeks, you may regret it afterwards as you may end up with being in a course that you can't handle. The Strike Committee has therefore picked a very bad time to call for a strike.

- (Ming Pao) January 21, 2016.

Academic staff member Fu King-wah said that he has to teach this afternoon because he has the duty to teach as a teacher. But he said that he sent an email to his students to say that he supports and respects the student strikers and he will record the class this afternoon so that absentee students can watch the video. The striking students can also contact him to discuss what they have missed.

Academic Staff Association chairman Cheung Sing-wai said that he has sent emails to his colleagues to tell them to provide whatever help necessary, including arranging make-up classes for students in need.

- What are these staff members so fearful? Because failure to teach the class may be a cause for dismissal if the university council headed by Arthur Li so insists (all in accordance with the university statutes, of course).

- (Ming Pao) January 21, 2016.

Strike Committee member and former Student Union president Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok said that the new university council chairman Arthur Li Kwok-cheung is a "聲名狼籍的教育界敗類" (=a scum with a bad reputation in the education field."

Here is Wikiepedia on the bad reputation of Arthur Li.

Meanwhile Yvonne Leung has a grand reputation herself.

Her most famous saying is the Return Home Card.

Her second most famous saying is this: (Speakout HK @YouTube)

0:19 Yvonne Leung: There will be various kinds of publicity, such as hanging out black gauze on campus, writing big characters on the ground in public spaces, and other actions.

[Wait ! But will you be telling people to do this while you sneak away to attend class yourself? You have a prior record for doing this!]

0:36 Yvonne Leung: The police are arresting Occupy people in Admiralty. I did not stay until the last moment, because I have a final examination the next day.

[The world will remember this forever!]

0:51 Yvonne Leung: The action certainly requires the willingness to bear the legal consequences. I took part in civil disobedience, and then I will turn myself in.

[You said that you will turn yourself in, but you never did. Your reputation is bankrupt! Do you expect the students to still trust you?]

- (HKG Pao) A Faculty of Education assistant professor Wu Siuwai said that this strike clearly intends to use the Occupy Central model to occupy Hong Kong University and render it ungovernable.

This is not true. The Occupy Central model says to occupy the commercial centre of the city in order to make life miserable for businesses and citizens who will then pressure the government to make concessions. If the students were to occupy the HKU campus, they will be making life miserable for themselves and other university denizens, but the outside businesses and citizens won't care.

- This is the best explanation of what they want.

(HK 01) Interview with Ricky Wong. January 17, 2016.

After more than 70 days (of Occupy Central), did Hong Kong change? I can't see any change.

When everybody is satisfied with the decent social conditions, how can anyone make any sacrifices? At present, the economic conditions are basically good. Most people are satisfied with the status quo. Who is going to sacrifice along with you? Don't be silly!

You ask what changes will take place in 2016? Any change, especially changes in society, will not take place during an economic boom. Throughout human history, dynastic changes only occur in economically bad times. People are greedy animals who are content with the status quo. If you want any changes to take place in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong economy must first collapse. If the Hong Kong economy continues to prosper like the past two or three decades, Hong Kong will remain a goldfish tank with more and better red worms to feed the goldfish, in which case the goldfish won't think about jumping out of the tank.

If the striking students want to get their way, they will have to make life as miserable as possible for everybody else. That's the key, that's the essence, that's the mission.

- "Four-eyed Brother" Cheng Kam-mun's Facebook

I rarely give advice on the Internet; I only want to take action, but I really can't find a way of wedging in.

If only the Hong Kong University students are sitting down to strike, other citizens cannot join in. There is no quick and decisive action and no supporting army. Therefore the action will stall and dissipate soon.

Moderately, the Hong Kong Federation of Students is calling: "Do not let Hong Kong University be an isolated island." The other universities should form strike committees to offer support and produce a chain reaction/domino effect. The Lingnan University trustee problem, the Polytechnic University dormitory problem ... every university must have its own problems. Or it can simply be the automatic appointment of the Chief Executive as Chancellor of every university. That should be enough reason for action, right?

Radically, this may be considered a university revolution and not just a student movement in order to begin a new round of resistance.

The following actions can let other citizens join in to offer support:

- Occupy certain important buildings (Benny Tai can think up Occupy Central, so there is no reason why he can't pull off occupying a campus building?)
- Erect road blocks to stop all vehicular traffic (Petula Ho Sik-ying could do that by sitting down on the road herself).
- Gradually lock down the campus (beginning with ousting the local commies).

- The local commie aunties and uncles of the Treasure Group

Disband the rotten Student Union!
Restore the reputation of Hong Kong University!
We demand the dismissal of the vice-chancellor!
Restore Hong Kong University back on the track to educate!
(SocREC videos): Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3

- There are signs that it is a foregone conclusion that the strike will fail. What signs? When Johannes Chan was up for appointment as pro vice chancellor, which politicians came out? Ip Kin-yuen, Audrey Eu, Alan Leong, Kenneth Kwok, Tanya Chan, Albert Ho, Emily Lau, Sin Chung Kai, Lee Cheuk-yan, etc. Which groups came out? The Civic Party, the Democratic Party, the Professional Teachers Union, the Hong Kong University Alumni Concern Group, etc. Where are they this time? Nowhere.
- Chances are these politicians and political groups tried to jump in, but the young turks told these old farts to bugger off because this is now their time.

- Day 1, 300, according to the Strike Committee's arithmetic

- Day 2, 150 according to Wong Chun-kit, a member of the Strike Committee and the former deputy editor-in-chief of Undergrad. [Who do you trust? The Strike Committee or your own lying eyes?]

- Numbers game

The Hong Kong University strike: There are about 28,000 students enrolled in various degree programs, of which fewer than 300 showed up for the Strike meeting at noon. This is 1%. Next to the Haking Wong Podium is a canteen with a seating capacity of 300. Most of those diners could have eaten quickly and come out to show their support for the strike at zero cost. But they don't.
Another interesting topic is singer Denise Ho deciding to withdraw her capital investments from her Taobao shop Hall1C in the same manner that Li Ka-shing withdrew his capital investments from mainland China. People pointed out that Hall1C has only two transactions for the month at a value of 1,000 RMB. So it is a news story that this could be a news story.

- (EJ Insight) About 300 students joined a rally at the University of Hong Kong campus on Wednesday to mark the first day of a weeklong boycott of classes in protest of the appointment of former education minister Arthur Li Kwok-cheung as chairman of the schools governing council. Boycott committee member Wong Chun-kit admitted the turnout was not satisfactory, noting that students have just started their new semester and there wasnt enough time to promote the boycott campaign, Ming Pao Daily reported on Thursday. Wong said the committee will continue efforts to solicit more support and participation from HKU students.

[More students to participate with more publicity? Day 1: 300. Day 2: 80. Day 3:?]

As to what other actions they will take, Wong said everything depends on the response of the HKU Council.

[It is a foregone conclusion will state that there are legal barriers which need to be studied, and the studying will go on for years. So what can the students do?]

- On Day 1, 300 were at the forum. On Day 2, 80 were at the forum. Where did the 220 go? They were busy because they have to attend class. Hehehe.
- Billy Fung Jing-en was one of the speakers at the Day 2 forum. He was a no-show, so that vice-president Arika Ho had to take his place. Fung was known to have been a no-show on radio, but now he is a no-show on his own show.

- Suggestion: For the purpose of increasing attendance at the rallies, you can set up hot pots with braised lamb or hot and spicy chicken. Given that the weather forecast is for cold weather over the weekend, the plaza will be overflowing with diners.

- And it doesn't help that when you write a big character on the ground, you managed to misspell the word. In so doing, you have turned the public discussion from condemning/deploring CY Leung to the poor quality of so-called university students of this generation.

- Strike Committee member Yvonne Leung said: "Many fellow students might well say, Arthur Li was just appointed and he hasn't done anything that harms Hong Kong University ... We completely disagree with this view. If he hadn't really hadn't done anything before, then why were there more than 4,000 votes against Arthur Li taking any public job position?"

Thus, a student in Law and Politics is completely unable to enumerate anything that Arthur Li has done to harm Hong Kong University; instead she appeals to the fact that a number of students (like herself) objected to Li. This is the one billion flies argument: One billion flies are eating shit, so we should also eat shit.

- The students want to have a greater say in university affairs. So their ideal university council would have at least half of the members being school insiders (students, teachers and staff). Actually, what does a university do? We can look at the current officers of the university and their responsibilities.

Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Paul K H Tam: Professor Tam assists and deputizes the President/Vice-Chancellor in the management of the University, especially in the areas relating to strategic planning, academic development, allocation of resources, human resource planning, and other strategic initiatives.

Executive Vice-President (Administration and Finance) Steven J Cannon: Dr. Cannon assists the President/Vice-Chancellor in leading and coordinating the Universitys support services and administrative operations to enhance the Universitys capability to scale even higher in the ever-changing and increasingly competitive local and international environments.

Vice-President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning) Ian Holliday: Professor Holliday assists the President/Vice-Chancellor in setting the direction and policy for the Universitys curriculum, teaching and learning, and quality assurance of undergraduate and postgraduate curricula.

Vice-President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) T. S. Andy Hor: Professor Hor assists the President/Vice-Chancellor in setting the direction and policy for research at the University, in developing the Universitys research and postgraduate education profile and agenda, and in coordinating knowledge transfer.

Vice-President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Global) W. John Kao: Professor Kao assists the President/Vice-Chancellor in leading and strengthening the Universitys global networks of collaboration, building key relationships with relevant stakeholders in Mainland China and overseas, maximizing opportunities across teaching and learning, research, knowledge exchanges and technology transfer, and deepening the Universitys presence and engagement worldwide.

Vice-President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Institutional Advancement) Douglas So: Mr. So assists the President/Vice-Chancellor in leading and strengthening institutional advancement initiatives and Universitys linkages with key stakeholders including alumni, donors and the community.

How much do students understand what these people are responsible for doing?

(Hong Kong University) Honorary Graduates: Lam Shan Muk

Dr Shan Muk Lam (more commonly known by his pen names, Lam Hang Chi and Shih Wei De) was born in 1940 and raised on the Mainland. After coming to Hong Kong, he joined the Ming Pao Daily in the early 1960s. After studying Economics at the Cambridgeshire College of Arts and Technology, he returned to Hong Kong in 1969 and joined the Ming Pao Evening News, leading its financial section.

Dr Lam founded the Hong Kong Economic Journal in 1973 and the Hong Kong Economic Journal Monthly in 1977. For 25 years, he wrote a daily column, 'Politics and Economics Review', in which he analysed Hong Kong and international affairs. Dr Lam's articles are widely acclaimed for being objective, insightful and well-argued. Since 1997, 'Lam Hang Chi's Column' has seen him writing about an even wider range of subjects, including economic theories that interest him, and which he hopes the reading public will find educational and interesting too. His writing has been anthologized into over 100 books in Taiwan, Hong Kong and the Mainland. Dr Lam was awarded an OBE in 1991 and an honorary degree from Lingnan University in 1999.

In recognition of his contributions to the journalism sector in Hong Kong, HKU will confer upon him the degree of Doctor of Social Sciences honoris causa.

Citation

His daily columns, written over a period of more than 35 years, are a model of scrupulous principles, reasoned arguments and enjoyable literary prose ... Mr Lam's editorials have been widely acclaimed for being objective, insightful and well-argued.

And here is the latest Hong Kong Economic Journal by Mr Lam translated into English at EJ Insight (via Google cache):


Taiwan's President-elect Tsai Ing-wen (left) once translated a book on Niccol Machiavelli, and is therefore quite familiar with his doctrines. Will she apply them in her administration? Photos: Wikipedia, Internet

How Tsai Ing-wen may draw inspiration from Machiavelli. BY Lam Hang-chi. January 20, 2016.

Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has been elected leader of the only Chinese democracy.

In a cover story last year, Time magazine noted that her election victory would make Beijing nervous. Another piece carried by The Economist warned the Taiwan Strait truce is coming to an end. Notions like these may be slightly far-fetched.

Though disavowing the 1992 consensus (one China, two interpretations), Tsai, under the prevailing climate, is not likely to annoy Beijing with moves toward Taiwans independence, either in words or in deed, as that would run counter to Washingtons interests in the region.

Beijing has no reason to be bothered too much as Tsai wont challenge this bottom line.

As for the Kuomintangs rout, the party made its own bed and now it has to sleep on it.

The Taiwan Capitalization Weighted Stock Index has retreated from 8,600 in March 2008, when Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was elected president, to around 7,800 last weekend, a dire gauge of how Mas economic policies went wrong.

The masses are not benefiting from closer trade ties with China, though big cats investing in the mainland have all struck gold.

Neither does the electorate endorse the KMTs mainland strategy, which centered around the 1992 consensus.

A National Chengchi University poll last year found that as little as 7 percent of the respondents regarded themselves as Chinese while 59 percent preferred to be viewed as Taiwanese only. But 24 years ago, 18 percent chose the Taiwanese identity when the one China consensus was reached with the mainland side.

People have since ditched their national identity as nativism takes hold in society.

Long before she took to the political stage, Tsai went to the National Taiwan University and Cornell University with a Ph.D. in law from the London School of Economics and Political Science. She had taught at several universities on the island and enjoyed genuine academic acclaim.

She also coedited a large encyclopedia on science and philosophy and translated a book on Niccol Machiavelli by the famed political scholar Quentin Skinner.

Machiavelli, an Italian Renaissance historian, politician and diplomat, was best known for his political treatise The Prince. He served in several top posts of the Republic of Florence and the essence of his statesmanship is military buildup.

In the book, he posited that the end justifies the means, it is necessary for powerful men to deceive and manipulate to serve a political purpose. His doctrine later came to be known as Machiavellianism.

Tsai must be familiar with Machiavelli, and obviously she is not just gifted academically, given the fact that she has reached the top of Taiwans political ladder merely 12 years after she joined the Democratic Progressive Party, having surmounted all the infighting and tamed opposing factions along the way.

In his works Machiavelli also argued that refusing dialogues with states or forces stronger than you is reckless and irrational. I reckon that Tsai always bears this in her mind and if so, channels for talks with Beijing can be maintained after she takes office.

Even if her DPP has manifested its pro-independence stance right from the outset, Tsai will return to the negotiation table to prevent any indiscretions from escalating into hostilities.

Tsai visited the United States last summer and one item at the top of her agenda was to seek Washingtons aid for the islands own arms industry.

The backdrop was the constraint in the Taiwan Relations Act, which limits sales of arms to defensive equipment only, but what the island needs are advanced warships and submarines.

The Taiwan navy currently has two antique Guppy class submarines used by the US during World War II and another pair of decommissioned, Netherlands-made Zwaardvis-class submarines bought from New Zealand.

Machiavellis claim of military guarantee for freedom and prosperity can be the base of Tsais push for Taiwans arms industry, and, the likeliness of a helping hand from Washington cannot be ruled out amid Beijings saber-rattling.

Machiavellianism also affirms integrity and probity for the interests of the country, and for sure Tsai will endeavor to project a clean image, particularly after the DPP was plagued with corruption and nepotism scandals when it ruled Taiwan during Chen Shui-bians (陳水扁) presidency.

The DPP stands a high chance to continue with its ruling status beyond Tsai, if the government is clean and proactive and the islands security is better assured.

This article appeared in the Hong Kong Economic Journal on Jan. 19.

Translation by Frank Chen

(Bastille Post) The Commentator's Nightmare. January 20, 2016.

Yesterday Hong Kong Economic Journal founder Lam Hang-chi wrote a commentary in which he heaped praises upon the academic background of president-elect Tsai Ing-wen and then he went on to say that this means that the Democratic Progressive Party should be able to hold on to power for a long time to come. Thus he wrote:

Long before she took to the political stage, Tsai went to the National Taiwan University and Cornell University with a Ph.D. in law from the London School of Economics and Political Science. She had taught at several universities on the island and enjoyed genuine academic acclaim.

She also coedited a large encyclopedia on science and philosophy and translated a book on Niccol Machiavelli by the famed political scholar Quentin Skinner.

However, this Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is not that Tsai Ying-wen (蔡英文) who translated the book. The latter is a (male) Research Fellow in Political Science at the Academia Sinica.

Nowadays, everybody scrounges for information on the Internet. If you are sloppy, you could easily trip up. This is surely the commentator's nightmare.

P.S. Although Hong Kong Economic Journal/EJ Insight purged this article, Google cache remembers.

(Facebook) City Forum.

Hong Kong Priority's Cheung Hon-yin: I want to ask Love Hong Kong Power or Mr. Lew Mon-hung a question. I say that I am a Hongkonger and not Chinese. What business is this to you? Even if want to forget my ancestry, I am merely forgetting my own ancestry. Those are my ancestors. What business is this to you?

(Oriental Daily) January 19, 2016.

Baptist University Department of Social Work lecturer Shiu Ka-chun said that one should be able to decide one's identity. To decide the choice of others would be a literary inquisition of people ranging from entertainers to politicians. He said that Internet users are reacting strongly here due to their fear of Communism which covers everything and anything related to the Chinese people, Chinese products and Chinese policies.


Nicholas Tse Facebook: Nicholas Tse: We should not be separating China and Hong Kong. We are one family.

(Oriental Daily) January 19, 2016.

Several years ago, Nicholas Tse was interviewed on mainland China and he said, "We should not be separating China and Hong Kong. We are one family." Today a fan posted the relevant speech onto Facebook. Within 5 hours, there were 2,000 comments, most of which were obscene-language curses accusing Tse of "capitulating to the Communists in order to make money", "mainland canine", etc. There were also people using simplified Chinese characters those critical of Tse as "Yellow Ribbons" and "denying that they are Chinese."

How are we one family? Those animals are worse than the dog in my home. My dog wouldn't urinate or defecate everywhere on the street. Your mother, Nicholas Tse! Hongkongers do not jump queues. Bastard! Hongkongers don't cross the border illegally. Your father! Hongkongers don't steal milk powder and hospital bed space. Bastard. Hong Kong children are not Double No's (neither parents are Hongkongers). If you fucking like that as a family, your mother! you ought to go back to China and play games with those beasts. You suck up to those dickfaces! I used to like your songs! But at this moment, I am going to tell you to eat shit! Bastard! Also, we carry Hong Kong ID's, not Home Visit Permits! Dickface!

Those who say that they are not Chinese, do you have proof? Did your daddy fuck a dog to give birth to you? Or did your mom let a dog fuck her to give birth to you? If neither, then where do you get the courage to issue a denial? If both happened, then you are a rare gem. Sorry, you are not human. We can't communicate!

Secondly, whether it is China, the United States or Japan, we are all earthlings ... Thirdly, whether Earth, Moon, Mars ... we are all beings in the universe.

Wow! The obscene language is terrible. If you are Chinese, you should go back to Weibo. Why use Facebook?

Actually, are you done with being stupid? What business is it to you for him to say that he is Chinese? When you say that you are British, whoever stopped you? Incoherent! Does all of Hong Kong have to obey you? You are entitled to say whatever you want, but nobody else can? This is fucking intolerable! Do people have to get your approval before they can say that they are Chinese? Is this fucking democracy?

Hong Kong independence and Taiwan independence use the same logic. This is really asinine. The Taiwanese independence folks hurry to get their President Tsai to declare independence. The Hong Kong independence people continue to Occupy Central or else beg your British daddies to talk you. Cursing Nicholas Tse isn't going to help you build a nation.

The newly crowned best television actress Nancy Wu Ting-yan ran the Standard Chartered Marathon's 10K race in a personal best time of 1:08:51. She posted her result on Instagram to share with her fans. But Internet users saw that she had chosen her "country" as China instead of Hong Kong SAR. As a result, she was pilloried.

In sensitive times like these, Wu immediately deleted the photo. But it was too late, as Internet users have made backups already. They began to ask: "Why choose China when you could choose Hong Kong SAR?" "You won't even admit that you are a Hongkonger?"

Internet comments:

- The column in the race results has the heading of COUNTRY. Applicants have to fill their NATIONALITY from an alphabetical list of countries. Many of the Hong Kong applicants started from the top, reached CHINA and checked it. Others looked further down until they reached Hong Kong SAR.
- This must be a drop-down list. If they allowed people to write freely, there will be loads of spelling discrepancies (for example, Italy, Italian Republic, Italia, Repubblica Italiana, Gli Assurri, etc).
- Here is the online application form. Yes, they used NATIONALITY and used Hong Kong SAR as an example.

- If there is confusion, then it is due to the race organizers providing a category called COUNTRY and listing China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan.

(About.com) What defines an independent country?

There are currently 196 independent countries around the world. This list includes Taiwan. Examples of entities that are not countries include: Hong Kong, Bermuda, Greenland, Puerto Rico and the constituent parts of the United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland).

The United Nations has 193 members. Taiwan is not one of those. The United States recognizes 195 independent countries. Taiwan is not one of those.

- On the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport, most Hongkongers will be classified as CHINESE nationality.
- I have watched innumerable of Hong Kong police dramas on television. The police always say that the perpetrator is
一個中國籍男子 (a male of Chinese nationality) and never ever 一個香港籍男子 (a male of Hong Kong nationality). Why don't the localists lodge a complaint with the Office of the Communications Authority for inaccuracy?

- Nancy Wu has deleted the Instagram photo. She knew that she was gravely wrong and she tried to destroy the evidence.

- By posting this so-called news story, our forum master has managed to achieve his goal of accumulating more than 1,000 scornful comments. Not many of our users have achieved this landmark before.

Internet comments:

- (Speakout HK@YouTube) On one hand, when Show Lo said "We're all Chinese", tens of thousands of Taiwan and Hong Kong fans unfollowed his Facebook and bullied him on the Internet. On the other hand, when Huang An denounced Chou Tzuyu as pro-Taiwan independence because she waved a Republic of China flag, these Internet users went after Huang An. So why do these Internet users go after Show Lo but defend Chou Tzuyu? Isn't this extremely undemocratic? Does a person have the right to choose and state his own identity? Or could it be that a person is only allowed to declare that they are Hongkongers or Taiwanese, or even American, Australian, British or German ... everything is possible except declaring that one is Chinese! Nancy Wu was pilloried by Internet users because she wrote down her country as China. Nicholas Tse was pilloried by Internet users because he said that all the Chinese are one family. What kind of world are we living in now?


Internet persecution
Chou Tzuyu for a Republic of China national flag
Show Lo for saying "We are Chinese"
Nancy Wu for being listed with China as Country in the marathon result sheet
Is it an original sin to claim an identity?

- Freedom of speech means that you are entitled to say what you want. So you are free to say "I am Chinese" or "I am Hongkonger, not Chinese" or "I am Taiwanese, not Chinese" and so on. In like manner, Internet keyboard warriors are also free to criticize what you say. Thus, we are free to flood your comment section, and we also flood the comment sections of your family, your friends, your company and your business associates. And freedom of speech also covers the use of vulgarities and obscenities. And we are also free to call on people to boycott your business so that you cannot make your livelihood. This is freedom of speech. This is democracy. We love it until the day when the same is visited upon ourselves.

- (China Times) January 20, 2016.

Two years ago, Johannes Liou emerged from the Sunflower Movement and became crowned the Sunflower Queen. She then became embroiled in a series of scandals. Last October, Liou was denounced by the American Institute in Taiwan for involvement in a human trafficking ring. Last November, she decided that she was going into the mainland entertainment business and become the host for a gourmet program. Now she has posted a Chinese flag with the comment "One China" on her Weibo. So far, she hasn't explained the implications.

Could she be setting up the next post for a "One Taiwan" message? Unlike entertainers such as NoNo who have to worry about the Taiwan market, Liou is going for the mainland market all the way. So she cannot afford to alienate the mainland market. So this is an inoculation shot to declare her position before Huang An gets on her case.

Appendix: (news.163.com) Johanne Liou denies through Facebook that this is her Weibo account. Actually, when she declared her intention, mainland Internet users objected and her agency quickly stopped the collaboration. Liou's mainland career is over unless she comes out and says that there is only One China.

- The Nicholas Tse saying is old, but someone revived it to irk the Yellow Ribbons. Actually, there are plenty more entertainers who can be trotted out as well:

Andy Lau singing "Chinese persons" in 2009: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR6vkU83sM0

Feng Fei-fei singing "I am a Chinese person" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t-3MtIo9eA

Lisa Wang singing "A Brave Chinese Person" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dI_RkZsZK4

Taiwan artists Jacky Wu, Jay Chou and S.H.E. call themselves Chinese https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUJ96HHM4cA

Bruce Lee https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnIXxvyXlQw
Q: Do you feel that you are Chinese or American?
A: Do you know what I want to think about myself? As a human being. I don't want to sound like saying "As Confucius says ..." Under the sky, under the family, there is but one family. It just so happens that, man, people are different.

- (HK01) Miriam Yeung recently posted to Facebook about the Asian Excellent Woman Grand Prize using simplified Chinese characters. Her Facebook was besieged by Hong Kong fans and that post was quickly deleted. Yeung explained that the Facebook account was run by the company, and her assistant April made that post. Yeung said that she herself is not very good at using simplified characters, and therefore she uses traditional characters herself. She said that adults can't change their characters easily. She apologized and wrote: "In the future, I will personally deal with these online accounts."

(Hong Kong Economic Times) February 6, 2006. At Taipei, Madonna's warmup act Mary Mac showed up 30 minutes late. Just as the crowd warmed up, Mary Mac said: "I love China, I love Taiwan." The crowd was surprised and became silent. Out of concern that Mary Mac's "I love China" might offend the Taiwan fans, Madonna mentioned "Taipei" and "Taiwan" many times during the main act. Afterwards Mary Mac wrote on her Facebook: "To the people of Taipei my apologies. I was distracted by the amazing energy tonight that I mistakingly insulted you all. Pls forgive me. All the best to you all. Xo."

- (Yidianzixun) In 2010, Norway exported 11,000 tons of salmon to China, which is 92% of their total export. During the same period, their export to the United Kingdom was 510 tons. So there was a huge gap. In October 2010, the Norwegian Nobel Committee decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize to the imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. By 2013, the share of salmon exports to China had dropped to 29%. Very quickly, the Norway government lowered its stance and by the first half of 2014, Norway had exported 5,500 tons. Is this going to be a happy ending? Of course, not.

Yesterday SETV (Taiwan) published a news report titled "Norway recognizes Taiwan as a nation." The story was about how one Taiwanese student applied for a visa and asked for his country to be changed from China to Taiwan. This story was accompanied by a screen capture of the reply from the Norwegian Immigration Department with the sentence "Norway recognize Taiwan as a nation" bolded in red. This news story quickly drew the attention of Internet users on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Many mainland Internet users left comments on the official Norwegian embassy weibo telling them that they have been used.

At 23:59 at night, the Norwegian embassy in China replied: "We solemnly repeat: The Kingdom of Norway established formal diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China on October 5, 1954 and was one of the earliest western nations to do so. The Norwegian government has adhered firmly to a One China policy over time. This position will not change."

The post was shared 14,668 times with 12,908 comments. There were also 62,432 LIKE's.

Even more interestingly, the Norwegian consulate in Guangzhou forwarded a post by the Norwegian Fishery Department on expert advice about how to eat salmon, with the brief comment: "We understand you. Don't worry." So the pro-Taiwan independence media want to provoke mainland Internet users and disrupt international trades, forcing the targeted nations to come out to clarify their pro-China stance.

Even neighboring Sweden came out with a Weibo statement from the Swedish embassy in China without even being pressed: "On May 9, 1950, Sweden became the first western nation to establish relations with the People's Republic of China. Sweden supports the One China policy. This means that we do not recognize Taiwan as an independent, sovereign nation, and Sweden does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

- Petitions: UK Government and Parliament

Due to the One China policy the United Kingdom doesn't recognise the Government of the Republic of China and all diplomatic relations between the two countries take place on an unofficial basis.

It's time to change this. Taiwan is an independant country. Taiwan maintains the Taipei Representative Office in the U.K. in London with a branch office in Edinburgh while the United Kingdom maintains the British Office Taipei in Taipei. This is ridiculous and must change.

Taiwan is a country, but China states that Taiwan is just another part of China. The consequence is that the USA, UK and most countries in the world don't want to upset China, therefore do not recognise Taiwan as a country.

Government responded:

The long standing position of Her Majestys Government is that we do not recognise Taiwan as a state. The 1972 Joint Communiqu between the United Kingdom and China set out that: The UK acknowledges the Chinese position that Taiwan is a province of the Peoples Republic of China and recognises the Peoples Republic of China as the sole legal government of China.

The United Kingdom believes that the Taiwan issue should be resolved through dialogue, in line with the views of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Recent years have seen a substantial increase in transport, tourism and trade links across the Strait, which have contributed to peace and stability. We hope that this trend will continue ...

- The Cheung Chau Rural Affairs Committee has issued an open challenge by writing the Lunar New Year message in simplified Chinese characters. This was noticed by the Progressive University of Science and Technology group.

Unfortunately there isn't much that can be done to them. Overwhelm their Facebook? They don't have one. Boycott? They wish you wouldn't come and crowd their place. Block access to Cheung Chau? There are 25,000 Cheung Chau residents versus 10 of you.

- The Non-Chinese People. By Chris Wat Wing-yin.

After the Causeway Bay Bookstore affair, some people say that they want to give up Chinese nationality; after Chou Tzuyu apologized, once again there is the argument of Hongkonger versus Chiense.

If I am a foreigner, I would find this perplexing. What is wrong with Hongkongers? Why do they say that they don't want Chinese nationality and that they are not Chinese.

This is something that can be settled by looking in a mirror, but instead people spend a lot of time and effort to argue about it. This is anti-intellectual and unintellectual.

The latest issue of the Baptist University bulletin has an article titled <Hongkongers: Get ready for the revolution, autonomy is the way out>. It is stated very clearly that they want a revolution. The student editorial committee chief editor Tsang Kin-fung said that he is a Hongkonger and not a Chinese person. He said that in order not to betray his Hong Kong identity, he refuses to participate in the Beijing exchange meeting organized by his department at the risk of not being able to graduate.

But this non-Chinese person speaks Cantonese every day, he writes Chiense, he studies in the Chinese Studies Department, and his ties with China are impossible to disentangle.

There are many such weird people in Hong Kong. They were born looking like Chinese, they live on Chinese soil, they speak and write Chinese, they eat Chinese food, they follow Chinese tradition, they observe Chinese festivals and they hold the passport issued by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China with which to travel visa-free to 152 countries and then they will insist upon you: "I am not Chinese."

Let me tell you -- if you don't want to be Chinese, it will be more than renouncing your nationality and not visiting mainland Chinese. At the very least, you need to learn or invent a new mother tongue and a new written language to be used with all other Hongkongers. You will also need a brand new look, because right now all the foreigners will take a look at you and think that you are Chinese just as a blond-haired blue-eyed foreigner will never be taken to be a Chinese citizen.

The legend has it that more than 2000 years ago, Xu Fu took 3,000 young boys and girls with him to an uninhabited island east of China and invented his own language and customs to become Japan. Eventually, the world forgot that he was Chinese.

The Lunar New Year is fast approaching. Those who are non-Chinese should remember not to take the Lunar New Year long vacation or to take lai see money -- because those are Chinese customs. You must keep your cool and give up the two week vacation and the thousands of lai see dollars!

- Hong Kong Good News "I am Chinese" series

- (HKG Pao) January 23, 2016. The Hongkonger-Chinese issue also showed up the mobile phone game Clash Royale. A Hong Kong user decided to use the monicker of "HK IS NOT CHINA". However, the operators said that people "found it offensive" and blocked this user "to prevent more people feeling upset." The operators recommend that the user change the monicker to "Hong Kong Love", "HK is Cool," or "HK is the best." So this Hong Kong user has made his cause known all over the Clash Royale world at the cost of being banned. Should he be proud of his non-accomplishment?

P.S. Well, if the operators accept "HK IS NOT CHINA," then what comes next will be "TAIWAN IS PART OF CHINA", "REPUBLIC OF TAIWAN", "HONG KONG CITY-STATE", etc.

- Raphael Wong (League of Social Democrats) Facebook

There is one thing which perplexes me.

A person's identity should be made by that person. What a person identifies himself/herself as is mostly his personal business. If and when we insist that a person must identify himself/herself as something or the other, or if we insist that he cannot be something or the other, then how are we different from the Communists?

"Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." We need to condemn those who insist on imposing an identity on others, and not those who have different identifications than ours. Even as we condemn those who impose on others, we make sure that we don't impose onto others.

To this, Wong Yeung-tat (Civic Passion) responded: This idiot is impossible to understand!

(The Guardian) January 16, 2016

A Hong Kong publisher whose disappearance last year sparked an international scandal and street protests has reappeared, making a televised confession on Chinas government-controlled broadcaster CCTV. Gui Minhai, a 51-year-old Swedish citizen who specialised in salacious tomes about Chinas Communist party elite, vanished from his beachfront home in Thailand in October last year.

His disappearance and the apparent abductions of four other booksellers with whom he worked was widely suspected to be the work of Chinese security forces, although Beijing repeatedly refused to comment on the whereabouts of the missing men.

On Sunday night China finally broke its silence over the case by broadcasting what it said was a confession made by Gui on state broadcaster CCTV. The publisher claimed he had voluntarily surrendered to Chinese authorities in October last year over his supposed involvement in a fatal hit-and-run incident in the city of Ningbo in December 2003.

Gui said he had fled mainland China after the incident, in which a young woman was killed, but had been driven to return last year out of guilt and a sense of longing for his homeland. It is my own choice to come back and to confess my crime. It is nobody elses business. I need to take responsibility for it myself, he said in the televised confession.

(Xinhua) January 17, 2016

"Being outside China all these years, I have always been anxious and uneasy. I frequently have nightmares about going back to my hometown and meeting all those familiar relatives ..."

On January 13, Gui Minhai said so at a certain detention center.

As the boss of Causeway Bay Bookstore, Gui Minhai has recently become the focus of overseas opinion. The information about "Causeway Bay Bookstore boss is missing" is hyped up by Hong Kong and certain overseas media. Someone even started a "Search for Gui Minhai" campaign. So who is Gui Minhai? What is the truth behind his so-called disappearance.

In a 60-square meter apartment in a certain residential building in Hangzhou city, Zhejiang province, 83-year-old husband Shen and 65-year-old wife Zhou live here. The apartment may be small but a bedroom was reserved and filled with photos of a young woman taken when she was alive. There were some flowers and child's toys to accompany the bright smile on the face.

"My husband never comes in here. If he comes in, he will think about our daughter's life from childhood to adulthood. I spend all day in the room to keep company with my daughter ... What kind of pain do we feel in our hearts?" When Zhou spoke about her daughter, she can no longer contain her sorrow. She said that the room was kept the same way as her daughter wanted it. Every Lunar New Year, Zhou buys new clothes for her daughter and hangs them by the bed as if the daughter had never left.

12 years ago, a traffic incident took away the life of the only daughter of this old couple. The instigator was Gui Minhai.

Gui Minhai, born in May 1964, family origin in Ning Po, given Swedish citizenship in 1996. On December 8, 2003, Ningpo businessman Gui Minhai organized a dinner during which a lot of alcohol. After the dinner was over, Gui Minhai made a fateful decision to drive his friend home.

At 21:17, Gui Minhai passed by a certain university on his way from Ningpo City Jiangdong district to Zhenhai city, and hit a female university student who was cross the road and thereby caused her death.

"I couldn't see clearly. I only hear a 'bang' and the traffic incident took place." Gui Minhai recalled painfully.

According to the relevant court document, Gui Minhai was tested and found to have 1.14 mg/ml alcohol in his blood, which qualifies for DWI (Driving While Intoxicated). In accordance with the law, the Public Security Bureau held Gui Minhai completely responsible for the incident.

The deceased 20-year-old university student Shen was in the prime of her life. Her family background was even harder to take: Her father had his daughter after he was 50 years old, so he regards her as the pearl on his palm. He wanted to see his daughter raise a family and build a career. But those dreams were dashed as the white-haired parents saw off their black-haired daughter.

"The family collapsed all of a sudden." Zhou recalled the tragic news. Both parents fell ill. The 70-something-year-old husband had it worse, as his physical health deteriorated, his mental state fell into depression and lapses of concentration and even became suicidal.

In August 2004, the court sentenced Gui Minhai to two years in prison suspended for two years. The victims' family dissented with the verdict and strongly demanded severe punishment.

Gui Minhai was rueful that his DWI act caused a family to be broken. But he was even concerned about having to go to jail. Soon after the court verdict was rendered and before the civil compensation was determined, Gui Minhai made the wrong choice.

"I began to be afraid ... afraid of going to jail. Besides, I can no longer do business in China after the incident. So I thought that I better leave." Gui Minhai said.

On November 2004, Gui Minhai was still on probation and cannot leave China under the law. By careful planning, Gui used the identity card of someone to travel outside of China on vacation. Since then he has traveled to many countries outside China.

Because Gui fled, the court voided the 2-year probation and reinstituted the original 2 year jail sentence. The public security bureau issued an arrest warrant for Gui Minhai.

By fleeing, Gui Minhai hurt the victim's family once more. The two old men focused their lives on the case, hoping that Gui Minhai would be arrested and made to serve his sentence.

It was not easy to be a fugitive on the run. During this time, Gui Minhai went into business with others. But his increasing wealth could not cover up his sense of guilty and regret. The two words that he used most frequently to describe this period were "fear" and "regret."

"After getting out of China, I thought I would be psychologically relieved. Instead, it got worse." Gui Minhai said, "On one hand, I was avoiding responsibility which is a psychological blow to the victim's family. On the other hand, I left China illegally and committed another crime while not receiving the original punishment. This is a crime on top of another crime."

"Being a fugitive, Gui Minhai could not return to his hometown and look after his parents. "I don't have a country, I don't have a home, I don't have a hometown ... As the ancients said, if my heart is at ease, every place is my hometown; if my heart is not at ease, then no place is my hometown." He said. "I felt a lot of pain inside. I frequently used materialistic enjoyment to keep the pain away, but the pain cannot in fact be excluded. I suffered psychological torment, I had constant nightmares, hypertension, heart conditions, unspeakable pain ..."

Gui Minhai said that even though he managed to escape overseas, he continued to feel rootless and loss. When he learned that his father was ill, he wanted to go back to China and surrender himself many times. But he could not take that final step.

Finally in June 2015, his family told him that his father had passed away. Gui Minhai did not have the chance to see his father before his death. So he finally decided to go back to China and surrender himself.

"I was very shaken up when I couldn't attend my father's funeral. My mother is 80 something years old. I kept thinking about her. I felt a very strong shame. I began to feel depressed. It was unbearable. So I kept thinking about turning myself in. I wanted to settle the matter so that I can see my mother before she passes away too." Gui Minhai broke out in tears and lowered his head. "I didn't have the courage to do so before. I think now is the moment to take that step."

In October 2015, Gui Minhai turned himself in to the public security bureau.

Gui Minhai has written many confessions during the investigation by the public security bureau. He said that he was prepared to do so the moment when he made the initial decision to turn himself in. "I must accept all my legal responsibilities. I am willing to accept any penalty."

When Gui Minhai learned the sorrowful state of the victim's parents, he felt even worse. He hopes that to express his deepest apologies to them. "I want to give my most sincere apologies to the victim's family. Sorry! I know that I can never make up the hurt and pain that I have caused them. I will try my best to redeem myself for the rest of my life, even if this only brings them a tiny bit of comfort."

When he learned that his "disappearance" was being hyped up overseas, Gui Minhai stated solemnly: "I voluntarily turned myself in out of my own choice. This is the responsibility that I should accept. I don't want any person or organization to intercede of interfere with my business, especially malicious hyping."

Gui Minhai also said, "Although I am a Swedish citizen, I still feel that I am Chinese. My roots are still in China. Therefore I hope Sweden can respect my personal choice, my rights and my privacy, and let me deal with my problems."

According to information, Gui Minhai is suspected of being involved in other crimes. The investigation is ongoing.

Video: (YouTube) Gui Minhai's interview on CCTV 13, January 17, 2016

(The Stand) January 17, 2016.

Apple Daily cited an informed source close to Gui Minhai that Gui's daughter Angela has made a statement: (1) It is impossible for her to determine the veracity of the traffic incident that occurred more than 10 years ago; (2) she has never heard her parents mention this incident before; (3) she wants to go to China as soon as possible to meet with her detained father together with Swedish officials; (4) she wants to find lawyers to defend her father as soon as possible.

(Sing Tao) January 17, 2016.

Our newspaper received exclusive information that Lee Bo wrote another two-page letter to his wife Sophia Choi. The letter spoke about his living and health conditions being fine, and the progress of the investigation being smooth. Lee Bo also said that he recently learned about the complex history of Gui Minhai, who is involved in other crimes and also being an unsavory character. Lee Bo said that he was dragged into this matter on account of Gui Minhai.

In the letter, Lee Bo emphasized that Hong Kong has rule of law and he wants people to respect his personal choice and privacy and not to hype up his decision to go to the mainland to cooperate with the investigation. He said that he reserves the legal right to sue those irresponsible media and individuals.

(Sing Tao) January 18, 2016.

In Lee Bo's latest letter home, he said wrote he recently learned that Gui Minhai has a complex history. Gui had killed someone while DWI and refused to accept responsibility by fleeing overseas.

In the previous letter, Lee wrote that he voluntarily returned to the mainland to cooperate in an investigation. In the latest letter, he wrote that the investigation is going on smoothly and things are getting better. "I am good friends with them."

As to what the world is saying about this 'disappearance', he is aware of the latest developments. "Some people are using my mode of entry to attack One Country Two Systems and the Hong Kong SAR Government. Even more disgusting is that someone smears me for patronizing prostitutes. That's really unreasonable."

The letter did not indicate when he will be back. But the mood seems confident: "It must be hard on you during this time. I hope to make it up to you some day." As for autistic son, Lee Bo wrote: "Please kiss Ah Tung for me. Tell him that Daddy misses him." The letter is signed with "Bo who loves you" and dated yesterday.

(SCMP) January 18, 2016. Full letter from Lee Bo to his wife.

Ping,

Since I voluntarily went to the mainland to assist with investigations, progress has been good. Things are going well. I have made friends with them.

Only recently, I came to know that Ah Hai [Gui Minhai] has a complicated history. He caused someones death while drink-driving in the mainland, and then fled to foreign countries. He also has many facades that I do not know. He has been involved in other crimes. He is a morally unacceptable person. This time he has caused me trouble.

Since I voluntarily came back to assist in investigations, I have followed the situation in Hong Kong. Some people used my immigration methods as an excuse to wantonly attack One Country, Two Systems and the Hong Kong SAR government. What was more odious was the smear accusing me of visiting prostitutes. This is ridiculous!

Hong Kong uphold its laws and systems. It should also be a city that respects human rights and individual privacy. I hope that every one can respect my personal choice and the privacy of my family. I hope people and organisations wanting to pursue their own agenda will stop blowing up and sensationalising the fact that I voluntarily returned to the mainland to assist in investigations. I reserve the right to sue such irresponsible media outlets and individuals.

This has been a hard time for you. I hope I can compensate you well later. I should stop here. Take care. Kiss Ah Tung* for me, and tell him Pa Pa misses him.

Love You

Bo 2016.1.17

(SCMP) January 18, 2016.

October is usually the time the resort town of Pattaya in Thailand shrugs off the lull of the low season as it prepares for year-end tourists seeking the sun and sea.

But on the sunny afternoon of October 17, an unexpected visitor cast a curious shadow when he arrived at a condominium building  in search of someone.

Gui Minhai, garbed in a T-shirt and white shorts, hurriedly dropped off groceries he had just bought with the managers of his apartment building as soon as he saw the visitor and invited the young man into his white car.

That was the last time Gui was seen alive, and thereafter his whereabouts remained a mystery until he appeared on the state-run CCTV on Sunday claiming he had surrendered to mainland authorities for a drink-driving death he allegedly caused in 2003. 

The last appearance by Gui near his holiday home, captured by closed circuit television, would not have come to light if a long-time friend had not taken the initiative to investigate his disappearance, along with four others who vanished separately later.

That friend was Bei Ling, co-founder of the Independent Chinese PEN Centre, who, together with friends pored over a months worth of closed circuit television footage at Guis apartment and interviewed the apartment manager, a woman called Mai.

What has happened to him is abduction conducted by a country. The Chinese government needs to come out and offer an explanation, Bei told the Post from Boston.

While many Hongkongers have been alarmed at the disappearance of the five booksellers, the spotlight has fallen mostly on Lee Bo, the co-owner of Causeway Bay Books and the last to have vanished late last year.

The latest twist in the personal details of Gui   a business partner  whom Lee Bo now has described as morally moribund in a letter he allegedly sent has prompted yet more questions and stoked fears of what else might be dredged up to explain their disappearance or as widely-believed abduction by mainland agents.

The facts of Guis disappearance remain just as sketchy but Beis accounts give another side to the interview on Sunday, calling into question Guis apparently voluntary decision to surrender. 

According to Bei, about two weeks after Guis last appearance, Bei said Mai had received a call from the publisher to permit four men at least three of them Chinese-speaking to enter his apartment and even stay overnight on November 3. Mai said the visitors, who stayed 20 minutes, had attempted to take away Guis computer but were stopped by the management office. One of them reportedly said  Gui was gambling in Cambodia.

The four men, who left the apartment in a taxi, were believed to be heading to Poipet, a casino city along the border between Thailand and Cambodia, according to Mai, who received a call from that taxi driver after the gang left their phone in the vehicle.

Bei eventually decided to report the case to Thai police as he found it deeply troubling that mysterious visitors might already have snatched the Swedish passport of Gui and even duplicated files and emails on his computer.

At first, it was not easy to convince Guis wife, who lives in Germany, that her husband had vanished inexplicably, said Bei. The wife told Bei that Gui still called her every seven to ten days.

Bei then suggested she tell Gui she planned to visit Thailand and ask him to fetch her at the airport. 

But as Bei suspected, Gui told his wife through instant messenging app WeChat that he could not pick her up and asked her not to visit Thailand. Bei took that as a subtle message from Gui to his wife that he had lost his freedom and had been taken away.

However, two weeks after he went missing, Gui, appeared to have sent a message via Skype to his 22-year-old daughter, Angela Gui, who is studying in England.

I have put [HK$30,000] in your account in Hong Kong, and hope you will be fine with everything, the message read. Bei believed that the people who had kidnapped Gui let him do so to show that Gui was safe. It was a ruse to persuade Guis family that all was well with him. 

On Sunday, Gui made an unexpected appearance on CCTV with a jaw-dropping story. He said he decided to escape from China after the court issued him with a two-year jail term, suspended for two years,  in 2004 in Ningbo in Zhejiang province. Under the sentencing terms, he was meant to stay in the mainland. 

Gui said he was overwhelmed by guilt and had failed to find another home. So he decided to turn himself in. But before the CCTV report emerged, other reports had suggested Gui was kidnapped by possible Chinese agents while on holiday in Pattaya. Bei did not believe Gui had returned to China out of his own free will, describing Gui as reading from a scripted speech. 

Another friend of Gui, chief editor Jin Zhong of Open Magazine, was also unconvinced. I hold reservations over his voluntary surrender, which could have been done right here in Hong Kong, not during vacationing in Pattaya, Jin added.

He said China looked at Gui and his four other missing associates such as Lee Bo as a cliqueand would handle them as a collective case. But to what extent Lee is viewed as Guis partner has yet to be seen. Judging from the 10-year prison term Hong Kong publisher Yiu Man-tin got two years ago, Im afraid the term would not be less for the present round, he said.

Netizens have also spotted discrepancies in Guis appearance on CCTV.  In one part of the interview, Gui had short hair and appeared anxious. But in another part, he looked at ease and had longer hair. The footage also showed him in two different shirts in grey and then  black.

Born in Ningbo in 1964, Gui began his publishing career at the Peoples Education Press after graduating in history at Peking University in 1985. He left for Sweden in 1988 to enrol at the University of Gothenburg, where he obtained a PhD in 1996. He and his wife became Swedish nationals and they had a daughter in 1994.

Gui returned to China in 2000. After receiving the suspended sentence in his hometown for the drink-driving accident, he left for Germany.  In 2006, Gui turned to publishing in Hong Kong and formed as many as eight joint companies with partners to produce books on China, with an emphasis on scandals, from mistresses to corruption, involving top state leaders.

The publishing business blossomed in 2013 when the scandals involving disgraced party boss Bo Xilai were confirmed to be true. Of the estimated 100 books on Bo that sold like hot cakes, half were published by Gui, who was said to have made a profit of HK$10 million just in 2013 alone.

That year, Gui founded Mighty Current Media, a publishing-distributing enterprise specialising in books on political gossip about leaders in China, with Hongkongers Lee Bo and his wife Sophia Choi, and Lui Bo. A year later, they purchased the Causeway Bay Books store and thus owned the entire publishing chain.

The Post learned that police officers visited Guis Hong Kong residence in early January. On January 4, three officers went to Guis three-bedroom flat in a waterfront high-rise in Tsuen Wan and made inquiries, building managers who have knowledge of the matter said.

Gui stayed at his Hong Kong house for only a limited period of time, several weeks for instance, each time building managers caught sight of him. Guis wife and daughter, who live in Europe, would also come over to stay periodically.

(Headline Daily) January 19, 2016.

Gui Minhai's daughter Angela in England said that her father's Chinese name has always been Gui Minhai and there is no record of her father exiting Thailand. Angela said that she was interviewed after CCTV aired the interview with her father. Afterwards she received information via Skype from her father, who said that he has no problems and that she shouldn't worry. He also told her to keep silent when asked about him. Angela said that this does not sound like the normal way that her father talks, nor would he contact her in this manner.

(SCMP) Public Eye: the stink from this mountain of mess just gets worse. By Michael Chugani. January 19, 2016.

Its easy to create a pile of poop. Cleaning it up is something else. The pile wasnt that big when Hong Kong bookseller Gui Minhai disappeared in Thailand.

It got a bit bigger when three of his associates disappeared in Guangdong weeks later, but still the Hong Kong media gave it only moderate attention. Stupidly emboldened by this, the abductors snatched a fifth bookseller, Hongkonger Lee Bo, right here in Hong Kong. The small pile suddenly became a mountain.

Lets assume, and you wont be wrong if you did, that the abductors were mainland security agents so peed off with the five for selling books critical of mainland leaders that they thought nothing of violating our laws to teach them a lesson. What that shows is that 18 years after the handover, they are still clueless that Hongkongers have a line to protect their core values that they will fiercely defend. Now the mainland is left with a mountain of poop that is too messy to clean.

The first cleaning attempt only made the pile messier. They paraded a remorseful Gui on state TV confessing that he voluntarily returned to face mainland justice for violating probation by fleeing after killing a female university student in a driving accident 13 years ago.

Public Eye doesnt know if the televised confession was forced or not. But we know this: most Hongkongers wont buy Guis story. It appears he was indeed involved in a fatal 2003 drink-driving case. But in the minds of Hongkongers, that is not why he and his four associates were snatched.

The pile got even messier two days ago when Guangdongs security bureau admitted it is holding Lee without saying why or if they had abducted him. Public Eye said last week the kidnap order didnt come from the top but from rogue agents eager to please their bosses.

We still believe that because, as we had pointed out, if President Xi Jinping had wanted to quash a book about his pre-marriage sex life, the abduction would have been much cleaner and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying would have stayed silent. Guangdong security admitting it has Lee supports the theory of a lower-level job.

A seething Xi has no doubt ordered a quick clean-up to limit the damage done to one country, two systems, which China has long touted as also a model for Taiwan reunification. But its taking so long because mainland security has many factional layers. First, the rogue agents had to be identified then a way found to put the best spin on a stinking pile.

The spin has so far flopped. Were coming up to Lunar New Year. Why not hold Gui but free the other four to rejoin their families for the festival with the spin that inquiries have been completed?

Internet comments:

- Points of suspicion

(1) Gui Minhai is commonly referred to as 桂民海 but this traffic incident analysis report has him down as
桂敏海.
(2) Gui Minahai's Swedish passport has his date of birth as May 5, 1964 (which means he should be 39 years old in 2003) but the traffic incident analysis report has his age as 46 in 2003.

So is this the same person?
- If you are a fugitive and you travel on a Swedish passport without Chinese characters, what would you claim your Chinese name is when you start a business in Hong Kong? Do you use the same name and the same birthday as a certain fugitive? Or do you use a different Chinese name (with the same pinyin sound on your passport) and a different birthday? The traffic incident analysis report states that Gui Minhai is a Swedish national. How many Swedish citizens named Gui Minhai live in Ningpo city? I think that there is only one.

- Gui Minhai wore two different t-shirts during the interview. Therefore the whole thing was staged.

The news broadcast was edited down. If the recording session went on for a long time and Gui Minhai wants to change his t-shirt, so be it.

- The 2005 CCTV report said that they learned that Gui Minhai left China in November 2014. It did not say that he "fled." It is commonsense that a suspended sentence means that not having to serve time in jail.
- A suspended sentence means that there is a two-year probation period during which the individual has to meet with the probation officer to see if the terms are being met. Gui Minhai violated these terms of probation and therefore his probation was revoked in June 2015.

- The veracity of the traffic incident can be tracked back to a CNTV broadcast in April 2005. The program was a demonstration of investigative techniques. The initial ruling by the public security bureau was that Gui Minhai bore primary responsibility because he was drunk as well as exceeding the speed limit while Shen bore secondary responsibility because this was not a crossing point. The victim's mother appeal the ruling by pointing out the nearest pedestrian crossing was 800 meters away, that most cars exceed the 80 kph speed limit on this road, that the victim was only 2 meters from the curb when she got hit and could not avoid a 110 kph car driven by a drunk driver who couldn't see. After thorough observational testing, the Zhejiang Provincial Public Security Bureau concluded that the driver Gui Minhai was fully responsible for the traffic incident and the victim was not.

- I can see how the confessions will get rolled out:
Bookseller #1: Caught by the police while patronizing a prostitute
Bookseller #2: Driving while intoxicated; jumping bail
Bookseller #3: Sexual molestation by grabbing the butt of a grandmother
Bookseller #4: Eating a meal without paying
Bookseller #5: Jumping the subway turnstile without paying

- More on the 2005 traffic incident. "Faced with the issue of going to receive a civil compensation of about 400,000 RMB, Zhou Yaping used her trembling  hand to wipe away the tears and said firmly: if the civil lawsuit succeeds, they will establish a scholarship at an impoverished school in the name of their daughter so that more children can study well. They hope that this school can make their daughter be the honorary headmaster. If possible, the ideal school would be the Xiaofeng Town Centre Primary School that their daughter attended. In this way, people will remember that DWI brings eternal pain to yourself and others."
So is the core of the story less that Gui Minhai didn't want to go to jail, but more that he doesn't want to pay 400,000 RMB in compensation to the victim's family?
- Gui Minhai made a bundle of money in Hong Kong by publishing "banned books" in Hong Kong such that he could afford to buy the Causeway Bay Bookstore in 2014. Did he ever compensate the Shen family?

- More on the 2005 traffic incident. Advice to Gui Minhai and his defenders is not to doubt the story. CCTV 13 can easily trot out old lady Zhou to reprise everything that she has told over the years. Here is one sob story: "Several hours before her death, Shen Yanchan sent a QQ message to her mother: 'Mom, I am going to be working soon. From now on, you can keep my 200 RMB monthly expenses to buy clothes for yourselves'."

- Those who believe it will believe, and those who won't believe it won't believe.

(Hong Kong Free Press) January 17, 2016.

Political Commentator Johnny Lau Yui-siu told RTHK that the PRC governments explanation was full of contradictions and could lead others to speculate as to whether the authorities were dishonest or made stories up.

The Labour Partys Lee Cheuk-yan told Commercial Radio that the supposed confession was illogical and not believable.

Amnesty Internationals Regional Director for East Asia Nicholas Bequelin said Guis words sounded scripted.

- Lee Bo no longer represents Lee Bo and Gui Minhai no longer represents Gui Minhai. They are not being represented by Lee Cheuk-yan et al, who know what is genuinely on the minds of Lee and Gui.
- The only good script is the one that follows what the pan-democrats have already scripted. Everything else is illogical and unreasonable.

- (Hong Kong Free Press) January 19, 2016.

The Hong Kong police received a reply from the Guangdong police on Monday evening confirming that missing bookseller Lee Bo is in mainland China. The message was received 17 days after an enquiry was made. The Interpol Guangdong Liaison Office of Guangdong Provincial Public Security Department stated that it understood that Lee Po [sic] is in the mainland. Also enclosed with the reply was a letter from Lee addressing a relevant government department of Hong Kong. The content of the letter is similar to the one received by his wife on January 17. The police have contacted Mrs Lee, who confirmed it was her husbands handwriting in the letter. Police wrote to Guangdong authorities on Monday night requesting to meet with Lee in order to further understand the incident.

- (NOW TV) January 19, 2016. In Beijing, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hong Lei responded to a question about Causeway Bay Bookstore owner Gui Minhai by saying that he has nothing to add to what the Chinese media have reported. Well, this hurts but the people of Hong Kong should really think about how important they are. Will they be ignored? Will they get up and say: "I'm not going to be ignored."

- (Ming Pao) January 19, 2016. Chinese PEN president Bei Ling has known Gui Minhai for more than 30 years. Back in 1985, Gui used "敏" (as in the traffic incident documents) and not "民" (as used in the recent Hong Kong news reporting). Bei Ling said that he conducted an investigation when Gui went missing, and learned from other sources that Gui Minhai might be involved in this traffic incident. However, Gui's family could not confirm this and so he didn't report it. Bei Ling does not know how to explain the age discrepancy.

- (Oriental Daily) February 2, 2016. Mighty Current's warehouse in Chai Wan will have to relocate because they couldn't get a rent extension. The remaining unsold 1,000 or so books were going to discarded. The Alliance to Support Democratic Patriotic Movements in China has stepped in to take over the books. They plan to be selling the books at the Alliance's Lunar New Year Market stall in Victoria Park.

Comment: This is consistent with what else is being sold at the Alliance's store. They sell a lot of lies about June 4th 1989 to gullible mainland travelers, so it is natural that they will also sell a lot of lies about the mistresses and hidden safe boxes of the Chinese leaders.

The Alliance does not say who gave them those books and how the proceeds of the sales will be used. Gui Minhai is the owner of Mighty Current and he could not be making that decision given that the Alliance said that he was kidnapped and held in detention.

TWICE music videos:

Like OOH-AHH
Candy Boy

Do It Again

(SCMP) January 16, 2016.

Election observers in Taiwan say they are looking into whether the controversy and media coverage over a singer who was forced to apologise after waving a national flag will effect the outcome of the presidential and parliamentary elections on Saturday. Millions are going to the polls to elect a new leader for the island and its legislators.

The singer Chou Tzu-Yu, 16, was forced to apologise after waving the flag on a South Korean TV programme. The apology was made after Chou sparked the ire of people living in mainland China.

A video clip of Chou apologising to the mainland Chinese public for waving a Taiwan national flag in November has been repeatedly aired by Taiwanese TV and prominently reported by local news media on the island. The apology was prompted by a Taiwanese singer based in mainland China, Huang An, who accused the 16-year-old of supporting Taiwan independence by waving the Republic of China flag.

The debate over the apology has gone viral on social media in Taiwan with some people angry that the singer was forced to say sorry. Why did you [mainland China internet users] and the Korean entertainment agency have to give her such a hard time? Shes just a teenager! wrote one commenter. Whats wrong for a young Taiwanese girl to declare her identity by showing the flag of the Republic of China? It is not the flag of the Democratic Progressive Party. Others in Taiwan said on social media they now wanted to punish China-friendly parties in the polls because of the apology.

One analyst said the controversy was bound to have an impact on the elections. Neutral voters who previously did not want to go out to vote might show up to cast their ballots to Taiwan-centric candidates and China-friendly candidates could suffer as a result, said Yao Li-min, chairman of the Citizens Congress Watch.

The opposition presidential front runner Tsai weighed into the controversy on Saturday. I believe everyone feels hurt and angry to see that Chou Tzu-Yu was forced to do what she was made to do, she said. It seriously hurt the feelings of Taiwanese people. The 59-year-old scholar-turned politician made her comments after she cast her ballots.

Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou also said at the ballot box on Saturday that there was no need for Chou to apologise. No citizens should be punished for recognising the Republic of China and expressing their affection for the national flag, he said. The KMTs candidate in the presidential poll, Eric Chu, also expressed sympathy for Chou.

Beijing issued a statement saying certain political groups in Taiwan have been using isolated cases to affect the feelings of people across the Taiwan Strait and people should be wary of this. The statement is viewed as an attempt to control the damage created by the apology. We support cross-strait cultural exchanges and our encouragement of exchanges between young people of the two sides has been consistent, the Taiwan Affairs Office said.

(ET Today) (United Daily News)

16-year-old Taiwanese girl Chou Tzuyu joined the Korean band TWICE. She is being denounced by Huang An as pro-Taiwan independence because of a photo in which she held up a Republic of China flag, and is now the subject of a boycott movement. Her management company JYP has canceled all her appearances in mainland China.

As soon as Huang An made his denunciation, Anhui Satellite TV canceled their TWICE performance. The agent demanded that JYP refund its 100,000 RMB pre-payment, threatening a ban on all JYP artists otherwise. The agent said: "We are not going after JYP or the other artists. The contract has clauses about bad effects or uncontrollable circumstances. I offered three solutions: First, Chou Tzuyu won't come with TWICE. Second, use another artist from JYP. Third, a refund. But JYP rejected all three. I have no choice left."

The agent added: "Frankly, I was derelict in my duties because I didn't familiarize myself with Chou Tzuyu before I gave the invitation. So as the hubbub rose, I didn't say anything and I tried to work with JYP. I have to thank Huang An. I stopped all collaboration as soon as I found out. I am waiting to see what their attitudes and solutions are. It seems that the masses of Internet users are correct. This is not just Chou Tzuyu's problem. The question is, Does JYP want to come to China ever again? I pity those other bands and the two good guys from China."

In response, JYP said that they won't refund the pre-payment because they have to protect their artists, and that they are willing to perform for Anhui Satellite TV for the lowest possible price. The agent said: "There is no room for them in China. Not a single television channel will work with them."

 (YouTube) JYP posted a video by Chou Tzuyu on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t57URqSp5Ew.

Hello, everybody. I have something to say. (Deep bow) Hello, everybody. I am Chou Tzuyu. Sorry. I should have come out much earlier to apologize. I did not know that I was facing the situation now. I did not dare to face up to everybody, so I came out only now.

There is only one China. The two shores of the strait are one body. I, Chou Tzuyu myself, am a Chinese person. I am proud. As a Chinese person who lives overseas, I occasionally make mistakes in my words and actions that hurt my company and the feelings of the Internet fans on both shores. I am very, very sorry. I have decided to call a stop to all my activities in China and seriously reflect. Here I apologize to everybody once again. Sorry. (Deep bow)

Apology from JY Park (owner of JYP)

\

Hello everybody, I am J.Y.Park.

First of all, I sincerely and deeply apologize for the hurt that I have caused my Chinese friends. At the same time, I have very sorry about the seriousness of this affair on my workers, Tzuyu and myself. I am very sorry.

As a result of this incident, I have once again appreciated deeply that working with a country means having to respect the sovereignty, culture, history and the feelings of the people of that country.

All this has given a tremendous lesson to my company and its artists. In the days ahead, we will resolutely stop any such incident from occurring.

Once again, I apology sincerely to those who have supported me, my company and its artists. We have let everybody know, we have hurt everybody's feelings. In order to make up for the hurt and to repay your support, we will continue to work to contribute towards cultural exchanges between China and South Korea.

Over the past few days, Tzuyu has suffered a lot even as she reflected upon herself. She left home at age 13 and came to South Korea. I and my company have not brought up Tzuyu properly for her parents. That is a huge mistake on the part of me and my company. We will stop all of Tzuyu's activities in China for now, and we will properly handle all the matters that have come about as a result of this affair.

Internet comments:

- Please get the sequence and details of the events right! This is not a case of (1) girl raises Republic of China flag; (2) girl gets bullied by big bad Chinese government; (3) girl makes apology video.

Here is what really happened:

(0) Chou Tzuyu appeared on Korean television. When asked where she came from, she replied "I am from Taiwan." The programme added the Republic of China flag on the screen:

(1) Pro-independence Taiwan media (SETTV/Liberty Times/Apple Daily) used Chou Tzuyu to provoke mainlanders, saying that they couldn't resist the charms of a pretty pro-Taiwan-independence girl in a Korean band. They praised Chou Tzuyu for bringing glory to Taiwan and breaking the fragile hearts of the Chinamen, etc. They labeled her as the "Bright Light of Taiwan" and the "Star of Taiwan Independence."


The two shores continue to debate sovereignty issues. Even since she debuted on <Sixteen>, Chou Tzuyu has continued to insist that she is "from Taiwan", used Chinese to say hello and taught her teammates to speak Taiwanese on the various Korean variety shows. In one program, she even waved the Taiwan national flag so that the glass hearts of the mainland Internet users are shattered all over the floor.

(2) No response from mainlanders because they don't read pro-independence Taiwan media

(3) Huang An posted a denunciation

(4) A Tzuyu fan advised Huang An not to pick on an innocent victim who was set up

(5) Huang An withdrew his denunciation

Fan: How are you, master Huang An? I don't know if you can see this message. Previously you posted on a young girl named Chou Tzuyu. She is a member of the new Korean band TWICE. There are three Japanese girls in the group. Yesterday, they went on a Korean program. She did not travel to Japan to make the video, and she was not sucking up to Japan. As to what you said about the Taiwan passport, she did nothing of that sort. As for the Republic of China flag, the production team left it on her pillow and she picked it up and put it down afterwards. Frankly, she has done nothing for Taiwan independence, and did not say anything on behalf of it. I hope that you can verify this. After all, she is only a 16-year-old girl who likes to dance and who is trying to build a career in a foreign country. I have said a lot, so I apologize for taking up your time.

Huang An: You are communicating sincerely. PRAISE! I can delete that weibo post. I hope that she is truly not a Taiwan independence advocate, otherwise I won't hold back. Thanx.

(6) Pro-independence Taiwan media provoked mainlanders again by saying that their futile actions could not prevent TWICE from appearing on Chinese television

(7) Huang An repeated his denunciation

Huang An (January 8, 2016): Is Chou Tzuyu for Taiwan independence? Does holding the Republic of China means that not for Taiwan independence? Let me tell you -- pro-Taiwan independence is behind Chou Tzuyu! Every day, SETTV sets up a special section for Chou Tzuyu. How can that be unless there is a special cooperation deal? Chou Tzuyu is not a superstar. I denounce Chou Tzuyu because the person that SETTV sets as the Glory of Taiwan should get what she deserves! On January 10, it is said that TWICE will be on Beijing TV's Global Spring Festival Show!

At the same time, Huang An said that if Chou Tzuyu is willing to state that she is a Chinese person, he will immediately his denunciation.

(8) Beijing TV invites TWICE to record a spring festival show. Apple Daily continued to hype up the fact with insulting essays such as "Chou Tzuyu broke the hearts of the mainlanders; she flew to Beijing to rake up RMB in spite of mainland objections."

(9) Mainland Internet users began to boycott Chou Tzuyu as more unsubstantiated rumors about Chou Tzuyu's pro-Taiwan independence words and actions swirled. This pushed Chou Tzuyu to the opposite side of mainlanders.

(10) Beijing TV's Spring Festival program capitulated to public pressure and canceled the TWICE appearance.

(11) Anhui Satellite TV revised its Spring Festival programme and eliminates TWICE.

(12) Huawei canceled the contract for Chou Tzuyu as their spokesperson.

(13) JYP felt the pressure and quietly changed Tzuyu's nationality of Taiwan to her birthplace of Taiwan in their official website.

(14) Mainland Internet users continued to rage.

(15) JYP still did not issue a public response. Meanwhile more rumors came about Chou Tzuyu saying "I am not Chinese. I am Taiwanese" etc. Neither Chou Tzuyu nor JYP address these rumors.

- Facebook post is from "Chou Tzuyu", but this is not an official page because JYP does not allow her to have personal page.

Hello to Tzuyu fans
I like Tzuyu and tht is why I am posting more news to share with everybody, not to raise controversies
With respect to the nationality issue, Tzuyu is a Taiwanese
She is not Chinese
I know that many many Chinese Tzuyu fans say that Tzuyu is Taiwanese and not Chinese
But there are some angry people who made jokes about Tzuyu's nationality
Taiwan is a nation
We are the Republic of China, not the People's Republic of China
That's right, we are Taiwanese
We won't hate China
But we will get more repelled because these angry people are debasing Taiwan
But we have to thank Tzuyu, for being brave to state her nationality
We Tzuyu fans will defend out Tzuyu

(16) Mainland Internet users called for a boycott of all JYP artists.

(17) JYP received ten contract cancellations of their artists in two days.

(18) Anhui Satellite TV want their deposit back

(19) JYP's refund refusal became known.

(20) Mainland Internet users began using the #boycottJYP hash tag on Weibo which rose to the number one spot with more than 300 million reads in two days.

(21) JYP issued the first press release to provide excuses for the behavior

JYP Entertainment

Recently there have been some inaccurate rumors about our artists. Our company found this deeply regrettable!

As a cultural corporation, we are active in promoting cultural exchanges between China and South Korea. Our company (including Chou Tzuyu) have never said anything or done anything political on China.

Besides, the subject of this inaccurate rumor is a 16-year-old minor, whose age and experience is insufficient to form any political viewpoints.

But our company's operations in China have definitely been affected by these inaccurate rumors, and it has also caused many inconveniences to our many collaborators with whom we always had good relationships.

Based upon these considerations, we have decided to cancel all performances by our artists in the near future until the relevant matters are clarified.

(22) Mainland Internet users left 300,000 comments to express their dissatisfaction about the lack of sincerity in the JYP statement and pushed on with the boycott.

(23) JYP stock prices tumbled, resulting in a loss of 40 million RMB in equity value

(24) All JYP activities were cancelled by advertisers and media outlets in China

(25) JYP issued the second press release with a more conciliatory tone, saying that Chou Tzuyu supports "One China" and is definitely not an advocate of Taiwan independence.

(26) Mainland Internet users discover that JYP was double-faced! On Chinese Weibo, they apologized. On Korean Internet, they said that said that this was a transient situation and they did not repeat their Weibo statement on their Facebook.

(27) JYP continued to be boycotted.

(28) Chou Tzuyu made a video appeal while wearing makeup

(29) Mainland negative public opinion soared to the high heavens, mainly against the pro-independence Taiwan media (SETTV, Liberty Times and Apple Daily) and JYP, and not necessarily against Chou Tzuyu herself.

(30) Chou Tzuyu came out with a video apology looking shaken and scared without wearing any makeup.

(31) Huang An wrote on Weibo: "Chou Tzuyu has finally come out to apologize! She said in her own words that there is only one China, that the two shores of the strait are one body and that she has always been proud to be a Chinese person! The day that we have been waiting for has finally arrived! We have won back a good girl who accepts the motherland. The people of the motherland has won a huge success on the road against Taiwan independence. Forward this!"

(32) Huang An's songs are removed from certain Karaoke lists

- (YouTube) Comparison of Chou Tzuyu's apology to the executed Japanese victim of ISIS.

- (YouTube) The usual captioned video of Hitler blowing his top upon learning the news that Chou Tzuyu has capitulated with a video apology.


Stanley Chao Facebook
Mainland actually had no response to Tzuyu holding an ROC flag on Korean TV or saying that she is from Taiwan in a mainland Chinese TV program, but the green media used to heap scorn about the broken hearts with shards all over the floor. Later on Liberty Times used the fact that TWICE was going to appear on the Beijing TV Spring Gala with the title: "Strong Nation Internet users call for boycott, Tzuyu flies to Beijing as schedule." That was when the mainland Internet users exploded.
When Ah-Mei sang the ROC anthem and was banned by the Chinese Communists, the mainland fans chose to support her. In the Tzuyu affair, the mainland authorities did not utter a word. It was the mainland fans who started the boycott. Why? Very simple. It was because Chou Tzuyu was used by the green media to fire shots across the straits. Okay, you play populism but so can they. You play hooligan to look haughty, but they turned out to be an even bigger and tougher hooligan. So now you are crying that they are being unreasonable. Isn't this risible?

Chou Tzuyu is merely the cannon fodder in the war between populism on both sides of the straits. Liberty Times even added: "'Labeled being of Chinese nationality': Shu Qi told foreign media: I am from Taiwan." Fortunately, Shu Qi's agency reacted quickly to defuse the situation. Chou Tzuyu's company is Korean and don't appreciate the subtleties here. They did not make an immediate response. Instead they said that they couldn't decide whether to choose China or Taiwan. Overnight the JYP weibo was flooded with negative comments and all JYP artists were boycotted/canceled. The JYP stock prices tumbled two days in a row. Finally, as the video shows, JYP surrendered unconditionally.

Who do you blame? Do you blame the mainlanders for being irrational? Taiwan independence is untouchable. If you don't go there, we can all get along and make our own money. But you keep going there time and again and then you heap scorn on the mainlanders. Why wouldn't they bite back?


Liu Taiyue
There is no problem with raising a flag or saying that you are from Taiwan. Very few people opposed that.  But the Taiwan media raised you up to be the Bright Light of Taiwan and exaggerated the significance of your actions. Your agency JYP also listed your nationality as Taiwanese at their official website. So this got bigger and bigger. Frankly, you are not to be blamed.
Mainland China did not force you to do anything. All they want is for you to choose between the RMB and Taiwan.

I checked through Facebook. Basically this is just a bunch of Hongkongers, Taiwanese plus some foreigners who don't know the facts but who are filled with sympathy entertaining themselves.

(The above are my personal thoughts. After all, I am only sixteen years old. And sixteen-year-olds don't have political positions, right?)

- SETN

This December 10 2015 SETN report says: "Taiwanese girl Chou Tzuyu who entered the Korean entertainment industry as a member of the TWICE group has been the subject of discussion over her nationality. Previously, she has drawn the discontent of mainland Internet users by saying that she is from Taiwan. This time, Chou Tzuyu and her TWICE teammates were on the renowned program <Weekly Idol> and she once against said that she is a genuine Taiwanese girl." Subtitle on screen capture: "I am from Taiwan" with the Republic of China.

Now there is nothing wrong with saying "I am from Taiwan" because it is the same as saying "I am from Shanghai" or "I am from Zhejiang." What is problematic is the story title: "Strong Nation heartbroken once again! Chou Tzuyu insists on Korean variety show <Weekly Idol>: I am from Taiwan." Chou Tzuyu didn't do anything to provoke 'Strong Nation' people; SETN did it for her, and neither JYP nor Chou Tzuyu clarified. It was a series of such incidents that led to the huge storm.

- JYP is so sneaky. Before this, they had Chou Tzuyu's nationality as "Taiwan" on their official website. After the affair blew up, they sneakily changed the information to Chou Tzuyu's place of birth as "Taiwan (China)" in simplified Chinese characters.
- Anonymous Tw: With respect to the JYP official website forcibly changing Taiwanese artist Chou Tzuyu's nationality to Taiwan (China), we solemnly inform the Korean government that it must be changed back to Taiwan. Paralyzing your web page will be just beginning of the shout of the people of Taiwan. If you ignore this notice, you are asking to be destroyed. Taiwan will make you see the force of a total boycott.

On the afternoon of January 16, the JYP Entertainment website began to be unreachable.

- As a Chinese person, I accept the video apology. It does not matter whether you really mean it or you have to do this for the money, you have at least apologized. Every person should receive a second chance. I hope that you can have a second chance not to work on your popularity or earn tons of money, but a second chance to genuinely recognize your error. You were exploited by the pro-Taiwan independence elements who pushed a 16-year-old into the eye of the storm. They want to use your fame to deepen the hatred between the people on the two shores. Your political choice does not bother me, but you should see just who is using you for their political purposes.

- A 16-year-old is not expected to have much political acumen. But the production company and management company should know better what can or cannot be done in the Chinese market.
- The population of China is 1.4 billion. If you upset so much as 0.1% of the people in China, your Weibo will be buried in an avalanche of 1,400,000 negative comments.

- What happens next? JYP's best option is to put Chou Tzuyu out to pasture for good and look for other putonghua-speaking girl(s), preferably from mainland China.

- (Passion Times) Taiwan website JUKSY has just issued a statement from their board of directors to the effect that they are offering NT$100 million to JYK to buy the contract of Chou Tzuyu so that she can reboot her career with them in Taiwan. Nice publicity stunt! There is no way that the deal with go through because nobody is worth that much in the Taiwan market.
- The deal can still go through, but JUKSY will pay a significantly smaller amount while still telling the world that this is for NT$100 million.
- Well, JYP is a publicly traded company so they will have to book the revenue somehow. How can they explain the missing NT$100 million?
- Great for Chou Tzuyu! But the Japanese and Korean members of TWICE are screwed, thanks to SETTV/Liberty Times/Apple Daily.
- Indeed, JYP is saying that they are totally unaware of such an offer. As expected, it was vaporware.

- The Chinese market belongs to the Chinese people. If the Chinese people won't let you come here and take their money, so what? If you don't like it, you can earn your money in the Korean and/or Taiwan markets. You were not forced to come to China.

- China is a big market that is important to companies and artists. For example, GOT7's Jackson always says that he is a Chinese person and therefore many mainlanders like him. Even if you don't consider yourself a Chinese person, you should consider your career. If you offend the Chinese people, the Chinese market will be closed to you.

- Frame #1: Jackson said "I am a Chinese person." Frame #2: "Tzuhu: From Taiwan (China)" and "Jackson: This one is from Taiwan. Taiwan (China)."

- It is not up to the artists or their companies. There is an election going on. (YouTube) Taiwan presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen said: "I think that the citizens of the Republic of China or a citizen of Taiwan holding a national flag expressing their feelings and support to those countries ... these are the rights that the citizens should have. She should not be suppressed. This is a very natural thing that we should all do."
- CTI (YouTube) has the news coverage of all the three major Taiwan presidential candidates coming out to support Chou Tzuyu.
- Every time that Huang An makes a denunciation, Tsai Ing-wen wins another several hundred thousand more votes.
- Tsai Ing-wen's nickname is literally "Spinach." The actually meaning is harder to translate. The Chinese term is 空心菜, which is literally the "empty-hearted vegetable (=Tsai)." This is intended to suggest that she is the one who gives plenty of talk but none of her ideas have any substance.
- It is very important for Chou Tzuyu to get screwed because it will guarantee that Tsai Ing-wen be elected because she will then pardon Chen Shui-bian. That is the most important thing right now. If Chou Tzuyu has to be crushed in the process, so be it.

- Chou Tzuyu's mother has reportedly come out to condemn JYP for making her daughter to accept the One China policy. So all of JYP's conniving has gone for nought.

- Apple Daily (Taiwan)

Huang An is public enemy! His mother's noodle shop has been detected. His sister said they have to cope themselves.
Someone has found Huang An's mother's noodle shop in North Hsinchu and said that "we should visit the place in our spare time! He made up shit to hurt entertainers ... we will ask his mother whether knows her son does as a Taiwan traitor and running dog." Many Internet users said: "Don't hurt his mother's business. His mother is innocent. She doesn't know how her son has gone wrong. But you can tell her to instruct her son not to become a traitor." "Please be reasonable because this shouldn't affect the wife and children." "The old woman may not be aware that her son has gone to such extremes."

Map direction to the noodle shop of Huang An's mother and messages to her

- (Ming Pao) The proverbial "informed source" unloaded alleged personal information of Huang An: In 2001 he obtained a mainland Chinese ID card and thus gave up his Taiwan residency. His home is in Taiping Town, Qingxin country, Guangdong province. His marital status is divorced. When Taiwan media reached his wife, she declined to discuss the state of their marriage and added: "Anyway, you will say whatever you want to say. This is what Taiwan media do all the time. While we still have some news value left, you can write whatever your want to write! Your position no longer has the fairness expected of the media. I don't want to make any comments."
- (Post852) Huang An's wife: "We are Taiwan citizens too. Why can't we have the right to choose our political positions?" "How many Taiwanese are working hard on mainland China? Do see how hard they work? Meanwhile you are just sitting in your homes watching television and cursing people out. And you think that this is democracy." "I'm very low-keyed, but I am still going to recommend all young people to talk about democracy after you've established a family, pay your taxes, read 5,000 books and travel to at least 10 countries first. Isn't that more rational and proper?"

- I'm having mixed emotions with all this! My heart aches so much for Tzuyu! But please stop blaming JYP! They did what they had to, in order to protect her, all JYP artists and the Company, and the people who are hurt from all this. Look at all the ongoing death threats to Tzuyu, flooded with repeated hateful words for days and days now! It badly affected Tzuyu, Twice, it affected JYPE and ALL of their artists. She is still a minor, they did what they had to. Before she apologized, the comments were flooded with hate. Now that she and the Company have apologized, can we stop hating JYP and continue to show our support to Tzuyu, TWICE and JYP Nation?

- What are some Hongkongers reacting so strongly about this case of someone being oppressed for waving a national flag? And then all this talk about freedom to raise your national flag? If Deric Wan or G.E.M. Tang waves a Chinese national flag, the same Hongkongers will throw a fit and demand that they be quartered!

- Someday when Chou Tzuyu retires, she can come out and say "Taiwan is not China" and "I am not Chinese." We the people of Taiwan know the truth about what is in her heart and we will always support her.

- Everybody sympathizes with Chou Tzuyu because she looked so frail and vulnerable on the video apology. Mainland Internet users are skeptical: "You are just kneeling in front of the pile of money." "You were reading off a written script. Can you be a bit more spontaneous? You were totally insincere!"

- Let's get it clear. The mainland fans did not make Chou Tzuyu apologize. JYP did, in consideration of their business mainland

- (Storm) The Mainland Affairs Council expressed its regrets over the whole affair. The Mainland Affairs Council has communicated to the Taiwan Affairs Office that this incident has seriously hurt the feelings of the people of Taiwan and they want the Chinese to restrain civil actions so as not to affect bilateral relations.
- What does the Mainland Affairs Council want? Why do they mean by restraining civil actions? Do they want the Chinese Communist government to censor the Chinese Internet to eliminate all criticisms of artists from Taiwan?
- It took two to tango. The Taiwan Affairs Office could make an identical statement about wanting Taiwan to restrain civil actions (plus media reporting) so as not to affect bilateral relations.

- As one of the top three transnational entertainment companies in South Korea, JYP must surely be cognizant what the principles and bottomlines are in various countries. In China, "Taiwan is part of China and not a separate country" is an inviolable principle.
- A simple public relations action would be for Chou Tzuyu to come out in the very beginning to say that "I'm only 16 years old. I don't understand politics. Please don't bother me with political questions." That would be the end of it.

- Given that mainland opinion is unified, opponents began to cite Japanese/Korean support for Chou Tzuyu. But that's a joke, because if a Korean performer refers to Korea's Dokdo Island as Japan's Takeshima Island, the Koreans will also flip out. Even the South Korean government says that it recognizes only one China and that Taiwan is a part of that China. So what was JYP thinking? Chou Tzuyu is a mere 16-year-old and doesn't know much. But how can a huge Korean entertainment company claim to be as ignorant as primary school students?

- Tsk tsk tsk. Here is what happen to JYP stock prices. Do you see cause-and-effect?

- (Apple Daily) January 18, 2016. Korean Multicultural Center said that it was racial discrimination, child abuse and human right violation to force Chou Tzuyu to apologize for waving a national flag, and therefore they intend to ask the Korean National Human Rights Committee to investigate. If found to be true, the police will sue JYP Entertainment Corporation and its owner J.Y. Park.

Meanwhile a Taiwan human rights lawyer named Wang intends to sue Huang An and JYP for coercion. He said: "I read in the newspapers that a man named Huang An used illegal means and without justifiable cause to coerce Ms. Chou Tzuyu so as to cause Ms. Chou Tzuyu to be very afraid. Huang An coerced her free will and made her say what she shouldn't say. Therefore I am going to file charges of coercion.

- (Apple Daily) JYP responded: "Because Chou Tzuyu was still a minor, the apology video was made after consultation with her parents after they arrived in South Korea. The company did not force her to make that video."

- Irrespective of how Chou Tzuyu apologizes, the pro-Taiwan independence media will continue to insist that she is pro-independence. They need a martyr, not someone who cowers to the Chicoms.

Apple Daily: Chou Tzuyu apologizes! She admits that she is Chinese (Tzuyu, you are Taiwanese! We know that you were forced! We support you!)

- (ET Today) January 16, 2016.

On the Chou Tzuyu affair, I cannot be completely on the side of Taiwan. Although Huang An's ideas are twisted, the Taiwan media were awful with their "collective rumor mongering."

Over the years, Taiwan has plenty of false rumors about mainland China. We have freedom of press as well as the freedom of rumor mongering. When did things start going wrong? The first time I encountered is when the Russian rescue team was prevented by the Chinese Communists from coming to relieve the September 21 1999 earthquake in central Taiwan. At the time, young people tried to find the original news report. When they couldn't find it, they declared that the Chinese Communists must have eliminated the news report. In the end, the only news report was a Russian report that the couldn't come because of problems within the Taiwan government.

Thereafter, I cultivated the habit of checking any mainland news story coming from Taiwan to what was actually happening over there. If I can find it there, then it must be yet another false rumor.

Huang An denounced Chou Tzuyu "completely and totally not because of waving a national flag." The first time round, Huang An objected to Chou's Two Country talk. When a fan explained to Huang An about the television program sub-titling, Huang An stopped. Huang An explained his action in his astonishing logic: "The pro-independence SETTV kept praising Chou Tzuyu. Given the amount of their efforts, SETTV must in cahoots with Chou Tzuyu w ho must be a pro-independence artist. You can't disguise that even if you are waving the Republic of China flag."

That was the simple reason. At this time, all the Taiwan media said "it was because Chou Tzuyu waved the flag of Republic of China and so she must be supporting Taiwan independence." Therefore all discussions in Taiwan are based upon this factually untrue report and all other derivative creations that have nothing to with reality. Everybody is acting out a farce.

How did this come about? It originated from mis-reporting. The instigators were Liberty Times and Apple Daily. It is interesting how all the other media followed suit and did not provide accurate information.

These are the possibilities:

1. Our reporters just copy information from each other, so there we all share a single news agency

2. Our media can't be brave enough to admit this: "We kept publishing the glass-hearts series of news stories in order to provoke mainland China, so that the people on both sides of the straits can be antagonized with each other. This was how Chou Tzuyu became victimized."

[Note: SETN Natural beauty Tzuyu waves Taiwan national flag, Internet users: Strong Nation glass hearts shattered once more; Liberty Times Tzuyu holds Taiwan national flag, Internet users: Can hear the sound of the glass hearts of Strong Nation people breaking]

3. The media have the common understanding that their mission is to incite hatred and thus bring the Republic of China national flag to ruins.

With the persistent provocations from SETTV and other media, the mainlanders' glass hearts were indeed broken. The mainlanders directed the anger provoked by the pro-independence media to the hyped young artist. There are hundreds of millions of Internet users on the mainland. If they want to burn the witch, nobody can stop them. If the Internet users wanted someone banned, they will get their way. Meanwhile, the Taiwan media don't have any accountability. They didn't offer any help to Chou Tzuyu; they only sent her to the stake to be burned.

The Taiwan media are capable of completely fabricating a controversy over Shu Qi's nationality too.

(Apple Daily) Chronology of the Shu Qi nationality affair

May 20. Cannes Film Festival published a schedule of photo sessions for movie stars the next day. Shu Qi's nationality was incorrectly listed as China. Shu Qi's team informed the organizers of the mistake.

May 21 19:18. At press conference and before the photo session, the organizers used pen to change Shu Qi's nationality to Taiwan on the program. At the time, the movie stars have not entered yet. Apple Daily reported.

May 21 20:29. China Times reported the same story as Apple Daily, but with the story heading of "Shu Qi changed to Taiwan nationality by hand."

May 22 12:06. United Daily News reported the same story and added certain non-existent details such as Shu Qi telling the international reporters and photojournalists that her nationality is Taiwan. According to information, the UDN reporter wasn't even at Cannes. The UDN story carried the title "Shu Qi thusts her beautiful chest to walk the red carpet at Cannes, fighting to say I am from Taiwan."

May 22 13:01. Liberty Times used UDN's report to blow up the nationality issue. Their story title was: "Labeled Chinese nationality, Shu Qi tell foreign media: I am from Taiwan!" This caused Internet users on both shores of the straits to engage in a verbal war. Shu Qi is criticized by mainland Internet users.

May 22 16:19. An Internet user posted a 15-minute video of the photo session in Cannes. Shu Qi did not say a word about the nationality issue.

May 22 22:05. Shu Qi's team issued a series of statements to say that Liberty Times published an inaccurate report. On Weibo/Instagram, Shu Qi emphasized: "I just want to let everybody see the best work. I don't want anything else."

Given these incidents, Taiwan artists should have a Standard Operating Procedure: If your main market is mainland China and not Taiwan, you must be prepared to immediately dissociate yourself from Taiwan media. You must not be stupid enough to let them get your burned at the stake.

Finally, can the Taiwan media go back to a fact-based reality? Must they deceive themselves and the public with false rumors? In the Chou Tzuyu incident, the problem was the series of news reports that were designed to provoke the mainland Chinese. That is the true origin of the incident. Now we have to face the reality: On one side of the Taiwan straits, there is Huang An playing up to populism. On the other side, there are the pro-independence media such as SETTV and Liberty Times playing up to populism. That is the reality. When one side attacks the other or vice versa, how can there be no retaliation? How can things only be one-sided?

- (Oriental Daily) January 17, 2016.


January 24 Anti-Huang An Demonstration March
Time: January 24 10:30-16:30
Location: Taipei City Government Office plaza
9,789 have indicated that they intend to participate
52,000 have indicated that they are interested
The demands of this event are
(1) It is not wrong to raise the Republic of China national flag
(2) It is not wrong to say that you are from Taiwan or that you are Taiwanese
(3) We hope the government will pay more attention to the small children who have gone to foreign countries to pursue their dreams
I hope that this event can use a rational and peaceful way of achieving our demands
as opposed to an emotional expression
and a demonstration march is hopefully a peaceful way that can achieve our demands

- (China Times) January 18, 2016.

On January 14, Show Lo attended a movie premiere in Beijing and was asked what he thinks of collaborating with mainland movie stars. He said: "Don't classify so finely, because we are all Chinese." Immediately many Taiwan Internet users were angry at him. One fan said Show Lo is liked because he is a Taiwan aborigine, but is now chilled because Lo is calling himself as Chinese. Lo's Facebook was flooded with negative comments.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vXL3raBByY

- (Apple Daily) January 18, 2016. Show Lo's company issued a statement

Certain persons with ulterior motives are deliberately stirring up what Show Lo said at the Beijing event. Our agency company issues this statement.

Show Lo is  is a native born, homegrown Taiwanese person and also a Chinese person who was brought up with a Chinese education. Who among his peers and elders are not? The cross-straits relationship issue is something that even political figures can't resolve, so please do ask those artists who only want to perform well. If even they can provide the answer, then the cross-straits problems should be trivial. Right? In the end, Lo only wants to perform. Please keep performing to performing, and politics to politics! Thanks, everybody.

Our company reserves the right to sue anyone who deliberately distorts or cites inaccurate information.

- (Winandmac) Since midnight, the number of Facebook friends of Show Lo has dropped by more than 10,000 to 2,388,000 and the trend is continuing. But Show Lo may not mind, because his Weibo has more than 50,000 new followers.
- Show Lo has 41,730,000 Weibo followers. In 2015, Taiwan's total population is 23,460,000.

- So far, no mainland newspaper said that the glass hearts of the people of Taiwan are shattered with shards scattered all over the floor.

- (HKG Pao) As Show Lo's Facebook followers declined, his Weibo followers increased. Since the mainland is the much larger market, he is seeing a net gain. This is the dilemma facing Taiwan and Hong Kong: the talents and the resources are flowing towards the bigger consumer market. Locking down Taiwan/Hong Kong is suicidal because if talented and resourceful people are forced to pick sides, they will pick the larger market. In the end, Taiwan/Hong Kong will be emptied out.

- China wins!

While Taiwan is busy with the elections and the post-election bickering
China has already seen the business opportunity
A sweater for special use with apologies at only 169 RMB (postage included)

Relevant Link: Entertaining in China Previous cases of Huang An/Anna Chan denouncing anti-China/Chinese artists

(SCMP) January 12, 2016.

The parent company of Chinese-language newspaper Ming Pao Daily is selling a stake in a subsidiary media company that runs politically sensitive social media content.

Media Chinese, which is owned by Malaysian businessman Tiong Hiew-King, said in a statement on Monday night that it was selling an unspecified interest in One Media which runs several Chinese-language magazines including Ming Pao Weekly and car magazine Top Gear. Media Chinese did not reveal any information about a potential buyer or say how many shares it was selling in One Media, but it owns 62.83 per cent of the company. This comes after mainland e-commerce giant Alibaba recently dismissed speculation that it was in talks to buy Ming Pao.

In 2012, One Media bought 10 per cent of media company Black Paper for HK$1 million. The company was co-founded by a lyricist with two former Commercial Radio DJs in 2009, a year before they rolled out the periodical Black Paper, which was printed on a single sheet of A5 paper.

The magazine gained a reputation for its satirical, outspoken content during the national education controversy in 2012. The company, Black Paper, has also published the popular Chinese-language satirical weekly magazine 100 Most since 2013.

In 2015, it founded the satirical media website, TV Most, which gained popularity with its political and social parodies. TV Most was one of the most popular multimedia platforms on social media, making fun of Hong Kong and mainland politics as well as Hong Kong government officials.

Yesterday, One Medias shares jumped 27 per cent, or 26 cents to HK$1.22 before it suspended trading, pending a statement on the deal. The news came as TV Most staged its show titled 1st-Guy-Ten-Big-Ging-Cook-Gum-Cook-Awards-Distribution at Queen Elizabeth Stadium in Wan Chai last night, and it went viral online. The show was also broadcast live on a TV channel.

(SCMP) January 12, 2016.

An awards show celebrating cover songs that make fun of social and political injustice in Hong Kong has become the talk of the town, with one academic even arguing that such satirical content could contribute to strengthening Hong Kongs cultural identity.

Discussion posts, photos and video clips of the sold-out TV Most 1st Guy Ten Big Ging Cook Gum Cook Awards Distribution, which took place at Queen Elizabeth Stadium, went viral on social media as well as receiving coverage in traditional Chinese-language media.

The show was aired live on pay TV station Now TV with a rare sponsorship from Shell. Citizens also gathered at various public spots such as Central and Shatin to watch the live cast.

The show was put together by multimedia website TV Most, which produces satirical video clips and cover versions of Canto-pop tunes poking fun at Hong Kong current affairs, from politics to media landscape and the education system, and other topics popular among young Hongkongers. It is founded by youth magazine 100 Most.

At the event, awards were distributed in front of a hysterical crowd, not to A-list celebrities, but to underdogs who are seen as outcasts from the mainstream, including best male singer Gregory Rivers, an Australian actor-singer who has been living in Hong Kong for 30 years, and grand award winner Denise Ho Wan-see, the politically vocal singer who was forced to go independent after playing a prominent role in 2014s Occupy protests.

I havent watched TV in a very long time. It was my first time watching a whole show cheering all the way. Support Hong Kong. Support Cantonese. Support derivative creative works, wrote web user Suz Tsoi.

Another web user HC Yip wrote that the fact that the availability of rich materials for derivative creations came from peoples discontent about the society was sad. And now we can only have a good laugh from watching this show, he wrote.

Anthony Fung, director of the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University, said Hongkongers have been struggling with establishing a cultural identity after the 1997 handover, and the kind of content generated by TV Most further strengthened Hong Kongs cultural identity. He said TV Mosts programme format makes fun of dominant broadcaster TVB, which is no longer a TV station that belongs the young generation.

He added that TV Most featured satirical content that voiced young peoples frustrations and discontent about a government that does not act on Hong Kong peoples best interests. It is another way of protest from the young generation, Fung said. While political activists take to the streets, these young people express their discontent against the status quo.

He said there is a worldwide phenomenon of the younger generation in big cities around the world rising against globalisation and capitalism, and Hong Kong is one example. There is a nostalgic feelings towards an old Hong Kong that wasnt controlled by property hegemony. A relatively fairer system, upward mobility and hope for the future were there, and the rule of law was upheld, said Fung.

However, Fung said TV Most cannot continue with poking fun at TVB forever, though derivative creative works which are now in the spotlight amid debate over the controversial copyright bill will continue to blossom amid the current socio-political climate. Other new platforms will emerge to showcase young peoples creations, which will become the taste of this generation, he said.

(Hong Kong Free Press) January 13, 2016.

Monday night was filled with mourners paying respects to David Bowie, but if you logged onto Hong Kong social media, you might not have known the singer had died. What had Hongkongers attention instead? An alternative awards show for satirical songs called TV Most First Guy Ten Big Ging Cook Gum Cook Awards Distribution (毛記電視第一屆十大勁曲金曲分獎典禮).

When TV Most first put tickets for the awards show on sale last month, they sold out within minutes. Hundreds of thousands of Hong Kong people tuned in for the live Now TV broadcast from Queen Elizabeth Stadium. Discussion of the show swamped local social media feeds for hours.

TV Most is not a broadcast station, but a new website and social media platform established by youth magazine 100 Most. Its Chinese name, Mou Gei (毛記), is a play on the citys biggest station TVB Mou Sin (無綫) in Chinese. Mou gei means Mous shop in Cantonese slang. TV Most even used TVBs colour scheme in its own logo.

TV Most is well-known for creating satirical fictional characters based on real people, many of whom are TVB news anchors and celebrities. For instance, one of the TV Most news anchors is Tung Fong-shing (東方昇), whose obvious inspiration is TVB anchor Fong Tung-shing (方東昇). Most of the programmes are tongue-in-cheek, with satirical news segments airing Monday to Friday. Serious news is covered as well every Wednesday a short documentary segment tackles sociopolitical issues and current events in Hong Kong with an uncharacteristic but welcome straight face.

Ging Cook Gum Cook (勁曲金曲) is a satirical take on TVBs music programme Jade Solid Gold (勁歌金曲 pronounced Ging Go Gam Kuk in Cantonese).

It is a weekly billboard programme that began in June last year, parodying real songs whilst poking fun at and raising concerns about social issues.

A song that has been on the billboard since the show started is Forever ATV, a play on famous singer Jacky Cheung Hok-yaus Forever Love. The title is a light-hearted but obvious jab at ATVs tendency to rebroadcast decades-old programmes rather than making new ones. The fact that ATV delayed paying staff wages several times is also subject to gentle mockery.

The programme does not limit its satirical subject matter to only TV stations, however. They transformed Eason Chan Yik-shuns Shall We Talk into a song about the controversial copyright bill, called Shall We Talk About The Internet.

There are four major music award ceremonies in Hong Kong every year, hosted by TVB, RTHK, Commercial Radio and Metro Radio. People have become increasingly cynical towards these shows, however, criticising them as being staged and clearly biased. The shows have been criticised for only handing out awards to singers signed to record companies friendly to the stations.

In 2009, TVB failed to reach an agreement with four international record companies over a royalties dispute. That year, singers who had contracts with those companies Universal, Warner, EMI and Sony did not receive any awards at the ceremony.

The TV Most Awards, meanwhile, is not beholden to the music industry in fact, it makes fun of the music industry establishment. Many of the awards went to artists who are not celebrities; instead the prizes honoured songs that were humorous or reflective of current affairs. One of the awards even went to a childrens choir group who sang about the pressures of the controversial Territory-wide System Assessment tests for primary school students.

The Best Female Singer award went to Akina Fong Kin-yee, a former TVB anchor who performed just one song, about the marital issues of middle-aged women. I have not joined the music industry yet, but I have already received an award, Fong joked at the ceremony. The vicissitudes of middle age and primary school examinations are the serious heart beating underneath the comedy.

The Best Male Singer award went to Gregory Rivers, or more well known as Ho Kwok-wing, an Australian actor-singer who has lived in Hong Kong for over 30 years. Though he first came to Hong Kong to follow his pop idol Leslie Cheung Kwok-wing, he is not a singer he is best known for his acting career on TVB, usually in the role of a Cantonese-speaking police officer. He sang Forever ATV as well as another song about Hong Kong peoples shared memories and core values.

The Grand Award went to Denise Ho Wan-see, often known as HOCC. Hos contract with her record company was not renewed after her vocal support of the pro-democracy Occupy protests. She sang a song about lawmaker Christopher Tree Gun Chung Shu-kun, a frequent target of parody for netizens.

The TV Most awards come at a time when many believe that Hong Kong television once a fertile playground for local humour and creative expression is on the wane. ATV has been plagued by questions about its independence ever since Chinese real estate businessman Wang Zheng became an investor (and unofficial major shareholder) in 2010. Two years later, the station received more than 40,000 complaints when executive director Louie King-bun criticised students on air.

The government has decided not to renew ATVs terrestrial licence after April 2016. Popular telecom mogul Ricky Wong Wai-kays Hong Kong Television Network was denied a free-to-air licence in 2013, a decision that was ruled two years later by the High Court to be unlawful. When TV Most first began, they aired a segment with Akina Fong that joked about applying for a licence of their own.

Though the awards may not be as serious as the other such ceremonies, the massively popular event may be another form of protest towards the musical establishment and more generally, towards the whole political scene in Hong Kong.

Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQEWb8oCyI TV Most Awards Show: The never-ending supplement drills

5:40

I have already been working until I am very worn out
If I have to work anymore, I will quit
I haven't slept all day
Actually I am not yet 10 years old
I got into such a situation because my mom is very bad
Life is too short, the red sun is too faraway
There are so many supplementary booklets that I am about to stop breathing
I don't care if there are too many fellow students in the world, not enough small friends
I have studying so hard that I am about to explode, stop breathing and be hospitalized
Obviously I have been trying to please my mom day and night
So why is the summer of my dream not here yet
Obviously I have tried my best without reservation, I work the supplements like crazy
I don't play because I want to live better
You ask me what I want
Who knows?
Through this hot summer I continue to work

When will I get to leave school?
It is always tiring to fight against mom
My monster daddy is even worse he wants to me to go directly from Form 1 to Form 3 without any break
I kept eating chicken essence to wake myself up
Even if my kidneys are busted, I still have to keep going

(Sky Post) I don't understand, I am alienated, I am afraid. By Chris Wat Wing-yin. January 15, 2016.

...

On the Internet there is a video of a bunch of primary school students singing a song from the movie <Infernal Affairs> with lyrics changed to the situation of the students having to do supplement homework drills. This video is popular among parents who give it many LIKE's. Many parents said that the lyrics reflect the harsh situation of their children and the song makes them break out in tears.

When I heard that, I was crying in my heart as well, because I am very much estranged from their society. I am not able of giving a LIKE to this song that so many parents and teachers LIKE. Furthermore, I don't understand why people can't see the problem with it.

...

The song's lyrics said that the students have no fund, no holidays, toiling day and night on the homework. There is nothing wrong with a song that reflects reality. But why is this song sung publicly on stage by primary school students heaping unabashed scorn on the mother and the father?

Ignoring the vulgarity of the lyrics, since when have people turned the hatred against the education system into hatred of your parents? When a group of primary school students demean their parents, don't you feel weird? The applause downstage was thundering. So what kind of world is Hong Kong turning into?

I don't understand, I am alienated, I am afraid.

(SCMP) January 6, 2016.

Reading material banned on the mainland has been pulled from the shelves of at least one Hong Kong bookstore as the mystery over the disappearance of bookseller Lee Bo deepens.

English-language-focused Page One, which has a total of eight outlets in the city six of them at Hong Kong International Airport is understood to have begun withdrawing sensitive material from sale in late November, around the time the first of five men linked to Causeway Bay Books went missing.

The pulling of the books marks a small but potentially significant moment for what has become the lucrative business of selling sensational, page-turning books on China banned by Beijing.

When a South China Morning Post reporter posing as a customer approached Page Ones Tsim Sha Tsui store and asked for a book called The Secret Deals Between Xi Jinping and Bo Xilai, the salesman said the retailer had stopped selling banned books more than a month ago. We were told to take all politically sensitive books off the shelves in late November. The manager did not tell us the reason, but said Page One would no longer sell banned books ever again. Staff at the Kowloon Tong store and one of the airport outlets told the Post the same.

Page One did not respond to requests for comment by press time last night. Page One Publishing, which mainly sells English-language titles, was set up in Singapore by Mark Tan in 1983. The retailer expanded its business into the mainland in 2010 and has since opened six shops in Beijing, Hangzhou and Chengdu. Banned books were often among the top selling items in Page Ones Hong Kong outlets and were placed in prominent areas at airport stores, from where mainland tourists would buy and smuggle them to elsewhere in the country.

The publishing of sensational books on the inner workings of the Communist Party and the private lives of government officials has brought lucrative returns for a number of booksellers.

The publisher at the centre of the ongoing mystery, Lee Bo, has reaped considerable profits from publishing anecdotal accounts on Chinese leaders long before the five shareholders disappeared in the past three months. Lees first book was on the so-called new Shanghai gang. In it he exposed the corrupt party boss Chen Liangyu, and it became the first account on the subject and garnered a lot of interest, said Jin Zhong, a local publisher, who is set to leave Hong Kong next month to join his family in the United States. That book, he added, generated a profit of HK$1 million and became Lees first bucket of gold. It also set a trend of publishing titles covering the most up-to-date developments in Chinese politics.

Unlike my books which could take months to produce a volume, the new publishers can do it in just a few days and hit the market on topics that are sensational and newsy, he said. To them, money-making is the number one objective, thats why they move fast and capitalise on personalities or subjects that are new in the market.

The lucrative nature of the business reached new heights during the Bo Xilai case in 2012 when the ex-politburo member and Chongqing party chief was engulfed in an alleged power struggle on the eve of the 18th party congress. Bos subsequent downfall spurred sales of books on Chinese politics to mainland tourists in Hong Kong. Those were the good days when we sold up to 300 copies a day, which got us out of the red after our 13 years of running the bookstore, said Paul Tang, the owner of People Book Cafe in Causeway Bay.

The surge in demand captured the attention of Gui Minhai, one of four partners in Lees book business who is said to be in custody in Shenzhen. Gui came to Hong Kong from Europe seeking to profit from the trade. Gui openly said he made HK$10 million just in 2013 alone, Jin said. With that money he bought houses and cars, and one of the properties is in Pattaya, where he was arrested.

Jins publishing business has yielded less profit, but he too has over 40 banned titles, including the Chinese-language edition of Jung Changs Mao: The Unknown Story, from which he made HK$3 million, selling some 100,000 copies of the book over a period of 10 years.

Internet comments

- With respect to what PageOne is doing, it appears that they are removing the books on political gossip but still leaving those about June 4th 1989 and Hong Kong independence. What is the difference? The political gossip books are fiction presented as facts, which is false advertising. June 4th was 26 years old and the facts are pretty much settled one way or the other, and Hong Kong independence is just a theoretical castle in the air.

- There are other books on Hong Kong newsstands that PageOne doesn't sell on principle.

(New York Times) Hong Kong Bookstores display Beijing's Clout. October 19, 2015. The tiny book stall next to the popular Star Ferry terminal in Hong Kong does a brisk business catering to the thousands of visitors from mainland China who pass by every day. About half of its books are political, including titles about the private lives, back-room politics and fabulous fortunes of the Communist Party elite in China. The other half are pornographic. Both types are banned in the mainland. Political books and pornography books both have market value, said the owner, Mak Kuen-tat, as he leafed through a tabloid about local celebrity gossip.

Here is a pornographic magazine:

Hong Kong 97: Ten shaved pussies

(Ming Pao) January 13, 2016.

Yesterday Apple Daily received an internal document from PageOne general manager Amanda To dated January 5 to PageOne employees, saying that the decision has been made to stop selling indefinitely all books sensitive about the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party in view of "recent news." Our newspaper sought confirmation from PageOne headquarters. The response was that the document was fabricated, and they have filed a police report.

(Page One) January 13, 2016.

Book chain Page One has confirmed that a memo calling upon its staff to avoid selling titles banned in China was fabricated. The company says they called police to investigate the matter.

On Tuesday, local newspaper Apple Daily alleged that General Manager of Page One Amanda To had issued an internal memo to staff on January 5. We are declared to announce that due to the news of these days, we are avoid to selling the affected books all about the Peoples Republic of China and Chinese Communist Party sensitive from now until further notice, it read, in broken English.

The report has been removed from the Apple Daily website. Page One issued a public statement, saying the forged memo which was posted widely on social media was untrue and misleading.

We strongly condemn the conducts of those persons and newspapers who forged, used or published such false document, the Page One statement read.

Internet comments:

- Fuck! Who is in charge at Apple Daily! Look at the English language in the Amando To memo. "We are declared to announce ..." "We are avoid to selling ..." If Amanda To really writes like that, she should be fucking fired immediately!
- Yes, I made the mistake of reading the memo while eating. I almost choked to death!
- If Singaporeans really write such poor English, Hongkongers have nothing to fear in terms of competition!
- But a Hongkonger fabricated this, so Singaporeans have nothing to fear in terms of competition!
- Even Google Translate can write better than that! (or maybe this came from Google Translate?)
- I like the signature of Amanda To! If that is how she signs her check with a number "7", I can write myself a $1,000,000 check from her.
- Amanda To (if she exists) should be suing Apple Daily for defamation.
- Amanda To is listed as a graduate of business management from the University of Bradford, United Kingdom. The University of Bradford should sue Apple Daily for suggesting that their graduates can write like this and still get a degree.
- Why is the General Manager's memo stamped by the Human Resources Department?
- You can order any stamp you want for any department in any organization in any number of print shops in Sheung Wan or Mong Kok.
- Why is the Human Resources Department involved in book inventories? Shouldn't the memo be coming from the sales or marketing department head? That's a brand new concept for corporate organization.
- According to SCMP on January 6, 2016, PageOne began pulling those political sensitive books last November. So why issue a memo on January 5 long afterwards?
- Why is the memo going to ALL STAFF (including the accountants, janitors, interior decorators, security guards, etc)? Shouldn't it be enough to go to sales, warehouse and store manager?
- Nowadays corporations sent memos via emails to the relevant employee groups. It is not environmentally friendly to still print paper letters to send by snail mail (note: the memo was folded to place into an envelop!).
- The terrible quality of the fabricated memo proves that this did not some from the Apple Daily creative writing team -- because they would surely do a much better job.

- We oppose political suppression of the freedom of press.
- You mean, We oppose political suppression of the freedom of creative writing?

- Oops! Where is the Journalists Association? Didn't they say that Apple Daily is a "proper" and "mainstream" media outlet above and beyond all criticisms?
- What does this reflect more on? The poor quality of the fabricator, or the quality of the young wastrel who was hired to be a reporter at Apple Daily, and/or the English-illiterate editors put in charge of gatekeeping?
- A responsible newspaper should at least make some basic verifications. But they went ahead and published without even exercising any commonsense.
- Do not make fun of everything being faked in mainland China. Apple Daily gives them a good run for their money.

- If the Hong Kong Police is investigating this case, what will Apple Daily do? Hide behind the shield of freedom of press which necessarily entails keeping the source of the lie confidential in order not to discourage whistleblowers?
- If the fabricator turns out to be an Apple Daily reporter trying to fill out his work quota, then what? Will Apple Daily stick to the shield rule?

- Time for a journalism class. (American Press Institute) Journalism as a discipline of verification

Journalists often describe the essence of their work as finding and presenting the facts and also the truth about the facts.

They also describe using certain methods a way of working which Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel describe in The Elements of Journalism as a scientific-like approach to getting the facts and also the right facts.

Called the Discipline of Verification, its intellectual foundation rests on three core concepts transparency, humility, and originality.

Transparency means show your work so readers can decide for themselves why they should believe it.

  • Dont allow your audience to be deceived by acts of omission tell them as much as you can about the story they are reading.
     
  • Tell the audience what you know and what you dont know. Never imply that you have more knowledge than you actually do.
     
  • Tell the audience who your sources are, how they are in a position to know something, and what their potential biases might be.

Transparency signals the journalists respect for the audience. It allows the audience to judge the validity of the information, the process by which it was secured and the motives and biases of the journalist providing it.

- Apple Daily has deep-sixed its PageOne exclusive report, so I don't know what they wrote. But I can guess that in this Internet age, they will report that they have received a copy of a memo which they haven't verified, so they are publishing it for the people to decide.


Apple Daily: Sorry, the page that you are looking for does not exist.

PageOne General Manager Amanda To to employees on Tuesday, ordering that all books 'sensitive to the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party' will not be sold indefinitely with the reason being 'recent news.' However, there was no indication that this is related to the disappearance of the five Causeway Bay Bookstore persons including Lee Bo." In other words, there was no attempt to contact PageOne about the memo.

But this report also states that (1) last week, an Apple Daily reporter went to a city store and spoke to a store employee; (2) an insider told Apple Daily about the company warning employees to stick to the company line or risk being fired. Therefore, Apple Daily had at least two prior sources. Why not ask them if they received the January 5th Amanda To memo too? Is that so hard to do?

- At this point, Apple Daily has purged the story from its website. So they know that they screwed up. What next? Of course, they aren't brave enough to apologize publicly. But that would mean that they will lose a libel case from PageOne. Therefore, they will stonewall the affair until the end of time.

- Well, the sequence of events is straightforward. First, Apple Daily received this tip and published it without any careful thought. They believed that they have an exclusive story. Next, they find out from the discussion forums that Internet users find the memo to be deeply flawed in terms of grammar and ideas. So they purged the story and are hoping that nobody notices.

Earlier the Hong Kong government appointed "Education Tsa" Arthur Li Kwok-cheung to be the Hong Kong University council chairman. Last week, the Hong Kong University Alumni Concern Group marched. Now, former Hong Kong University Students' Union president Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok and former Undergrad magazine deputy chief editor Wong Chun-kit sent an email to Hong Kong University students yesterday to say that the appointment is "an insult by the tyrants against Hong Kong University" and this is now the moment of the "most critical crisis." They said that they are planning on a student strike/non-cooperative movement. "The people of Hong Kong University have been silent for too long. We must strike back firmly at the authorities." They said that "respect are obtained by chanting slogans, but they have to be defended by action."

The email urged the students to bring their student ID's to attend to closed door "Hong Kong University First Meeting on the Student Strike." The agenda include setting the structure of the student strike, the decision-making mechanism, the goals of the movement, the blueprint of the action plan and the election of the Strike Committee. They said that they want at least 100 students to attend so as to ensure that the Strike Committee will have sufficient representation.

Previously, current Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-an said that there is no plans for a student strike. Today Fung said on Facebook forwarded the post about the meeting and said, "I've been depressed for a few days. Ultimately I want to go into battle together."

The outcome will be known after tonight.

Internet comments:

- (RTHK) January 11, 2016.


The meeting was restricted to Hong Kong University students only. At the entrance, student IDs had to be produced and inspected. The windows on the meeting doors were covered with black plastic bags, and a white board was used to prevent the media from seeing the meeting rooms. The students also refused to answer media questions.

I hope someone has made a secret recording of the proceedings and immediately post it on Facebook today. After all, we all know that the people have the right to know.

- (HKG Pao) January 10, 2016.

... It is interesting to note that these Hong Kong University students are planning a student strike not in the name of the Hong Kong University Students' Union. Instead, this is a Facebook group fronted by former Hong Kong University Students' Union president Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok and former Undergrad magazine deputy chief editor Wong Chun-kit. The current Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-an only said that he would participate and offer support "if my fellow students decide to hold a strike."

Furthermore, the organization will be a Strike Committee to be elected. This is saying that the Hong Kong University Students' Union will play no leadership role, which means that there is plenty of reservation within the student body about the appropriateness of a student strike.

- "We want at least 100 attendees so that the Strike Committee can be sufficiently representative." The total number of undergraduate students during the academic year 2014/2015 was 16,187. So 100 self-selected students who show up at this meeting will represent the rest. My calculator says 100 / 16187 = 0.6%.
- And they can't really hold a referendum to gauge student support for a strike. The result will be something like 99% of the students who voted (who constitute 5% of the student body) support a strike. And the world will be focused on the 95% who didn't say YES.

-  (Oriental Daily) The media can only take photos of the garbage bags through the door windows. But they noted that about 50 students went into the closed-door meeting, including current HKUSU president Billy Fung, ex-HUKSU president Yvonne Leung, ex-HK Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow, ex-Undergrad deputy chief editor Wong Chun-kit.


At first, the media can observe the meeting room as the students filed in.


Then Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung moved a white board behind the door.


So now the media can only take photos of the garbage bags on the door windows.
- They wanted 100 bodies for representativeness but got only 50. What now?
- Easy. They will claim to have another 50 proxy statements.

- Here is the meeting agenda:
1. Election of chairperson and secretary (10 minutes)
2. Reading/passing the agenda (10 seconds)
3. Reading/passing the Strike Meeting and its constitution (30 minutes)
4. Electing the Strike Committee members (30 minutes)
5. Approving the blueprint for the action plan (90 minutes)
6. Discussing and approving the student strike publicity plan (20 minutes)
Estimated total time of meeting: 3 hours 10 minutes

So this is a foregone conclusion that the student strike will be on. There is no plan to discuss whether there should be a student strike or whether such a strike could be 'successful' under any metric or the costs of failure (which won't occur, of course, because I said so).

- Why hasn't current Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jing-an called a student strike already? Here are some possible questions.

Firstly, how many students will answer the call? Here is some recent data:

(The Stand) October 30, 2015.

The Hong Kong University Students' Union held a referendum on two motions. A total of 5,353 students voted at a turnout rate of 33.2%.

Motion No. 1
The post of Chairman of the Council of the University of Hong Kong must be filled by a candidate who is acceptable to the members of its teaching staff, non-academic staff and students.

There were 5,119 YES votes, 110 NAY votes and 87 abstentions.

Motion No. 2
Arthur Li Kwok-cheung is not suitable to hold any position under the governance structure of the University of Hong Kong.

There were 4,785 YES votes, 178 NAY votes and 353 abstentions.

So 30% is the maximum support. In practice, many students support the idea but won't join a strike either because this is not in their personal interest (e.g. delayed graduation; lowered grades, etc) or because they don't think that it will work. So what happens if you call a strike and only 100 students responded? If the Student Union made that call, the cabinet will be completely de-legitimized thereafter. And that is why it is better to have a Strike Committee bear the risk of failure.

Secondly, how long will a student strike last? Prior to the start of Occupy Central, students went out on strike too.

(BBC, September 22, 2014) Thousands of students in Hong Kong have converged on a university campus to begin a week-long boycott of classes. The Hong Kong Federation of Students said that about 13,000 students had gathered for the start of the boycott. The mood was defiant.

So that was for one week. How long for the proposed Hong Kong University student strike? If you call for a one-day strike, you will get many participants because the cost is low but your critics will call this a joke. If you call for an indefinite strike until Arthur Li quits, you will get a lot fewer participants because of the high uncertainty.

It is possible to call this an unlimited strike, which means that the strike goes on until the goals are realized or the students decide to call off the strike. In the latter case, the students will argue that it was not a failure because they were the ones who made that decision (hehehe).

If the strike goes on for several weeks, it is possible to extend the semester with the courses condensed and evaluations renegotiated. If the strike goes on longer, it is possible that the entire semester will be canceled and the students will have to study for one more semester paying the attendant tuition fees and room-and-board.

Thirdly, what are the chances of success?

That depends on the definition of success. You can define your minimum goal as Arthur Li quitting. You can define a higher goal as changing the law that automatically puts the HKSAR Chief Executive in as chancellor of all eight universities. There are even higher goals but let us even try. What about the minimum goal then?

Based upon what happened during Occupy Central, the chances of Arthur Li/CY Leung capitulating is zero. In Benny Tai's script, Occupy Central will achieve total success within 3 days after 10,000 people paralyze the Central district to force the government to capitulate. Instead, the government waited for 79 days until public opinion is completely on their side before carrying out the clearance. In this case, the students can go on strike for 790 days and Arthur Li wouldn't mind.

Fourthly, the reason why labor strikes work is because the vital interests of the capitalists are being hurt. Every day that the longshoremen are out on strike, the capitalists could see the cargo containers sitting in the dockyards and money down the train. The same cannot be said about a student strike. The students can go on strike as long as they want, and Arthur Li, CY Leung and company won't feel any pain. Neither will the citizens in general. Occupy Central was different, because the purpose was to hold the citizens hostage in order to put pressure on the government. Of course, the student strike can involve stoppage in class attendance as well as blocking Bonham Road outside the campus to inflict maximum damage on residents in the neighborhood. But that won't win them many friends.

Fifthly, will a student strike create rifts within the campus community? If some students call a strike, will they try to prevent teachers from teaching and/or stop other students from attending class? Will the 30% be fighting against the 70%? How do you carry out a mass movement while fighting against the majority?

Of course, all the questions above are leftist retardism. The answers are already formulated by Admiral David Farragut at the Battle of Mobile Bay: "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!"

- A student strike? Isn't that just another name of collectively playing truant? Yes, instead of attending those lectures on retrosynthetic analysis in organic chemistry, or algebraic knot theory, aren't we better off with the day spent sunning at Repulse Bay beach?

- The students can go on strike and refuse to take exams, but they better not interfere with the other students' freedom of academic study/research.

- By the way, the unlimited student strike called in September 2014 (see Ming Pao) was never officially called off. That strike would end only if Chief Exeuctive CY Leung apologizes and resigns; ministers Carrie Lam, Rimsky Yuen and Raymond Tam resigns; police commissioner Tsang Wai-hung resigns; and the National People's Congress Standing Committee withdraws its August 31st decision. None of these have happened yet (except Tsang Wai-hung has retired). Technically, the students should still be on strike. So why call a strike on top of a strike?
- Hamburgers have double deckers, so do can student strikes.

- A tenet of Occupy Central is that you can hurt others but you must never hurt yourselves. Students who go out on strike for an extensive period are hurting themselves. So the creative solution is the Relay Student Strike, being a variation of the Relay Hunger Strike, which is a form of protest in which a number of persons go on strike by turns. So you can have an unlimited student strike by having one student going on strike for one day, another student going on strike the next day, etc.

- Drop Out! By Chris Wat Wing-yin.

On the day before yesterday, 152 (=0.6%) attended the Strike Meeting and formed a Strike Committee for the 24,955 full-time students in order to decide on class strikes and/or hunger strikes.

Each year, the government pays for 80% of the university expenses. If our taxes are supposed to support these students to engage in class/hunger strikes, then I suggest that why don't these 0.6% form a Strike Committee to express their opinions without wasting public money.

The world should be simple: If you don't like this restaurant, you don't have to eat here; if you don't like to watch TVB drama, you can switch channels or even turn off the television set; if you don't like someone to be your university council chairman, you can drop out of school. Nobody is blocking your way. People are actually cheering you, because taxpayers don't want their blood-and-sweat tax dollars to force you to study at a university that you don't like. If you don't want to study, you should drop out directly instead of just going on class/hunger strikes.

- (The Guardian) January 3, 2016.

Chris Patten, the chancellor of Oxford University, has told students involved in the campaign to remove a statue of Cecil Rhodes that they must be prepared to embrace freedom of thought or think about being educated elsewhere.

Patten accused students who had criticised Rhodes, who regarded the English as racially superior, of trying to shut down debate. He said that by failing to face up to historical facts which they did not like, students were not abiding by the values of a liberal, open society that tolerates freedom of speech across the board.

The intervention by Patten, who oversaw one of the last vestiges of the British empire as the final British governor of Hong Kong, comes after nearly 200 international students at Oxford signed a statement saying the Rhodes scholarship they share does not buy [their] silence over the imperialists legacy.

Rhodes, who is remembered for beginning the policy of enforced racial segregation in South Africa, attended Oriel in the 1870s and left a large sum of money to the college in his will. Each year, 83 international students are selected to study at Oxford under the scholarship that bears his name.

The Rhodes Must Fall campaign seeks to persuade Oxford university authorities to remove a statue of Rhodes from the building of Oriel college and to spread awareness of his white supremacist views and the historic crimes of the British empire.

In his apologia for Rhodes, Patten evoked the spirit of the South African statesman Nelson Mandela, the countrys first black president after the end of apartheid, who he said endorsed the Rhodes scholarships.

I think that we are giving them [the students] the respect of listening to their views, even when we dont agree with them, he told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4.

But if people at a university are not prepared to demonstrate the sort of generosity of spirit which Nelson Mandela showed towards Rhodes and towards history, if they are not prepared to embrace all those values which are contained in the most important book for any undergraduate, Karl Poppers Open Society, if they are not prepared to embrace those issues then maybe they should think about being educated elsewhere. But I hope they will embrace those issues and engage in debate.

Patten styled the objections to Rhodes as along the lines of the safe spaces policies adopted on many university campuses in Britain and the US, which critics have said are used to suppress debate on a range of issues.

That focus on Rhodes is unfortunate but its an example of whats happening in American campuses and British campuses, Patten said. One of the points of a university which is not to tolerate intolerance, to engage in free inquiry and debate is being denied. People have to face up to facts in history which they dont like and talk about them and debate them.

He added: Can you imagine a university where there is no platform? I mean a bland diet of bran to feed people, its an absolutely terrible idea. If you want universities like that you go to China where they are not allowed to talk about western values, which I regard as global values. No, its not the way a university should operate.

- Hypothetical dialogue:

Hong Kong University Students' Union president Billy Fung Jin-an: We will strike until we kick you out!
Hong Kong University Council chairman Arthur Li: You are free to strike. I am more interested to know that, given that my term is for three years, will you be on strike for three years?

- This is Occupy Central redux for CY Leung. In order to force Leung on an issue, the resisters will try to paralyze/obstruct normal operations at the university. Leung will do nothing and he will wait for public opinion (students/teachers/staff/alumni/general public) to swing to his side.

- What are the possible actions?
--- Class strike (been there, did that, not working)
--- Hunger strike (been there, did that, not working)
--- Imprisonment of council members (been that, did that, not working)
--- Blocking/filibustering council (council chairman rules on agenda/procedural matters; not enough members in council)
What hasn't been tried yet?
--- Occupation of vice-chancellor's office (Peter Mathieson isn't the target)
--- Occupation of university council president's office (Arthur Li does not have an office)
--- Occupation/lockdown of entire campus (not enough numbers)
--- Terrorist attacks such as bombings (declaration of state of emergency to shut down the university indefinitely)

- (Apple Daily) January 13, 2016. By combining information from multiple sources, Apple Daily learned that almost 200 Hong Kong University students attended the meeting. The participants agreed on a time schedule and action goals for the class strike. They intend to begin the class strike as early as January 20. However, the undergraduate students do not resume class until next Mondya, which makes the timing very tight. At the next meeting, the exact date and action plan will be decided.
- Eh, the other news media counted 50 to 60 persons entering the meeting room, but Apple Daily counted almost 200. The result of the Big Bang was an inflationary universe.

- They now have a logo for the HKU Strike Committee (HKU Student Strike Facebook)

Reform the University Council
Chase off the Tsar

- Advice from the Tsar, September 15, 2014
(NOW TV)
Host: Executive Council member Arthur Li thinks that the university students know that they cannot change the National People's Congress Standing Committee resolution but still put on a show (namely, a student strike). He thinks that the university should drop out of school in order to demonstrate that they are willing to make sacrifices.
Arthur Li: The university students go on strike to say that they are willing to sacrifice one week. Is that such a big sacrifice? Everybody who has attended university has skipped class at some point. Right or not? If you really want to talk about making sacrifices, then you must do a little something that shows other people that you are making sacrifices. Do what? You can drop out of school. If you drop out of school, this is going to be huge sacrifice for you. But is that a good thing? Yes, it is a good thing. Many people are studying for associate degrees. They could not get into university. Now they will have a chance to get into university.

- (Oriental Daily) January 15, 2016. Hong Kong University vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson said that the university will not punish student strikers and won't compel them to attend class. However, the students must take responsibility for their own actions.
What does that mean? It means that if you don't show up for class the rest of the semester, you will receive a failing grade in accordance with the rules. You do not get a free pass just because you say that you are fighting for your freedom/democracy/etc. That extracurricular experience cannot be substituted for credits on Advanced International Macroeconomics or Human Physiology.

Chinese University of Hong Kong vice-chancellor Joseph J.Y. Sung: "Not going to class is a sacrifice already." He does not encourage students to drop out of school. (Apple Daily)
- Remember the legend of Qiu Jin/Ch'iu Chin? At the time, the Chinese overseas students were divided between those who wanted an immediate return to China to join the ongoing revolution, and those who wanted to stay in Japan to prepare for the future. Qiu allied unquestioningly with the former group. At a meeting of Zhejiang students to debate the issue, she thrust a dagger into the podium and declared, "If I return to the motherland, surrender to the Manchu barbarians, and betray the Han people, stab me with this dagger!" In 1906 she returned to China along with some 2,000 other students.

- (Oriental Daily) January 17, 2016. On January 17, the Hong Kong students held its second strike meeting. The meeting was scheduled to begin at 9pm, but they had to wait until 10pm for enough students to meet the 100 quorum. According to information, the students will hold a class strike on January 20 (Wednesday), hold a meeting of all students on January 23 (Saturday) and hold a hunger strike on January 24 (Sunday).
- What? A class strike for one day and a hunger strike for one day? They don't even bother to hold a relay hunger strike with braised lamb stew for those coming off?

Hong Kong student hunger striker striking at hunger in accordance with international standards

Prelude:

(SCMP) Hong Kong activists vow to lodge complaint with UN over missing booksellers. January 7, 2016.

Albert Ho Chun-yan, chairman of the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, said the group is planning to report the case to the United Nations Committee on Enforced Disappearances to urge Beijing for an answer. The committee will report to the UNs General Assembly on its observations if it follows up on the case, as Ho said Lee was likely to have fallen victim to a political kidnap. The alliance will also organise a march on Sunday, from the Hong Kong governments headquarters in Admiralty to Beijings liaison office in Western District.

(Valiant Frontier)

Causeway Bay Bookstore
January 10 (Sunday) 2pm
Assemble at Government Headquarters
Illegal kidnapping
Ruining rule-of=law
Defend Hong Kong
Unite together

Valiant Frontier
January 5, 2016

This march is organized by the Chink Club. Our organization calls for all localist groups to come out and hijack those leftist retards. The Causeway Bay incident shows that China is treating Hongkongers like nobodies. We call for all localists to show up with placards for Hong Kong independence and Hong Kong flags, and use the methods of resistance of the Localists to lead the way for Independence!

January 8, 2016

The so-called valiant ones have shown their true selves. They talk about valor, but their bodies are honest. We know that from very early on. Now this so-called Valiant Frontier organization wants to hijack the event.

I am not going to condemn you, because I only have contempt for a cowardly bum like you. If you have the guts to hijack, bring it on, cowards! I am declaring war against you: I am scorning you, I am saying that you can't deliver, I am saying that you won't move, I am saying that you are useless. What about it? Are you upset? If you have the guts, let's fight it out with a sworn statement promising no one is to blame for any deaths or injuries. If you don't have the guts, go home already. Over.

(Headline Daily) January 10, 2016.

Mr. Lee Bo has received a video of Lee Bo, in which he said that he had gone to the mainland on his own in order to take care of certain personal matters, and he doesn't understand why some people want to make such a big deal out of it. He said that he and his family are under a great deal of pressure. He says that if the outside world really cares about him, then they should not make such a big deal anymore. At the same time, Mrs. Lee Bo received a handwritten note dated today. The contents are similar to that of the video.

Translation of Lee Bo's note:

I noted that recently some peole in Hong Kong are organizing marches over my business. I am very scared and perplexed by this.

Let me repeat this again. I went back to the mainland this time completely on my own in order to settle some personal matters. It is not related to anybody else. I don't know why these people want to make such a big deal over this matter.

It does not matter what your goals are or what interests you hope to derive from this, your actions are seriously interfering with the normal lives of me and my family. You have caused us to be under a great deal of pressure to the point of physical and mental exhaustion. In such an atmosphere, how can I come back to Hong Kong?

I implore you to be considerate about my family, and respect my choices and privacy. Please do not blow this matter up. That would be genuine concern for me.

Lee Bo
January 9, 2016.

Internet comments:

- Given the latest note on Saturday which has been authenticated by Mrs. Lee Bo, will the enthusiasm at the Sunday march?
How much energy can you put into the usual slogans:
"Down the Chinese Communists!"
"End One-Party Rule!"
"Support Hong Kong independence!"

- Everybody know that Lee Bo's video and note were made under duress. We can ignore anything that he has to say, because we know that he is being held captive by the ruthless Chinese Communists.
- Lee Bo is no longer even a player in this drama. The engine of history will move on to crush the Chinese Communists, with or without Lee Bo. [Of course, it is easier if he dies.]

- The march must go on, because the true purpose of the march is to get people to donate money in order to be able to hold more marches to raise more money.

- The underlying message from Lee Bo is simple: Guys, if you make such a big stink, I'll never be able to come home again! Even somebody brought up on melamine-laced baby formula can tell. But the show must go on, because the Democracy Movement needs aare  martyr and Lee Bo is just the perfect fall guy.
- Lee Bo and his wife realize that, and that is why they are striking back with the note/video. The harder the pan-democrats push, the harder they will push back.
- The pan-democrats are probably starting to feel uneasy. They look for a fight with the China Liaison Office/Zhongnanhai, but instead they are fighting with Mr. and Mrs. Lee. They are up shit creek without a paddle, but they can't back off now -- anyone who tries to back off will be accused of betrayal.

- Will Lee Bo be released for the good behavior of asking people not to make a big deal of his case? Well, look at the other four missing booksellers? Have they been freed yet? Since silence won't work, we must resist valiantly.

- Why does Lee Bo blame the outside world for creating pressure on his family? It's his wife that called the media, including Headline Daily this time.

- Once again, the note is suspicious because its contains a number of simplified characters. A genuine Hongkonger never uses the simplified characters because it is a crippling of traditional Chinese culture. Lee Bo is trying to communicate something here.

- This is a tightly written script with something completely different everyday. Hire that scriptwriter for TVB!
- I can see what happens next -- Donald Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz will try to outdo each other to pressure China into releasing Lee Bo. But before a global thermonuclear war breaks out, Lee Bo reappears to explain how he was abducted by aliens.

- Headline Daily showed the note, but they did not show the video which has Lee Bo sitting on a sofa and speaking to the camera. That's a bit unfair to the public right's to know.
- Lee Bo was kidnapped because he wrote/published "banned publications" on Chinese politics. So why were the note and video leaded to the pro-China Headline Daily? This is very suspicious.
- Oh, Headline Daily is also the newspapers with the largest circulation in Hong Kong. But any genuine Hongkongers would be giving it to Apple Daily.
- If the note/video appeared in Apple Daily, everybody would think that it was more of their fiction.

Main Event

(SCMP) January 10, 2016.

Hundreds of people took to the streets of Hong Kong on Sunday over the disappearances of the five missing booksellers, demanding Beijing to uphold the One Country, Two Systems principle. It is the second such protest in a week and indicates a growing unease in Hong Kong over allegations agents from mainland China may have abducted the booksellers and taken them back to China for questioning.

Richard Tsoi, deputy chairman of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, said it is time for Beijing to explain to the Hong Kong people what has happened to the missing booksellers. The One Country, Two Systems is under threat. It is time for Hong Kong people to come out to defend the city, to defend the freedom we have always enjoyed, said Tsoi. The alliance is the organiser of the march.

Participants said they took to the street to say no to white terror. I dont want to be the next to disappear. Who knows if people who have taken part in the Umbrella Movement will be the next to disappear? said Billy Wu, 43.

The protesters will march from the Hong Kong government headquarters in Tamar to the central governments liaison office.

(Oriental Daily) January 10, 2016.


"Captain America" Andy Yung waving the British dragon/lion flag for Hong Kong independence

About 1,000 persons gathered on Tim Mei Road outside Government Headquarters. They set off at around 245pm, as they waited for late arrivals to this 2pm assembly. According to Richard Tsoi, deputy chairman of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, the disappearances showed that One Country Two Systems has gone awry and therefore the march will show that the people of Hong Kong want freedom and human rights. As for the Lee Bo video, Tsoi said that Lee was forced to pretend to be safe. The alliance handed out yellow ribbons to marchers at the Admiralty Centre pedestrian overpass and on Tim Mei Road. They also changed slogans such as "Oppose political kidnapping" and so on.

(Oriental Daily) January 9, 2016.

More than a dozen Localists wearing black clothes and surgical masks raised the British flag and came to the front of the procession. They emphasized that they were not happy with the Alliance's way of conducting a march, and they said that they want to march in their own manner. They denied that they want to hijack the march. It is not known whether there will be additional activities after the march is officially over.

(Oriental Daily) January 9, 2016.

When the Localists demonstrators reached the Western District Police Station, they were surrounded by more than 100 police officers and brought to wait on the sidewalk. The police were running traffic control and would not let them advance. Meanwhile other demonstrators were allowed to advance to the China Liaison Office. The Localists began to complain, with some of them trying to break through the police line onto the roadway but they were unnsuccessful. Eventually they were able to advance slowly towards the China Liaison Office. When this group reached Connaught Road Central, the police blocked again. This group tried to break through the police line without success. After the Alliance's march was formally over, the police let the Localists proceed. When they got there, they took a walk around the blck and then they attached yellow ribbons onto the metal barricades and threw placards into the China Liaison Office. Then they left at around 645pm.

Videos:

Oriental Daily https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFabCAjb8lo

Resistance Live Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uagxn8T66qQ Police road block scene begins at 7:56.

INT News Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0gibvXU9dM

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6XbEZPEw98

Hong Kong Institute of Young Wastrel Studies Facebook https://www.facebook.com/1640482902830291/videos/1682186881993226/ Woman screaming: "Help me! Somebody help me! Rescue me! Help me! Rescue me! Don't cry! Help me! Don't cry! Help me! Help me! Rescue me! I am very scared! Help me! Don't cry!" all because the police let the pan-democrats marched through but stopped these Localists.

United Social Press https://www.facebook.com/UnitedSocialPress/videos/1083293538370245/ Time lapse video Part 1
United Social Press https://www.facebook.com/UnitedSocialPress/videos/1083294141703518/ Time lapse vdieo Part 2 Central Market pedestrian overpass

Internet comments:

- Hey, Albert Ho and Lee Cheuk-yan predicted a turnout of 5,000 with 48 organizations participating. Where are they?
- (Oriental Daily) About 1,000 persons gathered on Tim Mei Road outside Government Headquarters. They set off at around 245pm, as they waited for late arrivals to this 2pm assembly.
- (Ming Pao) About 500 persons participated in the march, some holding placards and wearing yellow ribbons.
- (Post 852) The organizers have declared at about 6,000 persons marched. Once again, the stated goal was surpassed.

- (Bastille Post) The organizers claimed 6,000 while the police gave a peak estimate of 3,500. This is lower than expected, as many people expected more than 10,000 or even 40,000. There several reasons:

(1) Lee Bo's actions has cooled things down. He sent two faxes and one video, in which he said that he did so for personal reasons and he doesn't understand why people are making a big deal out of it. Even if you question whether the faxes or video are sincere, his wife has gone down to the police station to withdraw the missing person report. You have to believe that this may be in the best interest of Lee Bo.

(2) Lee Bo and others published those "banned books" for the money. He told Next Weekly that his books are a mixture of truths and lies. "Political books are published not for justice, but for the hefty profits." This is not going to win public sympathy, as compared to a newspaper reporter gone missing.

(3) Even if some people sympathize with Lee Bo, they won't march because they don't want to be used by politicians and they are afraid of physical clashes. The past several Alliance marches had seen clashes with Localists, sometimes scarily so.

- The march was scheduled to start at 2pm. NOW TV reported that there were 100 or so people at the time, and that figure included both plainclothes policemen and reporters.

- Passion Times: Cheng "Four-eyed brother' Kam-mun

During the Alliance to Support Democratic Patriotic Movements in China's Causeway Bay Bookstore march, some resisters were surrounded and imprisoned by the Evil Police. But the people next to them could still proceed and they pretended not to see what was going on. When you can't even help those Hongkongers who are dying next to you, how can you still demand the release of Lee Bo?

- (Headline Daily/Sing Tao) Question: why are you marching today?

Ms. Yang: The freedom of speech of the people of Hong Kong and certain rights that were given to us by the Basic Law.

Ms. Cheung: Everybody has the goal of defending One Country Two Systems. What happened to these five people in Hong Kong is unacceptable to me.

Mr. Chan: As Audrey Eu said, what the mainlanders are saying is that even if you are doing something legal in Hong Kong, you cannot use what is done in Hong Kong as your excuse. Actually I very much agree with this position.

Question: Are you hurting or helping Lee Bo?

Ms. Yang: I believe that what Lee Bo is saying is a script written for him by the mainlanders. If Lee Bo runs the Causeway Bay Bookstore, he could not say something like this.

Ms. Cheung: Actually, I think that I can help him. Anyone with clear eyes can see that the Chinese Communists are applying pressure on him to make that video. Also, this is not just a matter for Lee Bo alone. This is a matter for all the people of Hong Kong. By helping him, I am helping all the people of Hong Kong.

Mr. Chan: Actually, this is no longer about an individual situation. This is about the situation of all the people of Hong Kong. This is also about all non-Hongkongers whether they are tourists or foreigners. When they arrive in Hong Kong, their personal safety will be directly affected.

- Mr. Lee Bo, you better not come back to Hong Kong.

Frankly, many people want to see you dead.

It does not matter where you choose to die. Either Hong Kong or mainland China will do. If you are dead, the mission to smear the Central Government will be completed. Not even the waters of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River will ever wash the dirt away.

If you die, your wife will be taking trips around the world to collect human rights awards, freedom of speech awards, etc. She will also be very rich if you bought you a big China Life Insurance Company policy before you disappeared (note: proof of death is required).

If you die, Apple Daily and Next Magazine will get a breath of life from their waning fortunes.

If you die, you will be Hong Kong's own Li Wangyang. Many political parties will instantaneously have an issue with which to raise political donations. Lee Cheuk-yan's June 4th 1989 gig is reaching its dead end, so this will be a shot in the arm for the politicians. They promise to raise motions in your name every day.

If you die, there will be annual Lee Bo marches and Lee Bo candlelight memorial services. There will be several Lee Bo Memorial Museums.  Kowloon's Ladies Market will be filled with Lee Bo t-shirts, Lee Bo posters, Lee Bo badges, Lee Bo refrigerator magnets, etc. You will be more popular than Che Guevara, Chairman Mao and Bruce Lee put together.

If you die, the foreign countries will collective criticize China. You will be the subject during each and every state visit from now to eternity. Even the foreigners will hold moments of silence on your behalf.

Therefore, you must not disappoint all these people.

- Prince Wong (Scholarism) Facebook

January 10, 2016 (Sunday)
I participated in the "Free the Causeway Bay Five March" this afternoon. At the end of the mar, I approached the China Liaison Office with a placard in hand. At the time, I was standing in front of the metal barricade and I was going to toss the placard inside the metal fence. Two or three police officers pulled me and threw me onto the ground. My knee and lower leg were scratched and bruised. Actually, all I wanted was to toss the placard over. I did not have any intention to hurt anyone, and I did not intend to charge. Why did the Police and the China Liaison Office find such a simple method of expression objectionable?

Give the chilling specter of the midnight knock on the door faces HK, it is time that Hongkongers should think seriously about out to get out of this place. There are a number of ways to do so.

Firstly, you can immigrate to some place where freedom reigns, such as the United States, Canada, etc. In many of these countries, a Hong Kong applicant must submit a Certificate of No Criminal Conviction.

(Wikipedia) A police certificate is an official document issued by police or government agency of a country to enumerate any criminal records that the applicant may or may not have. Criminal records may include arrest, conviction, and possibly criminal proceedings. The issuance of Certificates of No Criminal Conviction is a charged service provided by the Hong Kong Police Force which is solely in connection with a person's application for a visa to visit or reside in another country, or for adoption of children. Applications for the Certificate for any other purposes will not be accepted.

(Police.gov.hk) The applicant should bring his/her Hong Kong Identity Card or valid Travel Document, plus a letter from the relevant Consulate / Immigration Authority / Government Authority, which contains his or her name and clearly indicates that the production of the Certificate is required. The issuance of Certificates of No Criminal Conviction is solely in connection with a person's application for a visa to visit or reside in another country, or for adoption of children. Applications for the Certificate for any other purposes will not be accepted.

(Oriental Daily) January 9, 2016.


Hong Kong is dangerous? Emigrate to escape the chaos!

In 2013, there were 20,290 applications for Certificate of No Criminal Conviction. In 2014, there were 21,09 applications, for a year-to-year increase of 7.0%.

For the first 11 months of 2015, there were 19,112 applications. For the comparable first 11 months of 2014, there were 19,981 applications, for a year-to-year decrease of 4.6%. So Hongkongers are just not leaving in hordes. But the Causeway Bay Bookstore affair did not break out until January 2016, so 2016 may yet be another bountiful year.

Another way of Hongkongers to protect themselves is to use their BNO passports.

(Wikipedia) British National (Overseas)

British National (Overseas), commonly known as BN(O), is one of the major classes of British nationality under British nationality law. Holders of this nationality are British nationals and Commonwealth citizens, but not British citizens. The nationality itself does not grant right of abode anywhere in the world, including United Kingdom or Hong Kong, but all BN(O)s are permanent residents of Hong Kong. BN(O)s are subject to British immigration controls and do not have the automatic right to live or work in the United Kingdom.

The British National (Overseas) status was created by the Hong Kong Act 1985 in anticipation of transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong on 1 July 1997. This nationality was "tailor-made" for Hong Kong residents with British Dependent Territories Citizen (BDTC) status by virtue of their connection with Hong Kong: it allowed the people of Hong Kong to retain a relationship with the United Kingdom after the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong to the People's Republic of China. BN(O)s enjoy consular protection as British nationals would when travelling outside Hong Kong. However, since most BN(O)s also hold Chinese nationality, they do not enjoy consular protection in Mainland China and Macau, owing to the Master nationality rule. From 1 July 1987 to 30 June 1997, nearly 3.4 million of British Dependent Territories Citizens in Hong Kong successfully registered for British National (Overseas). All BDTCs in Hong Kong lost their BDTC status on 1 July 1997, and any BDTC who did not register as a BN(O) automatically acquired Chinese nationality or British Overseas Citizenship, depending on their ethnicity.

Here is the Master nationality rule, especially to the denial of British consular protection in Hong Kong.

(Hong Kong SAR Government, Immigration Department)

According to Article 18 of and Annex III to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the Peoples Republic of China, the Nationality Law of the Peoples Republic of China shall be applied in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region from 1 July 1997. Taking account of the historical background and the existing circumstances of Hong Kong, the Standing Committee gives the following explanations concerning the implementation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the Nationality Law of the Peoples Republic of China

    1. Where a Hong Kong resident is of Chinese descent and was born in the Chinese territories (including Hong Kong), or where a person satisfies the criteria laid down in the Nationality Law of the Peoples Republic of China for having Chinese nationality, he is a Chinese national.
       
    2. All Hong Kong Chinese compatriots are Chinese nationals, whether or not they are holders of the British Dependent Territories Citizens passport or British National (Overseas) passport. With effect from 1 July 1997, Chinese nationals mentioned above may, for the purpose of travelling to other countries and territories, continue to use the valid travel documents issued by the Government of the United Kingdom.  However, they shall not be entitled to British consular protection in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and other parts of the Peoples Republic of China on account of their holding the above mentioned British travel documents.
       
    3. According to the Nationality Law of the Peoples Republic of China, the British Citizenship acquired by Chinese nationals in Hong Kong through the British Nationality Selection Scheme will not be recognised. They are still Chinese nationals and will not be entitled to British consular protection in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and other parts of the Peoples Republic of China.
       
    4. Chinese nationals of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region with right of abode in foreign countries may, for the purpose of travelling to other countries and territories, use the relevant documents issued by the foreign governments. However, they will not be entitled to consular protection in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and other parts of the Peoples Republic of China on account of their holding the above mentioned documents.
       
    5. If there is a change in the nationality of a Chinese national of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, he may, with valid documents in support, make a declaration at the authority of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region responsible for nationality applications.
       
    6. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is authorised to designate its Immigration Department as the authority of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region responsible for nationality applications. The Immigration Department of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall handle all nationality applications in accordance with the Nationality Law of the Peoples Republic of China and the foregoing provisions.

And within the Chinese Memorandum of the Joint Sino-British Declaration of 1984:

Under the Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China, all Hong Kong Chinese compatriots, whether they are holders of the "British Dependent Territories citizens' Passport" or not, are Chinese nationals.

Taking account of the historical background of Hong Kong and its realities, the competent authorities of the Government of the People's Republic of China will, with effect from 1 July 1997, permit Chinese nationals in Hong Kong who were previously called "British Dependent Territories citizens" to use travel documents issued by the Government of the United Kingdom for the purpose of travelling to other states and regions.

The above Chinese nationals will not be entitled to British consular protection in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and other parts of the People's Republic of China on account of their holding the abovementioned British travel documents.

If you were born in Hong Kong or elsewhere in China, you are a Chinese national. If you hold a BNO, you are still a Chinese national while you are in Hong Kong. So the way to do is to go through the formal process of renunciation of Chinese nationality. The good thing is that a BNO passport holder without nationality can apply to become a British citizen.

(Hong Kong SAR Government, Immigration Department)

Any person who meets the requirements laid down in Articles 10, 11 and 12 of the Chinese Nationality Law can apply for renunciation of Chinese nationality.

Article 10

Chinese nationals who meet one of the following conditions may renounce Chinese nationality upon approval of their applications:

  • they are near relatives of foreign nationals;
  • they have settled abroad;
  • or they have other legitimate reasons

Article 11

Any person who applies for renunciation of Chinese nationality shall lose Chinese nationality upon approval of his application.

Article 12

State functionaries and military personnel on active service shall not renounce Chinese nationality.

Other Requirements

If the applicant is a Chinese national, he/she can renounce his/her Chinese nationality if:

  • he/she is a Hong Kong resident or was a Hong Kong resident immediately before he/she emigrated to another country; and
  • he/she is of sound mind; and
  • he/she is the spouse or child of a foreign national and is required under the law of that country to renounce his/her Chinese nationality before he/she can be naturalised as a national of that country;

or

he/she has emigrated to and settled in another country and is required by the law of that country to renounce his/her Chinese nationality before he/she can be naturalised as a national of that country;

   or

he/she has been adopted by a foreign national and is required under the law of his/her adoptive parents country to renounce his/her Chinese nationality before he/she can be naturalised as a national of that country.

Application may also be considered if the applicant has other legitimate reasons.

If the applicant chooses to renounce his/her Chinese nationality, it may affect his/her right of abode in the HKSAR.

Historical materials:

(EJ Insight) Why BNO is a much better choice than HKSAR for passport. By Ben Kwok. January 7, 2016.

When the going gets tough, the tough get a British passport. That may explain why there is such a sudden surge in demand among Hongkongers for a renewal of their British National (Overseas) (BNO) passport or so it seems.

The BNO passport was made available for 3.4 million Hong Kong citizens before the 1997 change of sovereignty. But the renewed demand for the document, according to discussions on social media, was spurred by the controversy over the disappearance of Causeway Bay bookstore owner Lee Bo and his four associates. Theres wide speculation that he was arrested in Hong Kong by mainland security authorities and taken across the border for investigation, putting into question Beijings sincerity in abiding by the one country, two systems principle.

How Lee was able to return to China without a mainland visa only deepens the mystery. But as it turns out, Lee is a British citizen, a holder of a UK passport, as confirmed by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Britain, in fact, has expressed deep concern over Lees disappearance, which should put a warm glow in the hearts of some BNO passport holders.

Although BNO passport holders understand that they wont be able to enjoy all the rights and privileges of a British citizen, they know that if they are kidnapped and taken to another place, they can count on one more help, instead of relying solely on Hong Kong police and government officials.

Many Hong Kong people are horrified by our dear Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who on Tuesday suggested that Lee Bo himself should take the initiative to contact the Hong Kong police. Is this the kind of help we can expect from our government?

There is no doubt that being a BNO passport holder has its advantages, as explained by Simon Shen, associate professor and director of the Global Studies Programme at the Faculty of Social Science of the Chinese University of Hong Kong and lead writer (global) at the Hong Kong Economic Journal. His Facebook post about the matter won 10,000 likes within 24 hours. BNO is definitely better to have, wrote Shen, because if the Hong Kong political structure changes, or the one country, two systems is canceled, or other countries withdraw their recognition of the HKSAR passport, BNO will get you to other parts of the world, and provide the last escape door. Shen pointed out that a BNO passport can get you to 189 countries, including some former British colonies that require a visa for Hong Kong passport holders. In case of emergency, one can get help from the British Consulate, and stay in most European Union countries.

The only drawback is the fact that you cannot become the chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. But considering all the troubles CY Leung faces everyday, whos interested in the position, anyway?

Interestingly, not many Hongkongers have bothered to renew their BNO passports. Out of the 3.4 million qualified passport holders, only 22,000 renewed their passports, compared with 88,000 in 2004, according to data from the British Consulate General in Hong Kong.

One reason for the big drop in numbers could be the cost of passport renewal. A 32-page BNO passport now costs 102.86 pounds (HK$1,167), compared with HK$370 for an HKSAR passport. The 48-page version costs 110.86 pounds (HK$1,258), compared with HK$460 for the local one.

But if a few hundred dollars more can offer a double insurance over a period of 10 years, why not?

There are also shortcomings in our local passport. HKSAR passport holders can only get visa-free access to 152 countries, excluding, among other destinations, the United States, Australia, India, Saudi Arabia and Bhutan, according to Secretary of Security Lai Tung-kwok.

Despite an increase of 25 visa-free destinations most notably Russia and other Eastern Europe countries in the past decade, Hong Kong still trails behind Singapore and Malaysia in this regard.

Also, according to Lai, there are 17 countries such as Vietnam, Iran and Burma that offer visas to Chinese citizens but not to HKSAR passport holders.

(SCMP) For Hongkongers, British National (Overseas) passport not worth the hassle. June 28, 2014.

The care with which we safeguard passports reflects the unnerving inconvenience of losing one. The need for such care grew amid the emphasis on the security and integrity of travel documents following the emergence of global terrorism. Security authorities are less understanding these days about the repeated loss or theft of passports that might fall into the wrong hands.

Renewing a passport is therefore an important ritual of identity. So imagine the incredulity among Hongkongers, accustomed to the reliable if bureaucratic ways of the Immigration Department when it comes to issuing SAR passports, at the mess the British passport office has got itself into over a backlog of 500,000 applications. It would have been accompanied by relief that Hong Kong no longer relies on the former colonial power to issue passports. But it was shortlived.

Holders of British National (Overseas) passports who want to renew their documents must submit all valid passports, including those issued by Hong Kong. SAR passport holders have now been denied the chance to travel because their documents are held up in the British bureaucracy for up to four months. The fiasco arises from the closure of British consulate passport offices, including the one in Hong Kong in December, and the repatriation of passport services. It was a cost-saving measure that has upset the travel plans of many.

Applicants can supply copies if a document is needed urgently, or apply for its early return. But it remains ridiculous that people have been grounded by a bureaucratic bungle. Inadequate planning for a surge in passport applications hardly seems a good enough excuse. British Home Secretary Theresa May rightly apologised. This should remind Britain that while some Hongkongers still value the BNO passport as an alternative document, they can't do without the SAR passport for long. It should also prompt them to consider whether they really need the BNO document, given the extent of the SAR passport's visa-free acceptance.

(The Standard) Allow us to live in UK, BNO holders demand. January 22, 2015.

Thousands of Hongkongers with British National Overseas passports are pushing for the right to live in Britain - but there are no signs they will get their way. About 400,000 Hong Kong residents hold BNO passports, which means they can enter Britain without a visa and get consular help when abroad, but have no right to live there. Hongkongers were offered a special British National Overseas status in 1997 to calm those who feared for their future under Beijing's rule.

BritishHongKong, a non-profit organization, is campaigning for holders to have the right to live in the country. It has written to members of parliament and made a statement to a parliamentary inquiry into Hong Kong's post- handover relationship with Britain. "It is an extra option for Hong Kong people. It's a right they deserve," says Sampson Noble, a 30-year-old who runs the BritishHongKong campaign group, which has 3,000 members in its online forum. "I was born British. It should not relate to my ethnicity."

Frustrated Hongkongers are joining the calls for Britain to offer them an escape route in the wake of increasing social and political tension following the Occupy Central movement last year.

Joe Li Kin-cho, an immigration consultant at the Global Path Overseas Studies Centre in Hong Kong, said inquiries from Hongkongers looking to immigrate have doubled in the past six months. "It has been increasing since Occupy Central. Inquiries have increased by 100 percent, which was unexpected," he said. "People are very worried."

Destinations such as the United States, Canada and Australia remain popular, but Taiwan and Singapore are also attractive as they are cheaper. It costs only about HK$2.3 million to immigrate to Taiwan, while it costs HK$10 million to move to Singapore.

Li said citizens are concerned about political and social instability from the Occupy movement. "Some will call us and say their democratic freedom has been reduced, while others say the protesters have ruined what they like about Hong Kong," he said.

Another BritishHongKong campaigner, Humphrey Lau, said the British still continue to discriminate against Hongkongers. "We were ruled for 156 years and we are being discriminated against," he said. "There is a feeling of being betrayed."

Facebook page "BNO Concern," which also calls for the right of BNO passport holders to live in Britain, has more than 6,000 likes, with users dismissing their status as "rubbish" and pushing for change. "How can we trust the UK any more? UK returned HK to China without any consent of the HK people," wrote Stanley Lam. "Also the UK rejected the right of abode in the UK for all HK British people. Shame on UK!!!"

Despite the growing calls, there is no sign that Britain will change its immigration rules. "There are currently no plans to amend British nationality legislation to give holders of BNO status the right of abode in the UK or to extend the right to apply for BNO status," a consulate spokeswoman said.

(SCMP) Britain rejects appeal to grant full citizenship to former Hong Kong British soldiers. March 12, 2015.

London has turned down a renewed appeal to grant full British citizenship to former British-Hong Kong soldiers left in the territory after the handover. A Home Office minister said veterans could take a form of British nationality known as British National (Overseas). But BNO status does not allow holders the right of abode in Britain. The issue was debated in the House of Commons yesterday, following lobbying by a campaign group formed by ex-servicemen in Hong Kong. The group - Campaign for Abandoned British-Chinese Soldiers Left in Hong Kong in 1997 - has been fighting for the former soldiers' right of abode.

Andrew Rosindell, a member of the British parliament's foreign affairs committee, said: "The ex-servicemen in Hong Kong were part of our regular British army, working side by side with British troops both in Hong Kong and elsewhere. "And these men are now our veterans To many, it seems the veterans of ours now form a forgotten part of British history."

But immigration minister James Brokenshire said: "It has been a long established practice in British national law for British nationality to be lost when a country ceases to be a UK territory." He added Hongkongers could acquire BNO status, which can be retained for life.

Dubbed by some second-class British passports, BNO passports were issued after the Hong Kong Act 1985. There are some 3.4 million holders of such passports in Hong Kong.

A campaign group member, Roger Ching Yuen-ki, who served in the Royal Military Police in Hong Kong, said it would continue its fight. "We hope the parliament will agree to issue passports to the rest of us as soon as possible and it will urge [Prime Minister] Mr David Cameron to reconsider the issue."

Internet comments:

- One argument for BNO is that the United Kingdom will provide diplomatic protection overseas. Here is an example:

(Reuters) April 3, 2015.

A Chinese naval frigate has evacuated 225 foreign citizens from strife-torn Yemen, its foreign ministry said, marking the first time that China's military has helped other countries evacuate their people during an international crisis. Ten different nationalities were among the evacuees picked up on Thursday afternoon from Aden, Yemen's second city, and transported to Djibouti, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on its website late Thursday. The ministry said foreign governments - Pakistan, Ethiopia, Singapore, Italy, Germany, Poland, Ireland, Britain, Canada and Yemen - had requested China's help.

The United Kingdom is a bankrupt country with no ability to project military power across the world.  They can't print the BNO passports in a timely manner even if you pay the costs. When bombs start falling in Yemen, all the UK government can do is to call up the Chinese government and beg them to evacuate the British citizens in the area.

You may very well ask why the United Kingdom asked China and not the United States for help. After all, the United States are their good allies and also the most powerful nation in the history of mankind.

(State.gov)

On February 11, 2015, due to the deteriorating security situation in Sanaa, the Department of State suspended embassy operations and U.S. Embassy Sanaa American staff were relocated out of the country. All consular services, routine and emergency, continue to be suspended until further notice. The Department notified the public of this move, and its impact on consular services, and urged U.S. citizens in Yemen to depart while commercial transportation was available.

The level of instability and ongoing threats in Yemen remain extremely concerning. There are no plans for a U.S. government-coordinated evacuation of U.S. citizens at this time. If you wish to depart Yemen, you should stay alert for other opportunities to leave the country. U.S. citizens who are able to depart Yemen for another country and are in need of emergency assistance upon arrival may contact a U.S. embassy or consulate in that country.

- (SCMP Michael Chugani, December 2, 2015)

Public Eye rarely reads the pro-Beijing mouthpiece Global Times, for the same reason we can't stomach the one-sided pro-democracy camp mouthpiece Apple Daily. But something the Global Times said last week made us sit up and think. It suggested that Hongkongers who do not consider themselves Chinese should give up their SAR passports and home return permits and forgo their right to seek help from Chinese embassies when in trouble abroad.

That makes logical sense. The SAR passport, which has visa-free entry to more countries than the British National (Overseas) passport, is issued by the Hong Kong government on behalf of China. The home return permit is a mainland document granting holders unlimited entry and residency. It would be hypocritical to reject Chinese identity yet accept the benefits the SAR and home return documents accord. Those who say they are Hongkongers instead of Chinese should dump their Chinese documents for the BNO passport, which is just a travel document. We wish them luck in persuading the British government to grant them abode rights.

But there are Chinese nationals, such as Democratic Party chairwoman Emily Lau Wai-hing, who have never rejected their Chinese identity yet have been stripped of their home return permits. Global Times should also champion the reinstatement of Chinese documents for Hongkongers who have never rejected their Chinese identity. That will go some way towards showing it is not a Beijing mouthpiece in the same way the Apple Daily is a democracy camp mouthpiece.

- (Geoexpat Forum) October 19, 2007

Technically yes, BNO is a class of British nationality.
However the status is next to meaningless. Immigration authorities of various countries - and even British and Chinese consulates abroad - appear to be confused or ill-informed about what a BNO is.

There have been cases of BNO passport holders being detained because immigration control had not heard of it and thought they were false British passports (which in a sense they are!) and the local British Consulate had wrongly 'verified' them as such. Chinese consulates have also refused to provide assistance to BNO holders, mistakenly believing BN(O)s to be British Citizens and not Chinese nationals.

The official positions are:

The Chinese government does not recognize the British nationality status of BN(O) for Hong Kong Chinese; they regard it as merely a travel document facility. As such, BNO passport holders (who are of Chinese descent) are Chinese citizens and 1) are not entitled to British diplomatic protection within Chinese territory and 2) are entitled to Chinese consular assistance abroad.

The UK Foreign Office says BNO passport holders are entitled to the highest levels of British consular assistance in third countries, and that they are working hard to remind their consular missions about this.

From personal anecdotal knowledge, there appears still to be widespread confusion and ignorance among both British and Chinese consulates with regard to BNO passport holders. No one respects it.

If you are a BNO passport holder of Chinese descent, I would strongly encourage you to get a HKSAR passport and travel on that instead. It is also a lot cheaper, and has superior visa-free travel entitlement. (I would also advise BNOs to apply for the HKSAR passport in Hong Kong; overseas applications via Chinese embassies or consulates may meet with obstruction from unhelpful, ill-informed staff.)

- (Shanghai Expat Forum) December 23, 2007.

I bought my girlfriend a ticket to visit me in Shanghai from Canada where she is studying. She is a HK resident with a BNO passport.

She arrived yesterday but she thought she didnt' need a visa, but then they wouldn't let her in. She flew to HK to get a visa, and now they are saying it takes 5 days to get it. She says there is another option she can take to arrive in Shanghai tomorrow, but the cost will be 1500CND. Doesn't make any sense to me, does anyone know what she is talking about?

...

Ok..well I talked to her again, she says she paid 1000CDN to get a visa so she can arrive on Dec25th ... I've been looking at visa sites like China Travel Service and it is only like 500HKD for a same day visa. She says they told her she is a special case because she doesn't have HK/China passport and is not a Canadian or British citizen...really i don't understand it and then she got mad because I was mad at her for paying so much without checking the CTS link I sent her first. Anyways....anyone ever heard of something like this?

...

I'm assuming that you're talking about a person who is Chinese and from Hong Kong. If so, then she's really just a Chinese citizen with a useless passport. That she'd even attempt to enter the Mainland on a BNO passport is beyond belief.

...

A BNO passport is about as useful as a chocolate fireman. A good friend of mine (British guy) is married to a HK lady for some 16 years now. They have two kids. 4 years ago they wanted to move to the UK. You should have seen the sh1tfight she had to go through to get a UK resident visa.

...

To get a visa with her useless BNO passport, she'd have had to go to the PRC visa office in Wanchai and apply for one. BNO is useless and issued to current and / or former colonists who continue to be treated like second-class citizens. Only recently did they even waive visas to enter the UK for BNO passport holders while to this day are still legally treated as third-class "citizens" of their own "country."

...

BNO is useless and issued to current and / or former colonists who continue to be treated like second-class citizens. Only recently did they even waive visas to enter the UK for BNO passport holders while to this day are still legally treated as third-class "citizens" of their own "country."

Over 1/2 of HK BNO passport holders have actually given up their useless BNO passport in favor of their SAR passport because a HK SAR passport offers many more travel benefits than a BNO passport. For example, a HK SAR passport holder has visa-free access to approximately 130+ countries compared to a dismal 88 with a BNO passport. Even many countries of those 88 place tighter conditions on those entering with a BNO passport than with a HK SAR passport.

Oh, did I mention that a BNO passport is a royal pain in the *** to renew and is three times more expensive that a HK SAR passport?

...

- On on hand, if you are a Hong Kong resident with a Home Visit Permit, you can visit China as frequently as you like and whenever at no cost. You just present your card to the immigration officer and you will be cleared to enter in about 10 seconds.

On the other hand, you renounce your Chinese nationality and hold only a BNO (or any other) passport. Here is the Commissioner's Office of China's Foreign Ministry in the Hong Kong SAR:

Single entry visa: HK$200
Double entry visa: HK$300
Multiple entries (6 months): HK$500
Multiple entries (12/24/36 months): HK$800

Normally it takes 5 working days. Additional charge for expedited service (HK$300 in 2 working days; HK$200 in 3 working days). And you must have a single or double entry visa before you can get a multi-entry visa.

If you don't want to queue, you can use a travel agent who will charge more (of course). For example, China Travel Service charges $1360 for a double-entry visa.

The United Kingdom is earmarked for a sweetheart deal:

Single entry visa: HK$360
Double entry visa: HK$540
Multiple entries (6 months): HK$1090
Multiple entries (12 months): HK$2170

If you have strong beliefs, you should be willing to pay for them. It is a display of character.

- (Apple Daily) Legislator Regina Ip said that those people of other nationalities should not be applying for Home Visit Permits. Philosophically, that's true. But it's about the economics, stupid! For a United Kingdom national, the cost for a 12-month multiple-entry visa is HK$2170. A Home Visit Permit for a Hong Kong resident is $390 for unlimited number of times over ten years. What would a man, who is an economic animal, do?

- (Speakout HK @YouTube)

0:01 Radio host: Everybody should extend their BNO's ...

0:15 Senior Counsel Ronny Tong: It is useless.

0:16 Radio host: According to what you say ...

0:16 Tong: It is absolutely useless.

0:17 Radio host: Yes.

0:18 Tong: At the very least, it is useless in Hong Kong. The so-called BNO passport is actually just a travel document. It is not a nationality document. Even the United Kingdom does not recognize the right of abode of BNO holders.  Even in the United Kingdom, it is regarded as a travel document. According to the Chinese Nationality Law, if one of your parents are Chinese and no matter where you were born ... unless you became a British natoinal as soon as you were born ... you will always be a Chinese national.

- (Kinliu) Welcome to abandoning Chinese nationality. By Chris Wat Wing-yin. January 9, 2016.

A university lecturer is advocating that people who used to hold a BNO passport go down to the British Consulate to renew the passport, because One Country Two Systems is clearly dead when the mainland public security bureau officers can come to Hong Kong to enforce the law. So people are talking about how the BNO passport can be a comfort.

Senior counsel Ronny Tong said that the BNO passport is merely a travel document. The holder does not have the right of abode in the United Kingdom. Even if the holder gets into trouble overseas, he can't get help from the British consulate. Therefore, the BNO itself is quite useless.

According to the Chinese Nationality Law in Annex III of the Hong Kong Basic Law, you are a Chinese national if you were born in Hong Kong unless you formally go through a renunciation process. So right after the call to renew the BNO passports, the call the next day was to renounce Chinese nationality. The media even provided several ways to do so.

That's fantastic! And you better do what you say! There are too people in China already, and Hong Kong is crammed. Don't just play keyboard warriors! If you can, you should do it immediately! You can begin by cutting up your Hong Kong Identification Card, your Home Visit Permit to China and your Hong Kong SAR passport. Then you will be completely free of China.

Of course, when they ignore your pleas at the British consulate, or when you can't travel to some places, you shouldn't blame others. It was you who abandoned yourself ...

- (HKG Pao) The Dutchman Paulus Johannes Zimmerman is a district councilor for the Pok Fu Lam district. In 2012, he applied for Chinese nationality. He is now eligible to run for the Legislative Council, if he can 15 or more other district councilors to nominate him.

- (Change.org) Reunite Hong Kong with the United Kingdom and Grant Hong Kongs British Nationals (Overseas) who Support the Unification and Pledge Loyalty to the UK a Citizenship and Their Child/Children a British Nationality

As a colony of the United Kingdom from 1842, Hong Kong was listed as a non-self-governing territory under Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations that recognizes the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount. However, Hong Kong was removed from the List in 1972 and later in 1997, the sovereignty of Hong Kong was transferred from the United Kingdom to totalitarian China, all without Hong Kongers' consent. We should have the right of self-determination. Our language, cultural, political, economic, social, and educational advancements are all under threat from China. China intervenes and manipulates the internal affairs of Hong Kong. It breaches the terms of 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration. We urge the United Kingdom, the International Court of Justice and the United Nations to declare the 1984 Sino-British Declaration void, resume British sovereignty over Hong Kong and put Hong Kong back on the List of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Events in Hong Kong indicated China has no intention to uphold its end of the bargain. Many aspects of lives are undergoing rapidly deteriorating. Particularly finance, education, judiciary, immigration, policing, healthcare, human rights, freedom of speech and press are all in full retreat. We lost our border and immigration control soon after the unjust transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong from the United Kingdom to China. The local and official languages in Hong Kong are English and Cantonese. However, children are misformed in schools that Mandarin is the standard language but not Cantonese. Our languages and unique culture are under threat. Brainwashing China-patriotic elements are penetrated across all subjects in education these are just minor parts of the tip of the iceberg. Peking's will and influence are the very obvious causes of these negative changes. The Chinese do not respect the terms on the 1984 Joint Declaration. In order to uphold British honour and integrity, we urge the United Kingdom to declare the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration void. Only with British leadership can the glitter on the Crown Jewel of the Orient shines again.

Hong Kongers have the right to determine Hong Kongs political system.
Until our collective voice expressed in a fairly conducted referendum, the United Kingdom has the duty to govern. We need support from the World especially the United Kingdom!

British Nationals (Overseas) in Hong Kong

Under the premise that we support reuniting Hong Kong with the United Kingdom and pledge loyalty to the United Kingdom, we urge Britain to grant those of us who are British Nationals (Overseas) a citizenship and give their child or children a British nationality.

We were born and raised in British Hong Kong. We love British Hong Kong. We love and respect Britain. We did not have a chance to opt for Hong Kong as a British overseas territory, instead the sovereignty of Hong Kong was transferred to totalitarian China in 1997 through the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration co-signed by Britain and China. China even illegally and arbitrarily regards Hong Kongs British Nationals as Chinese Nationals in the 1984 Joint Declaration, an act that is racially discriminatory. As a consequence, Hong Kongs British Nationals cannot get protection from British Consulate General in Hong Kong and China as indicated in the 1984 Joint Declaration. Since 1997, China executes genocide in Hong Kong through rapidly planting a great number of Chinese nationals in Hong Kong, arrogating to themselves the identity as Hong Kongers via numerous methods. Our language, cultural, political, economic, social, and educational foundations are all threatened by China as well. Furthermore, the 1984 Joint Declarations protection has a duration of fifty years, of which only thirty-three years remain. The future of British Nationals and their children is in danger. Hong Kong is a British overseas territory. We urge Hong Kong to reunite with the United Kingdom. Under the premise that we support reuniting Hong Kong with the United Kingdom and pledge loyalty to the United Kingdom, we urge Britain to grant those of us who are British Nationals (Overseas) a citizenship and give their child or children a British nationality.

Sign it. Share it. Support Hong Kongers' genuine choice to reunite Hong Kong with the United Kingdom. Save and free Hong Kong's British loyal unionists and their children from totalitarian China. Sign it. Share it. Support Hong Kongers' genuine choice to reunite Hong Kong with the United Kingdom. Save and free Hong Kong's loyal British unionists and their children from totalitarian China.  FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY AND OUR RIGHTS!

(Headline Daily) January 15, 2016.

An Internet user is selling paper stickers to put "Hong Kong" on top of the "People's Republic of China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" of HKSAR passports, with icons that include Lion Rock, Central, Bruce Lee, Umbrellas, etc. Another Internet user said that he used such a passport to enter/exit Indonesia without any problems. The airport ground crew was surprised to see the alteration, but did not ask any questions. Another Internet user said that he was able to enter/exit France and Germany without problems.

The Immigration Department points that unauthorized alterations of travel documents is an offence under the Immigration Control Ordinance, which carries a maximum a penalty of 14 years in jail plus a fine of HKD 150,000. The same penalties apply to those who abetted or incite such activities. In addition, using an altered passport to enter a country may violate local laws.

More at Occupy Central Part 5


More at:
Occupy Central Part 1 (001-100)
Occupy Central Part 2 (101-200)
Occupy Central Part 3 (201-300)
Occupy Central Part 4 (301-400)
Occupy Central Part 5
(401+)

Archive    Blogroll    Press

Google
Search WWW Search www.zonaeuropa.com