(v3.0)

Section 1 of 3:  Recommended Photos/Videos/Reading

Global (in English) Greater China (in English) Greater China (in Chinese)
Smuggling Cubans Alex Tabarrok, Marginal Revolution
Anal Food Rape and the CIA Susan Block, CounterPunch
Writing Machines Tom McCarthy, LRB
War by media and the end of truth John Pilger, Asia Times
Talk like an Egyptian Grayson Carter, Aeon
Torture and the Truth Jane Mayer, The New Yorker

Did the Senkakus Sink Sony? China Matters
10 Lessons From the Hong Kong Protests Han Zhu, Huffington Post
Meet the Face of Hong Kong's Occupy Movement: Joshua Wong  Rolling Stone
China's Brave Underground Journal Ian Johnson, NYROB
Occupiers Can Retreat & Escalate The Movement At the Same Time  Hong Wrong
VIDEO And Then Hell Broke Loose': Feature-length Occupy Documentary  MSNBC via Hong Wrong

反占中VS占中--满天神佛  YouTube
莫言:人一上网就变得厚颜无耻
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, 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.]

(Sina.com.hk) October 16, 2014.

On the night of October 15, the police successfully cleared the demonstrators off Lung Wo Road. The ATV televised coverage showed some police officers getting their photos taken afterwards. At the discussion forums, these police officers were compared to the Filipino policemen who got their photos taken in front of the tourist bus in which Hong Kong tourists were killed by a hijacker.

(Apple Daily) December 11, 2014.

On the 75th day of the Occupy Movement, the police used 7,000 officers to clear out the Occupy Admiralty area. The roads were re-opened at around 11pm. But before then, the cars have to wait for the police officers to get their commemorative group photos taken.

(Sharon Cheung's Facebook) December 15, 2014


The quality of the police is poor. We should not blame them.
It is not illegal to take photos. Technically, there is obviously "no" problem.
But this is not like having a party. This is about handling a very serious matter. When you take phots, you are being contemptuous.
They don't understand, because they are not good enough to understand.
Therefore, why are the police the biggest loser this time? Everybody knows.

(Passion Times) December 16, 2014

(Police commissioner) Tsang Wai-hung knew how to hibernate like a turtle. But after the Occupy areas got cleared, he rushed up to get his media exposure. His ugly and despicable side was fully revealed to the world in a risible manner.

Even more ridiculous was how he used "normal behavior" to describe the group photos of police officers taken after the clearances. He just didn't care how the people of Hong Kong feel. He insists on fighting against them.

Apart from certain Chinese Communists lackeys, most people are displeased with the performance of the police over the past two months. Reality revealed the evil nature of the police. The Hong Kong Communist regime cannot deny this. Time and again after the police treated citizens brutally, they take group photos. This is not as simple as "commemorating mission accomplished" as Tsang Wai-hung claims. On the contrary, they are showing off their might as invaders/conquerors to the non-police citizens of Hong Kong.

In the Philippines hostage incident, the local police also took group photos in front of the tourist bus. The Hong Kong people were outraged. In the Umbrella Revolution, nobody has died yet but many Hong Kong citizens were bloodied and bruised by the police. That is an irrefutable fact. Are the police so haughty because nobody has died yet? ...

This absurdity of this type of behavior happened in the same society to the same ethnic group. This is even worse than the Japanese occupation that lasted 3 years 8 months. In the civilized world, one rarely ever sees violence being deployed against its own people. But this has happened repeatedly in Hong Kong in the 21st century. What is so "normal" about this "normal behavior"? Where is the "behavior"? If someone thinks that this is "normal behavior", then there is something wrong with this brain -- either because of diminished intellectual capacity or lack of humanity.

If the Hong Kong people put up with this wild talk from Tsang Wai-hung and permit the police to bully the citizens as vanquishers, all future police violence will be regarded as "normal behavior" and totally ignored. In the end, Hong Kong will become a police state, in which my misgivings and anger will mean death to my family!

(SpeakOut.HK via Sky Post) Tonight, let's have a group photo. By Wat Wing-yin. December 19, 2014.

After the police cleared the area, they took group photos on the recovered roads. They get criticized about being callous and unprofessional. They are compared to the Filipino police who took group photos standing next to the tourist bus in which Hong Kong hostages were killed. Someone even compared the clearance with the Japanese soldiers raising the hacked heads of Chinese citizens in a competition to see who kill more.

This is not the first time that the Hong Kong police have been compared to the Japanese bandit army. A celebrity compared the police clearance of Mong Kok with how the "Japanese army lost their minds upon seeing the deaths of comrades and carried out a massacre." When I see such comments, I think that Hong Kong is not just seeing a rift of social relationships or public opinions. There is also a rift in perception, thought and judgment.

After these clearances, there have been no death and very few injuries. When the mission is so deftly accomplished, it is normal as the police commissioner says to relax and take a group photo for commemoration. What is the problem?

A media worker wrote on the Internet: "The quality of the police is poor. We should not blame them. It is not illegal to take photos. But this is not like having a party. This is about handling a very serious matter. When you take such a photo, you are being contemptuous. They don't understand, because they are not good enough to understand ..."

I ask the reporters, Who hasn't taken a photo after or even during news gathering? Go back to your photo albums: How many people have taken photos of yourself wearing a press badge in front of the National People's Congress Building? Or used the crowd of demonstrators against National Education as backdrop? ... It is normal to take such photos. It is your personal records about how you once did wonder things.

The police officer was not keeping one foot on the head of a demonstrator, making V-signs with one hand and taking the photo with the other hand. So where is the callousness? Saying that other people are shallow? Now that is callousness. What is wrong with the police taking a photo after accomplishing the mission to commemorate how they took part in this piece of history? This is like a movie awards show. After the show is over, the workers step up on stage for a group photo to commemorate their participation in a successful show. Is this unprofessional? I am speechless.

At a discussion forum, someone posted this group photo of reporters after the Admiralty clearance:


The sarcastic words say: "Poor quality reporters: The quality of reporters is poor. We should not blame them. It is not illegal to take photos. But this is not like having a party. This is about handling a very serious matter. When you take such a photo, you are being contemptuous. They don't understand, because they are not good enough to understand ..."

[Permalink] Hong Kong By The Numbers (2014/12/19) (Chinese University of Hong Kong, Centre for Communication and Public Opinion Survey) 1,011 Hong Kong Cantonese-speaking residents aged 15 or above were interviewed by telephone. The response rate was 44%. All data were weighted by gender, age and education to Census data.

Internet comments:

In the overall rankings which is based upon the four factors of economy, society, environment and culture, Shanghai came in at number one for the second year in a row. Hong Kong was number two. According to the Institute president, Hong Kong is a mature economy with relatively slow growth rate between 2% and 5%. Shanghai is rapidly developing, growing at better than 8% in the first half of 2014. Thus, the GDP gap between Shanghai and Hong Kong is growing wider. Shanghai is benefiting from local policies and national strategic planning. In the forthcoming years, Hong Kong will continue to slide in the rankings. The current numbers three and four are Beijing and Shenzhen, which are not far behind this year and are growing relatively quicker.

In the ranking by city competitiveness in economic growth, Hong Kong came in at number 14, which is 3 places lower than 2013 with a declining trend. It is not clear how the people, businesses and government of Hong Kong will adjust to the global economic conditions after Occupy Central. New ideas are required. Meanwhile, it is clear that the upscale Chinese tourists are bypassing Hong Kong now, leaving only relatively downscale and/or family tourists.

In the ranking by city public safety, Hong Kong was ranked number one in 2013 but has now fallen out of the top 30. The Institute president said that Occupy Central which lasted for more than two months clearly impacted Hong Kong's standing. According to some media reports, the movement cost Hong Kong an average loss of $60 million per day. Taipei came in at number one, with the Sunflower Movement and gutter oil having much less impact. The next four Chinese cities re Lhasa, Xuzhou, Zhenjiang and Macau.

Although the Occupy areas have all been cleared, supporters do not consider the movement to be terminated. From the Facebook page on "Boycotting anti-democracy businesses", there is a call to change the name of your mobile phone to "I want genuine universal suffrage" and open up your personal hotspot so that people searching for Wifi networks can see what the people of Hong Kong are demanding.

The method:
1. Setting -> General -> About, and change the name of the mobile phone to "The people of Hong Kong want genuine universal suffrage."
2. Initiate the Wifi and Personal Hotspot functions.
3. Setting -> Personal Hotspot on.

You are ready with the resistance movement now. All other persons in the vicinity will see the title when they search for Wifi networks. Nobody will know that it's you (unless you are the only person in the vicinity). You should especially do this in crowded public areas (such as McDonald's Starbucks, MTR stations, university campuses, shopping malls, public libraries and all the areas covered by the Hong Kong government's public Wifi service.

Internet comments:

- The police can do ID checks when you go shopping, but not Occupy Wifi!

- A very creative way of expressing one's views. We are going to move Hong Kong once centimeter at a time.

- Here is an even more creative way of expressing one's viewers. You walk up to the urinal at a public restroom and you repeat "I want genuine universal suffrage" while you urinate.

- Low cost, high efficiency. Why not?

- I don't mind if someone gives me free Wifi access. But then, I have to ask: Is he a hacker trying to steal my information?

- If I find some a Wifi network, I will download as much rubbish as possible or watch a HD movie to run up his charges.

- Running Personal Hotspot uses up the battery. You can also be vulnerable to hackers. So don't be stupid.

- Why don't you make an official name change to family name "I want" and given name "genuine universal suffrage." Then you demand everyone (friends and family) address you by your full name. So wherever you go, you will hear people say "I want genuine universal suffrage" and this demand will be universal in your universe.

- Yes, I've followed the instructions except I entered "the people of Hong Kong don't want genuine universal suffrage" as the name of my mobile phone. What a creative way of expressing one's views.

(Oriental Daily) December 17, 2014.

It is heading into the winter and many Hongkongers are dining out to eat Sichuan chicken hot pot as well as hot and spicy rice noodle soup. Recently, an Internet user has called for Hongkongers to boycott these two dishes because they are mainland specialties available at restaurants with menus in simplified Chinese characters and waitresses who don't speak fluent Cantonese. Hongkongers do not want to be mainlandized. Instead, Hongkongers should patronize the local noodle shops and eat local specialties such as wonton noodles and cart noodles.

Internet comments:

- Good idea! Those chicken hot pots look very dirty too me. There is no reason why they should taste so good unless they are using gutter oil. Better stay away from them for the sake of your health.

- These Sichuan hot pot restaurants are opened by Hong Kong citizens, they pay Hong Kong rent, they hire Hong Kong workers and they pay Hong Kong taxes. What is not Hong Kong about them?

- Hey, don't forget to boycott Chongqing sour and spicy noodles and baked fish. These dishes are also from Sichuan/Chongqing.

- Nobody is forcing you to eat any food. The fact is many people like Sichuan hot pot during winter.

- Once upon a time, we made fun of the anti-Japan demonstrations in mainland China. Now, we cry at the anti-China demonstrations in Hong Kong.

- Please boycott those Sichuan hot pot restaurants! Then I can go there without waiting on line.

- Menus in simplified Chinese characters? What about those menus that are only in English, French and Italian but no Chinese in Central restaurants?

- If we want to protect local Hong Kong cuisine, we should also boycott hamburgers (Germany), hot dogs (America), pizza/pasta (Italy), sandwiches (England), goose liver (France), salads (Greece), curry (India), ramen/sushi/sashimi (Japan), pad thai (Thailand), spring rolls (Vietnam), fried chicken (Taiwan), BBQ roast pork (Guangxi, China), Peking duck (Beijing, China) ... Oh, don't forget that wontons first started in Guangzhou (China). The only truly Hong Kong product is the egg custard. Would you like to eat that all the time?

- Wrong on that! Even the egg custard is an import from Macau, where it was known as pastel de nata. The only thing that is guaranteed to be completely locally produced is SHIT! So you eat SHIT!

- I don't think that there is any more Occupy XXX or Boycott YYY left. The fighting spirit has flamed out already. So this is a troll post.

On social media, Internet user Raymond Kwong said that he ordered a number of stamps and then made up 2,000 $2 checks to pay his taxes. Last week, he mailed them out in 7 bags over several days.

According to Raymond Kwong, it took time to order those stamps (one for the payee, one for the amount and one for his own signature) and it took time to actually stamp the checks. The costs are thereforefore high. Because the high walls tumble down, he was fatigued already. "In this confusing age where right and wrong are indistinguishable, at least I can relieve my inner depression." "I am no match for the Occupy Movement students and citizens."

Internet comments:

- Let's look at the economics of the operations:

Begin with your own operations:

- Prepare stamps, one for the payee name (The Hong Kong SAR Government), one for the voucher number, one for the two-dollar amount and one for the addressee (the Inland Revenue Department post office number for receiving tax payments).

- Prepare 2,000 checks yourself. You have to scan in an original HSBC check. Then create a template to print 2,000 checks keeping track of the check numbers. Your costs are your time, the paper and the printer ink. You probably need to test if HSBC will accept your ersatz checks first, or else it will be a lot of service charges for the returned checks.

- Stamp 2,000 checks with payee name, voucher number, dollar amount and signature. If you can use a signature stamp, it will be faster than if you must physically sign.

- Stuff and seal 2,000 checks into 2,000 envelops.

- Affix 2,000 stamps to 2,000 envelops, and stamp the addressee on the front of 2,000 envelops.

- Bring the 2,000 stamped and addressed envelops down to the post office.

... If your tax bill was $4,000, then the costs of paying it this way is far more than that.

In recent years, the government-run Hong Kong Post has been running a budget deficit because fewer and fewer people are using "snail mail." If you want to send something, you just send it as a PDF file via email, whatsapp, Dropbox or whatever. The post office appreciates your patronage of 2,000 pieces of mail at $1.70 postage per piece for a total of $3,400 in revenue. But if you mail it in 7 boxes, each containing hundreds of letters, the postage would probably be just several hundred dollars. The Post Office has ample processing capacity that is currently standing idle. With more people like you, they will be able to close their budget gap very quickly. They may even expand. So you are doing good public service by subsidizing the Hong Kong Post.

The post office brings the day's mail to the Inland Revenue Department. Some IRD worker will open the envelops, record the voucher number and check number (by scanning?) and forward the checks to their bank. If there are more envelops, it will take more time. The IRD can either take more time with the same number of people, or they can higher more temporary workers. This just comes out of the government operational budget which is funded by the taxpayers. By the way, the voucher is supposed to accompany the payment. If you don't attach the voucher, you won't be credited.

Each day, millions of checks are deposited at the banks in Hong Kong. Those checks are sent to the Hong Kong Interbank Clearing Limited where they are sorted and sent to the drawee banks. The drawee banks process the checks. Generally, the process is automated (e.g. recording the routing number, the account number and the check number at the bottom left of the check). At some point, it may be necessary to do double-verified manual data entry (usually in mainland China to reduce cost) for the handwritten amounts. Therefore, this will increase costs for the banks if enough people do this. At which point, they will impose a service fee when the number of checks from an account exceeds a certain threshold in one day. That cost will be imposed for all customers.

- You are causing trouble for yourself and others. The bank and the post office will suffer along with the Inland Revenue Department.

- When you behave badly in class, the teacher makes you copy your own name 100 times. When you grow up, you behave badly by making other people open 2,000 envelops and count 2,000 $2 checks. Is this revenge sweet?

- You must have made sure that you have no friends or relatives working at the HSBC Bank, the Hong Kong Post and the Inland Revenue Department before you undertook this selfish and perverse action.

- Yes, 689 (=Chief Executive CY Leung) must go, because he is responsible for this happening!

- This reminds me of the restaurant customer who threw the cups and dishes on the ground over some issue. He thinks that he is causing damage to the restaurant owner. Actually, it is the janitor who has to clean up the mess and not the restaurant owner.

- We should also run our own non-cooperation movement --taxis will not carry pro-Occupy persons, buses will not carry pro-Occupy persons, restaurants will not serve pro-Occupy persons, etc. If we can't tell a pro-Occupy person from other persons, we will just refuse to serve young people PERIOD.

- It looks as if Raymond Kwong printed his own checks. Some banks allow you to print your own checks if you meet the specifications (such as magnetic ink, etc) while others won't. If the checks don't meet the specifications, the bank can charge him a service fee, such as $100 per check. 2,000 checks would mean a total penalty of 2,000 x $100 = $200,000!

- This genius only paid $4,000 in taxes. The first $180,000 in income is tax-free. The rest gets taxed beginning at 15%. So he is earning $180,000 + ($4,000 / 0.15) = $206,000 per annum = $17,222 per month. So this is your high-education, high-income Occupy Central person?

- This is like the Shopping Revolution in which you go out every night and raise hell with the police, the businesses and other passersby. After a few nights, you stop because the fun is gone -- you are hurting others without benefiting yourself.

- How is this going to bring "democracy" closer?

- Environment protection groups should protest against the waste of paper. But of course the Occupy Movement people say that when it comes to major issues of right or wrong, the law comes second and environmental protection comes third.

- This is just the sort of thing that would be concocted by people who don't pay taxes and who don't live in public housing. In other words, students.

- The smart people tell others to do something. The losers actually do it. It is the same smart people who told the students and citizens to charge the police line while they watched on television in the Legislative Council building, and the same losers who actually charged and got clubbed by police batons.

- There is no such thing as being the most stupid. There is only being more stupid than ever.

- Wikipedia on Tax Resistance: "Tax resistance is the refusal to pay tax because of opposition to the government that is imposing the tax or to government policy or as opposition to the concept of taxation in itself. Tax resistance is a form of direct action and if in violation of the tax regulations, a form of civil disobedience. Examples of tax resistance campaigns include those advocating home rule, such as the Salt March led by Mohandas Gandhi, and those promoting women's suffrage, such as the Women's Tax Resistance League." But in this case of Hong Kong, the call is not to resist paying taxes. It is to split up the tax bill and pay in increments on time. The government tax revenue is not going to be one cent less. It is no wonder that Internet commentators aren't sure that this is causing trouble for the government or yourself.

- (Ming Pao) Ricky Wong wrote in <Sky Post> that the non-cooperation movement will cause the moderate supporters such as housewives to walk away from the pan-democrats. So far, no democrats have come out to prevent this from happening. Ricky Wong said that the democrats will pay a heavy price in the coming elections if this continues. Rick Wong said that a democracy will tolerate differetn voices, but the democrats seem clueless about their strategies: "They only talk about their ideals and they are losing public support. They are bound to fail."

0:01 (Woman) The street itself belongs to us. That is, we occupy it by force ... actually, it is not occupy by force ... we occupied it so many days already. For many days. We erected many tents that you can see behind me. Those tents, those camps. They don't have any reasonable justification, no legal reason to remove our stuff.

0:22 (Woman) The government evicted me today, but they can't evict me tomorrow. They can evict me tomorrow, but they can't evict me the day after tomorrow. I think that the government is using tyranny ... the shameless C.Y. Leung ... he can use such clearance tactics this time, but he won't be able to do it a second time. I hope that he can reflect himself.

0:38 (Woman) (note: the question was about how 80% of the democratically elected District Councilors had signed a statement asking the Occupy Movement to leave) Are 80% of the District Councilors more numerous than so many of us citizens? I feel that I represent myself. If I want to retreat, I retreat.

0:49 (Young man) I feel that when it comes to major issues of right or wrong, I feel that the law comes second.

0:58 (Woman) The road does not belong only to taxi drivers. The road belongs to the citizens of Hong Kong. The road belongs to every citizen of Hong Kong. Since we can sit here, it means that we are free to sit here. It represents ... Even though he is free to negate us, but this road belongs to everybody in Hong Kong. So just because he says that this is interfering with his business, it can be prohibited. Also, I can tell him that he is preventing me from fighting for democracy.

(1) 9.28-30 佔中啟動 Occupy Central Live Broadcast   9.28-9.30 Occupy Central started, by HK Apple Daily with more than 3.3 million viewings

(2) 【 一口'梁'氣 - JFung Remix 】Official MV  A remix of a music video about the family of Chief Executive CY Leung, with more than 1.5 million viewings

(3) 03OCT2014反佔中人士衝擊銅鑼灣路障,攬少女大髀,鑽褲襠  October 3, 2014 an anti-Occupy Central person charges a Causeway Bay roadblock, grabbing the thigh of a young woman and getting into her pants, by SocREC, with 1.38 million viewings. For a transcript of the incident, see #001.

(4) 孩子問︰誰還未覺醒, music video adapted from the song Do You Hear The People Sing? with 1.21 million viewings.

(5) 內地女人車箱食野:「『你厚多士』 An aggressive mainland woman gets into an argument with a Hong Kong woman over eating food in the MTR subway, with 670,000+ viewings.

(TIME) Hong Kong Police Arrest Prominent Radicals in Home Raids. By Elizabeth Barber. December 11, 2014.

Hong Kong police on Wednesday and Thursday arrested several dissidents at or near their homes, as authorities concurrently prepared to clear the citys main protest camp. Wong Yeung-tat, head of the anti-Beijing organization Civic Passion, was arrested near his home at 1 p.m. on Thursday on 59 counts of unlawful assembly, according to his partys news outlet ... Civic Passion is perhaps the most recognizable of the vocal, insistent groups at the fringes of Hong Kongs democratic movement. It has had choice words not just for the government, but for the protests unofficial student leaders, accusing them of timidity in confronting the government for the right to free and fair elections here.

(YouTube) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTD-kpJ8_kE The first part of this video was recorded inside a car going down a Mong Kok street.

0:07 (Man) This one is solo. Very few police officers go solo.
0:11 (Wong) You shouldn't call them "evil police" whenever you see one. But he looks like one.
0:13 (Man) Giving a ticket, giving a ticket.
0:14 (Wong) Damned guy. He fucking looks like one. Fuck his mother! Yes. Actually, it is nitpicking to call them "police dogs." Don't call them "police dogs" because that is an insult to dogs. It is nitpicking to call them "evil police." If you lose a flower pot, you can get it back some day. Right or not? It is two days later now. Are you going to get it back?
0:28 (Man) Fucking break it. (laughter) The flower pot isn't mine. Fucking break it!
0:36 (Wong) The flower pot. You shouldn't say that. "French Guy" (note: Cheung Ka-hin, also known as "French Guy" is seated on the front passenger seat) said it. I didn't say it. I wouldn't say anything like that. I only call people to come out to stimulate the economy, to buy things. You attack. Not retreat. If you don't retreat and you don't defend, then you are attacking. So it's attacking. Right now, this is mobile. More fluid. Buy things. The Buy Things Movement. But is "Buy Things" ... that is, how shall I say? ... Over the past couple of days, many people got injured. Many people got injured. Especially on Wednesday night. The most number of injured persons. Heads broken, blood flowed. They got injured and then they got arrested for assaulting the police. Yesterday, the person from Apple Daily was arrested. He was accused of trying to seize the policeman's gun. He was accused of assaulting the policeman. But ... the Hong Kong people is still missing one step. That is, everybody knows what that one step is. Obviously, we won't say it out. We wouldn't be fucking stupid enough to say here that we are going to do whatever it is. Then you are going to charge us with dishonest use of a telephone. Right or not? Dishonest use of live broadcast. We will not openly talk about illegal matters. Our is just a Buy Things channel. There is no instigator. What is going to happen in Admiralty? We will see what the Federation of Students do. Hey, we ... hey, we are not the organizers, even though we see many Hot Dogs (=members of Civic Passion) on the street just then. Right or not? But we don't fucking care. For the Hot Dogs, people call us Hot Dogs out when something goes awry. But when everything works, people say the Hot Dogs were nowhere in sight.
2:11 (Man) Very hard to follow.
2:11 (Wong) There is something else that can be done. That is, you take a yellow umbrella. You take a yellow umbrella. You disseminate on the Internet. You are not inciting anything. You are reporting on conditions all over. Actually, you say that several hundred people have gathered together. You bring a yellow umbrella. Fuck your mother! You go down to Peking Road. You tell your friend to raise a yellow umbrella. You take a photo.
2:28 (Man) Take a photo.
2:32 (Wong) You disseminate on the Internet that several hundred persons have gathered together. You post the photo of the yellow umbrella. People will think that it is true. Right or not? Eight or nine o'clock. Especially on Saturdays and Sundays. Tomorrow is Saturday, followed by Sunday next. Which busy district does not have several hundred persons present? There are several hundred persons on every street. You ... it is necessary to pay attention to the time. That is to say ... for example, late night for me ... the last two nights, I left quickly and I even made a post to tell others to leave. That is, don't do anything if there are no passersby.
2:55 (Man) Hmmm.
2:56 (Wong) Because if there are no passersby ... if there are no passersby, they will know who you are. You will be surrounded. Right or not? If there are passersby ... where are we going? ... for example, the whole thing ... should the whole thing be called the Umbrella Revolution or not?  I think t it has evolved into the Shopping Revolution. So you are walking with two feet. For example, the Federation of Students ... Brother (Joshua Wong) Chi-fung ... Brother Chi-fung is telling people not to come to Mong Kok. How can you not come to Mong Kok? No way.
3:22 (Wong) Everybody has to recognize one thing. No political figure, no social activist can reap any result from this movement. That would the fucking best thing. The times have changed. You need to have people from the new era to emerge. We are the resisters in an new ear. You are still talking about those who are carted away, or perhaps carting something yourself. Not fucking doing this sort of thing anymore. Not fucking doing this sort of thing anymore. Have you manufactured a shield before? Right or not? That is, have you done this sort of thing before? We are not asking, "Have you been arrested by the police before as a resiter?" We are not talking about this sort of thing anymore. "Have you fought the police before?" This is what people are talking about now.
3:57 (Man)
3:57 (Wong) It is not about being hit. It is not about being hit. I don't want to say out the next step. Hey.
4:03 (Man) Understood.
4:04 (Wong) I don't want to say it out. They are still talking about that era.
4:09 (Wong) I have already said that I am not going to be the leader of this resistance movement. Do you know what I mean? In the Umbrella Revolution, the masses lead ... they progress very rapidly, they evolve very rapidly, whether it is their thinking, or their action, or the borderlines that they can cross. For example, for our generation, our generation grew up during the British colonial era. With respect to rules and regulations, we have some fucking great ...  how shall I say? ... that is, I saw that while I attended court the past couple of days. Fuck your mother! I was showing the videos in court about the clash at the entrance to the Legislative Council. I was talking on the programme. I had a can of Coke in my hand. When I wanted to throw it away, I went up to a garbage can to put it in there. Do you know?
4:58 (Man) Actually, that is how it is. That is, you follow the rules and regulations absolutely.
5:04 (Wong) Yes.
5:04 (Man) We know that clearly.
5:05 (Wong) We are like that. We are like that. The new generation isn't like that. The new generation isn't like that. Completely new people are needed. Completely new thinking. Completely new ideas. Also, you are still talking about bringing some energy back together and go to Admiralty. Then you tell people not to wear masks when they go out. Be careful and don't go down to Mong Kok. Fucking crazy! CY Leung tell people to shop, and you do the exact opposite. Do you fucking think that this is the same as opposing the government? Is this equal the same as opposing the establishment? Of course, that is not the way to fucking do it. How to do it? We have to following the motion of the masses. Follow the masses' ... that is, follow the masses. That is something very important. Therefore, in this movement, ... of course, we have to go after the "evil police". And ... don't fucking talk about whatever, don't make the focus turn fuzzy ... the fuzzy focus about getting genuine universal suffrage ... one single demand ... fuck your mother! Overturn the table with the 'evil police' now! What the fuck is there to talk about? It doesn't fucking matter what the focus is. The most important thing now ... simply put ... that is ... French Guy, you say once more: Do you want the flower pot?
6:10 (Cheung) The flower pot? Don't want it anymore, brother! That is, the flower pot was used to threaten. If you don't give me back the money, I will break the flower pot. Right or not? Break the flower pot. What's the fucking big deal?
6:23 (Wong) French guy, how can you say something like that?
6:23 (Man) Way out of line.
6:24 (Cheung) I am only talking about a flower pot.
6:25 (Man) Wow!
6:28 (Wong) If the flower pot is broken, it is not as like burning a piece of rock together with a piece of jade (= destroying indiscriminately). A flower pot. You can get another one. So how can you say something like that.
6:33 (Man) Yes.
6:36 (Wong) No wonder you got arrested so easliy. (laughter)
6:41 (Wong) But once this ideology is transformed into the Buy Things Movement, there is a fresh army. But ... but this is not sustainable. But it is not necessary to sustain it. The point is not to sustain it. The point is not ... the whole thing has changed. Right or not? Not to guard it. We have to think one more step ahead. Think a bit more. Whether we can think of it depends on the luck of the people of Hong Kong. The luck of the Hong Kong people. Everybody thinks differently. Everybody think about it. Actually, it is still Mong Kok, if you ask me. In truth, they are keeping a curfew. The actual situation is a curfew. They are actually keeping a curfew but they won't say that it is a curfew. They won't say openly that it is a curfew. Hey, if you can force CY Leung to impose a curfew, the stock market would collapse to whatever fucking level. You should notice that it will be December soon. I have said so before. Europe is not fucking allowed to buy through the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connection. Not fucking allowed in Europe. Even if the European funds have not made purchases, some funds must have gotten in. The Fund guys always take their Xmas vacation. Let me tell you. Right or not? If you give them a curfew before Xmas, it would be a disaster. This is great. Right or not? So ... where are we now? ...
7:51 (Man) Mong Kok.
7:52 (Wong) Another step. Need to think an extra step ahead. At the same time, that is ... French Guy, how about it? What ...?
7:59 (Cheung) Eh ... simply put ... look up what the overseas guys do ...
8:03 (Wong) What?
8:04 (Cheung) Look up what overseas ...
8:06 (Man) Ferguson. Those ...?
8:07 (Cheung) Hey, I won't speak brashly. Right or not? Borrow materials. Always. Watch more YouTube. Spend more time on the Internet. See what they do overseas. Consult some references ...

Here is a comparison of the Occupy Movement and the Shopping Revolution:

Occupy Movement:

- Description: A group of demonstrators occupied the roads in Admiralty, Causeway Bay, Mong Kok and Tsim Sha Tsui up to more than 70 days.

- Objective: Create public pressure on the authorities to make concessions on the political system (civil nomination in the Chief Executive election; elimination of the functional constituency in the Legislative Council).

- Size: Usually several hundred in Admiralty and Mong Kok; several dozen in Causeway Bay and Tsim Sha Tsui. More in the evening after school/work.

- Impact for the duration of the occupation

  • Blocked traffic, causing cancellation of some public transportation routes and creating traffic jams that increased travel time for many citizens and businesses

  • Caused economic losses for some neighborhood businesses

  • Annoyed some local residents (noise, quarrels, thefts etc)

- Results:

  • No concessions from the HKSAR government/Central government

  • The Hong Kong Police Force cleared the sites after waiting for the public to coalesce into a majority in support of clearance.

Shopping Revolution ("Buy Things"): (see, for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=025MbmqsZNc )

- Description: Groups of shoppers walk around the streets in Mong Kok and Causeway Bay at nighttime (usually between 7pm and 2am), chanting slogans, window shopping and blocking pedestrian crossings by dropping coins, tying shoelaces, etc.

- Objective: Create public pressure on the authorities to make concessions on the political system (civil nomination in the Chief Executive election; elimination of the functional constituency in the Legislative Council).

- Size: Usually several hundred in Mong Kok.

- Impact when the shoppers are walking around

  • Caused economic losses for some neighborhood businesses.

  • Annoyed some local residents (noise, quarrels, etc)

  • Lots of fun for participants because they can harass the police and chant obscenities together aloud.

- Results (still unknown):

  • Unlikely for such a smallish action to gain any concessions from the HKSAR/Central Government.

  • The police has been shadowing the shoppers nightly, sometimes stopping them for ID checks and making arrests. The small numbers are not sufficient to overwhelm the police.

  • The public does not support this kind of infantile behavior.

  • [Cultural note: In Cantonese, such people are known as primary school chicken (小學雞), defined as "a person (of any age) who behaves immaturely and loves to pick fights." The image is that of primary school students running around the playground.]

During the Occupy movement, some people were inconvenienced and this led to economic losses for businesses. For example, while buses didn't run on Nathan Road, a shopper can still take alternate transportation (MTR or re-routed buses/minibuses) and walk over (that if, the bus may be stopping instead on Shanghai Street two blocks away). However, businesses suffered all the same because some shoppers don't want go to through the hassle and end up elsewhere.

During the Shopping Revolution, several hundred people may walk down the street and decide to stop in front of a store, gawk at the display windows, chant slogans ("I want to buy things", "I want genuine universal suffrage) but seldom buying anything. Some store managers (especially jewelry stores) are inclined to play it share and shutter the store. If you open the door for business, you may or may not get some business during the Occupy Movement. If you close the door for business during the Shopping Revolution, you will get zero business. Fortunately, the Shoppers only come out in the evening and not all day.

Addendum: Here are some expansions to the original Mong Kok Shopping Revolution

(Oriental Daily) At around 730m, a dozen or so Shoppers arrived at the Hong Kong Brand and Products Expo. Once they entered, they raised yellow umbrellas. The security guards told them that banners must not be shown inside the grounds and advised them to leave, but the Shoppers ignored them. The shoppers walked around the grounds with security guards and plainclothes policemen following them. Some citizens saw them and said in disgust that this was "nonsensical."

(YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2yPrN7QGEo ) A Xmas carol choir gathered in Causeway Bay with lyrics adapted for the Umbrella Movement.

(YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sndpb_ZmqYM ) Shoppers congregate in front of the Sogo Department store in Causeway Bay. At 2:34, they play the coin dropping trick. At 3:56, a man wearing blue jacket appears. At 4:06 the man punches a young man wearing a green school uniform jacket and carrying a yellow umbrella. The police jumped in immediately. At 4:33, the policeman says: "There wouldn't be a problem if you didn't play dropping the coin." at 4:45, the policeman says: "If you want to cross the street, please use the pedestrian overpass."

(YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sndpb_ZmqYM ) Shoppers congregate in front of the Sogo Department store in Causeway Bay. At 2:34, they play the coin dropping trick. At 3:56, a man wearing blue jacket appears. At 4:06 the man punches a young man wearing a green school uniform jacket and carrying a yellow umbrella. The police jumped in immediately. At 4:33, the policeman says: "There wouldn't be a problem if you didn't play dropping the coin." at 4:45, the policeman says: "If you want to cross the street, please use the pedestrian overpass." At 5:15, the crowd chants: "Cross the road! Cross the road! Cross the road! ..."

Addendum: This sort of tactic reminds people of the extortion racket by triad gangs. The gang demands a protection payment from a restaurant. The restaurant refuses to pay. Dozens of gang members show up at the restaurant. Each one sits at a different table, and orders a plate of rice plus a drink. They sit there for hours without leaving. Everything they do is within the law. They do this repeatedly until the restaurant pays up. (See the 1998 movie Young And Dangerous Part 5 (beginning at 62 minutes into the film, when Elkin Cheng enters his restaurant and finds a rival gang taking up the seats, one per table. He summons a police friend to talk to them. The rival gang leader Mark Cheng says that the law is on his side (he has the right to choose when and what to eat, and he has the money to pay the bill). The policeman does not use the law directly. Instead he orders ID check for everyone. Although they sit at separate tables, some of them are obviously related to others. Then he says: "I believe that you people all know each other. I have the right to charge you with illegal assembly. You may have the money to pay the restaurant bill, but not enough to pay the bill down at the police station. At $2,000 bail per person, you need to have several hundred thousand dollars with you." The rival gang leader decides that it is better to leave.)

(Apple Daily) December 11, 2014.

Right before the clearance of the Occupy Admiralty area today, an anti-Occupy "blue ribbon" person showed up. She went out on the road to provoke the citizens at the scene. After she was surrounded by Occupy people, she suddenly pushed an old woman at the scene. The other Occupy people followed her and accused her of "physicall assaulting people." This Blue Ribbon person yelled: "Why are you using your hands and feet?" There was some shoving and pushing.

A man who claimed to be a pastor escorted this Blue Ribbon person away. When she got to the entrance to Admiralty Centre, she turned around and held up v-signs to the Occupy people. This caused her to be surrounded by Occupy people again. The two sides pushed and shoved. The Blue Ribbon person attacker a reporter who was taking photos. Although someone yelled "Call the police," no police came up to learn about what happened. Finally she succeeded in entering the Admiralty MTR station and leaving.

You should click on the Apple Daily webpage and watch the video.

Ready? And now for the full video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as7id7FhWgg (or https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1746785638879197&fref=nf at 1:27pm on December 11, 2014. Here is the transcript:

0:11 A man holds an umbrella in his right hand and makes a middle-finger salute with this left hand.
0:14 (Male voice on megaphone) It's time to get off work. Get off work.
0:19 A middle-aged man in a down jacket jumps up and swipes the sign that the woman is holding up. The two struggle and fall off the meridian wall onto the road.
0:28 (Counter-demonstrator woman) Using your hands and feet.
0:31 (Another man) Who is using his hands and feet?
0:31 The man with a dark shirt and a red cross-belt pushes the woman back.
0:33 (Male voice on megaphone) Fuck your mother!
0:39 (Male voice on megaphone) Fuck your mother!
0:41 (Male) Go away! (Cacophony)
1:15 The woman raises her arms and make V-signs. She removes her spectacles and wipes her face.
1:16 (Male) Miss, what did you come here today for?
1:17 (Male) Provocation.
1:19 (Male) Please, what did you come here today for?
1:23 (Male voice on megaphone) May your whole family die!
1:30 (Crowd) Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! ...
1:40 (Counter-demonstrator woman) Why are you using hands and feet?
1:46 (Counter-demonstrator woman) Hey, you touched me!
1:51 (Man in blue jacket wearing cap) I am a pastor.
1:52 A stream of water flies by.
1:56 (Counter-demonstrator woman) He was pouring water on me!
2:03 (Man) Fuck your mother's stinking cunt!
2:11 (Another woman) Damned shrew! You go away! You deserve to die!
2:15 A bespectacled man in a grey jacket swings his arm and makes contact with the counter-demonstrator woman's arm.
2:16 (Woman) Stinking cunt!
2:18 (Yet another woman) You can't be touched?
2:18 (Pastor) Leave, leave, leave.
2:23 (Man) Miss, do you have any demands today?
2:26 A man in a black jacket tugs at her from behind. She turns around and slaps his hands.
2:27 (Man) Use hands, use hands!
2:30 (Woman) You hit me!
2:32 Counter-demonstrator woman waves her hands at a reporter in blue/neon green filming with a camera, but does not make contact.
2:33 A man in a white helmet and black long-sleeved shirt sneaks up and punches the counter-demonstrators with a straight right punch.
2:35 The woman hits the man in a white helmet and black long-sleeved shirt on the back.
2:36 (Another woman) Don't hit the reporter!
2:38 (Another woman) Physical assault! Physical assault! (cacophony)
2:49 (Man) You go away.
2:57 The woman walks down the stairs to the Admiralty Centre MTR station, while raising V-signs.
3:08 (Young man) I witnessed you assault someone. I am a witness. Don't leave. (He pushes her shoulder.) Don't leave! Don't leave!
3:18 (Counter-demonstrator woman) I am calling the police.
3:18 (Young man) You call the police.
3:20 (Counter-demonstrator woman) I am wet all over my body.
3:21 (Young man) Call the police. Call the police.
3:21 (Counter-demonstrator woman) I am calling the police.
3:25 (Counter-demonstrator woman) I am calling the police immediately. (She wipes saliva off her face).
3:25 (Male voice on megaphone) Report your mother!
3:27 (Counter-demonstrator woman) My whole body is wet.
3:28 (Male voice on megaphone) I recognize you. Blue Ribbon. Fuck your mother! Do you recognize me?
3:33 The woman takes out a mobile phone to call the police.
3:35 (Policeman) Police!
3:35 (Young man) Sir. Physical assault.
3:36 (Man) Arrest her!
3:39 (Young man) Sir.
3:40 (Police) What is the matter?
3:42 (Woman) This person assaulted someone.
3:43 (Counter-demonstrator woman) My whole body is wet.
3:45 (Man) Physical assault.
3:48 (Policeman) You people move away first.
3:50 (Counter-demonstrator woman) Ah Sir has arrived.
3:52 (Woman) This person committed physical assault.
3:55 The policeman takes the woman down the stairs.
3:55 (Man) Hey, letting her go?
3:57 (Woman) This person committed physical assault.
3:58 (Man) Letting her go?
4:01 (Woman) She committed physical assault.
4:02 (Policeman) Stop making noise!
4:04 (Woman) She committed physical assault. She committed physical assault.
4:07 (Policeman) Do not block my path!
4:12 (Policeman) It is too noisy here. (cacophony)
4:36 (Policeman) Who got assaulted? Were you assaulted? Who got assaulted?
4:41 (Another policeman) Does anyone want to complain about being assaulted?
4:43 (Policeman) Who got assaulted?
4:44 (Another policeman) Who got assaulted? Stand up, please!
4:47 (Policeman) Is there a victim?
4:49 (Another policeman) The police are here. Please come up here. Whoever got assaulted come up here, please.
4:55 (Policeman) Who is the victim?
4:58 (Policeman) If there is no one, please disperse!
5:09 The police look around and nobody says a thing. All those people who claim to be eyewitnesses have slinked away.
5:13 (Man) You are supposed to enforce the law. There was a physical assault.
5:17 (Policeman) Do not block the passageway. Please. Please make way for our colleagues to pass through. Friends from the press, please be careful about falling down the stairs. Move over a little. Yes. Thanks, everybody.

Here are some screen captures in case you miss the quick actions:


Hand on the back of the neck.


One hit on the left upper arm, one hand on the back of the neck


A masked young man poured a bottle of water on the woman


Two hands on the back


A straight right punch from the man with the white helmet and black long-sleeve shirt

So what happens to all this talk about staying calm and holding rational exchanges of ideas? And what about journalistic ethics in cutting the start and end of this video for its readers and completely misrepresenting the story? If someone actually lodged a complaint and the police initiated an investigation, a lot of other people may be indicted for physical assault against the alleged perpetrator based upon this video.

HKTV decided to launch an Internet-based television service. Users can view HKTV through either Viewing-On-Demand (VOD) or Live-Channel-Viewing. VOD viewing is done by a number of devices such as smart televisions, mobile phones (iOS 8/android), tablets (iOS8/android) and personal computers. Live Channel viewing requires a special set top box that when enables viewing HKTV when connected to the Internet. This implies extra costs of purchase, installation and possibly an Internet connection.

HKTV launched officially on November 19, 2014. This is the same day as market leader TVB was founded, indicating the desire to challenge directly. Some people think that the emergence of HKTV against all odds means that there are now more choices beyond the two duopolistic incumbents, just like "genuine universal suffrage" will provide more choices for Chief Executive beyond the two or three designated by the establishment.

However, people won't support a new television station just because it offers another choice. Support here means actually watching it regularly, and not just getting on the Internet and give it a "like" on Facebook.

After three weeks, here are the weekly audience numbers from HKTV:

  First week
ending 11/25
Second week
ending 12/2
Third week
ending 12/9
Viewing-on-demand viewing

  Average daily viewers
 
  Average duration (in minutes)
 

205,000

53
 

174,000
 
69
 

159,000
 
71
 
Live channel viewing
 
  Average daily devices
 
  Average duration (in minutes)
 

 358,000
 
42
 
 183,000
 
49
195,000
 
51

How does HKTV stack up against the incumbents TVB and ATV? Here the comparison can be made for live channel viewing for which comparable data exist.

In the television advertising market, the currency is the average audience. That is to say, if I run an 15-second commercial on a certain station at a certain time, what is the audience? Therefore, it does no good to tell me that you reach 358,000 unique persons per day or per week.

For comparison, we need to convert the HKTV channel data into an average audience. For the first week, there were 358,000 unique devices per day viewing 42 minutes on average. Thus, the total number of viewing minutes is 358,000 x 42 = 15,036,000 minutes per day. Assume that the population of persons aged 12 or over is about 6,500,000. Assume that the only relevant daypart for HKT is 8:00pm - 10:30pm per day for now (two drama series plus one variety show), giving 150 minutes per day.

The average audience = 100 x 15,036,000 / (6,500,000 x 150) = 1.5% in Week 1.

By comparison, TVB had an average audience of 21.5% and ATV an average audience of 2.1%.

Similar calculations show that HKTV had an average audience of 0.9% in week 2 and 1.0% in week 3.

In conclusion, HKTV has not made much of a dent in TVB's business. As for ATV, it is rumored that its license would not be renewed due to poor management, as indicated by the poor prime time ratings in the 1% to 2% range.

According to the Nielsen Television Audience Measurement system, during the week of November 19=25 between 8pm and 1030pm, TVB had a daypart cumulative audience of 3,480,000, ATV had 337,000 and HKTV had 246,000.

Apart from audience quantities, HKTV also has other problems. For the first few weeks, HKTV has experienced bandwidth problems. Many users came across sporadic stoppages in the streaming. This is immensely frustrating. HKTV promises to do everything possible to fix this problem. The shows are currently presented at 720pi resolution, not the HD 1080pi as originally promised. This is one way of conserving bandwidth.

A larger problem is with the quality of the television programmes. The first two drama series are The Election and The Borderline are supposed to be refreshing after decades of the staid TVB routine. The Election concerns the election of the Chief Executive of Hong Kong in 2024 (see SCMP). The Borderline is a police story supposed with extraordinary gunfights.

If that is what is being marketed, then some viewers are disappointed with the hype. Here are some Internet comments:

- Avoid Yellow Ribbon Zombie television at all cost!

- The bandwidth problem will be solved automatically as fewer and fewer people watch it.

- A new toilet smells like fragrance the first three days. After that, it smells like shit. So just wait for the novelty to wear off and see what happens to HKTV.

- Just as dumb as TVB crap.

- Slightly better than the TVB crap, but not enough to make me watch HKTV on any regular basis.

- Young Hongkongers like to watch American, Japanese and Korean dramas, which have production qualities that are much higher than those in Hong Kong. USA has a population of 300 million, Japan 128 million and South Korea 51 million. Hong Kong has a population of 7 million. Large populations generate large advertising revenues, which support lavishly made productions. HKTV (or TVB) can never outdo the Koreans and Japanese.

- Look at the programme lineup for Sunday: 12:30 The Election Chapter 4; 13:30 Shopping Hero Chapter 16; 14:15 The Borderline Chapter 9; 15:15 The Borderline Chapter 10; 16:00 The Borderline Chapter 11; 17:00 The Borderline Chapter 12; 17:45 The Borderline Chapter 13; 18:45 The Election Chapter 4. It's re-runs all the time. How do they expect to compete? HKTV does not content to support one channel, and Ricky Wong applied to run 30 free over-the-air channels?

- What kind of television channel is this? No news, no music, no finance, no current affairs, no sports, nothing good to watch.

- HKTV recruited a bunch of over-the-hill rejects (= "worn out batteries") from TVB for their name recognition while at TVB, including the actors/actresses, scriptwriters, directors and producers and that is why these programmes look just like the TVB ones. Did you really expect a miracle?

- The HKTV website is supposed to be shopping platform. The revenue will be used by HKTV to support the television service. But they are selling stuff that you would never ever buy.

- How do I rate this restaurant? First of all, it is faraway (= takes a long time to set up, such as downloading, installing and registering). The food is served slowly (=takes a long time to load the programme, with intermittent outages). The food is not particularly good (= the programmes aren't particularly impressive). So why do I want to go to this restaurant? Just because it is one more choice? ATV is already another such choice, but nobody goes there. Why? Because the food sucks.

- Nowadays, nobody watches television the way it was in the 1970's, 1970's and 1990's.

- Some people will like it and other won't. There is no accounting for taste. But audience ratings don't lie.

- The drama series are full of mistakes. How can I believe that the Chief Executive in 2024 would still be using a 2014-vintage LG mobile telephone?

- Ricky Wong claims that those drama series cost $1 million per episode to make. He is just burning money. And burning money doesn't automatically bring in the audience.

- Ricky Wong is going to blame government suppression for the lousy audience ratings. But shouldn't he be asking questions at all those people who swore they would support by HKTV by watching it? I mean those idiots who swore that HKTV is better than TVB without viewing a second of the new channel yet.

- Ricky Wong can threaten: "If you don't watch HKTV, you won't get 'genuine universal suffrage'."

- It is just so like the so-called "democrats." They yearn for some perfect ideal. They praise it to the high heavens before it happened. But reality turns out to be very different. Such is HKTV, such is "genuine universal suffrage."

- Apple Daily is trying to pump up HKTV in its "news reporting." I hope that HKTV is not going to be to television like Apple Daily is to newspaper -- All rumors all the time.

- I downloaded the app as soon as I learned about it. But when I saw the amount of information that they are demanding to know in order to register as a user, I deleted the app immediately. They have no business collecting that level of detail from everybody.

- The third drama series to be broadcast was known as Hakka Woman originally. Now it has been the new title of I Don't Want To Be A Hongkonger In My Next Life. So where do you want to be born in? Ferguson, USA?

- One of my Yellow Ribbon colleagues think that HKTV audience ratings = democracy index. So he was upset at the poor ratings, and he watches HKTV all the time on his mobile telephone.

- I will never watch HKTV because of what he wrote on November 28, 2014 in Sky Post: "I was planning to go to bed early but I obviously could not sleep well after seeing the live television broadcast in Mong Kok. On television news, I saw how the police dealt with the citizens and I wanted to tell them to stop, because they are merely facing off defenseless students. In the morning meeting, a female colleague said that the police lose their heads as if they were on drugs. Now I finally understood how the Japanese soldiers went berserk after days of fighting in which they saw their comrades got injured or killed to launch a massacre in revenge." And Ricky Wong also explained why he couldn't get on the dais to support the students: "Students, sorry, I am powerless. I can only admire and envy you brave young people for being carefree and able to be reckless. I have to worry not just about my personal life, but also the lives of the families of several hundred colleagues. I am cooperating with several hundred companies to develop an Internet shopping platform. What company will agree with what I do?"

- Ricky Wong is not much of a freedom fighter. The word is that he tried to strike a deal with Tencent/QQ to distribute HKTV in mainland China, but it was squashed by the supervisory government agency. Ricky Wong is an opportunist -- in business as well as in politics.

- In Hong Kong today, it is risky to use politics to boost your business. If you please one side, you offend the other side.

- Why does Ricky Wong draw so many negative comments about HKTV and himself? There is no reason why any citizen would object to the introduction of new television channels. It is the manner in which he turned this into a political issue, and his political position is highly unpopular.


AM730:
Page 1: "Occupy Admiralty" cleared; 209 persons arrested
Page 2: "Occupy Admiralty" peacefully ended after 75 days; 209 persons arrested


Apple Daily: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/first/20141212/18966579
Do not forget the original aim, we'll be back


Headline Daily:
Curtains fall for "Occupy"
Admiralty cleared; occupies did not resist


Hong Kong Commercial Daily:
Admiralty successfully cleared,
"Occupy Central" completely failed


Ming Pao:
Site cleared in 13 hours
Roads cleared


Oriental Daily:
Jimmy Lai who gave the money, the pan-democrats who took the money
"Occupy Central" black hands arrested together


The Sun:
"Admiralty" over, recover
Seven hours, zero force, no bloodshed
7,000 police out in force, 209 persons arrested


Sing Pao:
Curtains down on final act of "Occupy"
Police arrest 247 persons, Admiralty "recovered"


Sing Tao:
"Admiralty" finishes/disperses/folds the umbrella
The police clear the site peacefully, 209 persons arrested


South China Morning Post:
Orderly end to 75 days of turmoil


The Standard:
209 arrested as Occupy cleared


Ta Kung Pao:
Admiralty over
Clearance, arrested one by one, the police arrested 247 persons


Wen Wei Po:
Admiralty cleared; "Occupy Central" defeated
The roads are clear again; the police clear the site

Q1. Do you support the High Court in issuing injunctions for the Occupy areas?
72%: Support
18%: Do not support
5%: Don't care
5%: No opinion

Q2. Do you support the government clearing all the Occupy areas?
75%: Support
13%: Do not support
9%: Don't care
3%: No opinion

Q3. Do you support the manner in which the police cleared the obstacles in Mong Kok earlier?
55%: Support
35%: Do not support
6%: Don't care
4%: No opinion

Q4. Some people have called for "shopping groups" to gather and continue to express political demands. Do you support this?
16%: Support
74%: Do not support
5%: Don't care
5%: No opinion

[Q4 is the first piece of survey data on the Shopping Revolution, although you really don't need any polling to know the answer. The common opinion is that this is just what "elementary school chickens" would do. The only people who are really hurt are the local businesses (and their workers). And it will only make "genuine universal suffrage" recede even more as public resentment grows over this sort of action and the cause that it espouses. Yes, on the night of the clearance of the Occupy Admiralty, the Shopping Revolution even made its initial appearance near the Occupy Causeway Bay area. This provides the perfect excuse to clear the one remaining Occupy area.]

The Kowloon Federation of Associations announced the poll results. 2,863 citizens aged 18 or over were randomly selected and interviewed December 6-9 by telephone. Here are some highlights:

27.72% are opposed to "using the illegal Occupy Movement to change the Hong Kong political system."
32.44% are very much opposed to "using the illegal Occupy Movement to change the Hong Kong political system"

23.88% support the "Hong Kong Police to clear the obstacles in the Occupy Admiralty area"
47.35% very much support the "Hong Kong Police to clear the obstacles in the Occupy Admiralty area"

55.52% agree that the Occupy Movement has created severe social divisions so far
30.24% agree that the Occupy Movement has created social divisions so far
8.83% agree that the Occupy Movement has created minor social divisions so far
3.14% agree that the Occupy Movement has not created social divisions so far

79.96% agree that they are concerned or very concerned about the social divisions
22.80% agree that they are unconcerned about the social divisions

76.05% want/very much want to see one-person-one-vote implemented for the 2017 Chief Executive election

54.12% said that they have always wanted to follow the National People's Congress decision to implement the direct election of the Chief Executive
6.15% said that they changed from opposing to following the NPC's decision as a result of the two-month-plus long Occupy Movement
2.93% said that they changed from following to opposing the NPC's decision

18.65% think that there is a good chance that the political reform package will be passed
39.32% think that there is still a chance, however slight, to pass the package

As to how the government should address the young people's demands,
23.25% say that the government should improve housing for young people
21.82% say that the government should improve the educational system

(SCMP) The game changes: as Occupy sites are cleared, Hong Kong's democracy protesters go 'shopping'  December 11, 2014.

The "shopping tour" protest in Mong Kok on Tuesday night appeared at first as if it had lost steam. Only a tiny crowd showed up at the usual starting point, outside the Broadway Cinema on Sai Yeung Choi Street South. Most of the younger "shoppers", whose numbers could grow to 200 each night, were nowhere in sight. Instead, a counter-protest group lurked nearby. But then the "shoppers" popped up suddenly, right behind the counter-protesters and hurled sarcasm-laced chants at them.

Each night, the protesters turn on its head a call by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying for the public to shop more in Mong Kok, after the two-month-long street occupation was cleared on November 26. They show up to do just that - except that they only buy a few, inexpensive items and mostly walk up and down the pavements, singing and shouting slogans.

Sarcasm infuses the "shopping tour" as protesters shout "gau wu", a Cantonese transliteration of Putonghua's gou wu or "to shop". The expression became popular after a mainland tourist who joined an early anti-Occupy rally told a reporter she was there to shop. This new form of demonstrating may just be the beginning of more to come as pro-democracy activists experiment with new ways to continue their fight after Occupy. The key features of the "shopping tour" protest - spontaneous, leaderless, sporadic and possibly skating on thin legal ice - give a hint of the emerging forms of social activism in post-Occupy Hong Kong.

The shops appear wary. Most put up their shutters when the protesters appear, their business disrupted. But among those that responded to the Post's queries, jewellery chain Chow Tai Fook said it saw no impact on its daily operations or revenue, while Tse Suen Luen Jewellery reported a "drop in foot traffic" at its two stores in the area.

The core group of "shoppers" - most of whom spent their days in October and November camping in Mong Kok - stressed they came of their own accord and not at anyone's bidding.

"If you ask me who the organiser is, I can think of nobody but 689," said protester Man Ip, using a popular nickname for CY Leung that refers to the 689 votes he received from the 1,200-member election committee in 2012. "Not a single group now has that much influence and power that they can order others around," said the 23-year-old fresh graduate who has been at Mong Kok every night since September 28, when police used tear gas on protesters. "It started out as an attempt to try to reoccupy Nathan Road on the night after it was cleared, but we were very much outnumbered by the cops," Man said. "Soon, there were people chanting ' gau wu, gau wu', telling others to follow 689's appeal to shop and that's how it started." But Man conceded that protesters had not yet thought of ways to go further with the "shopping tour". Most die-hard Occupy protesters, he said, were exhausted by the toll their two-month strike had taken.

Another "shopping tour" protester, Sam Ho, 36, was equally candid. He said they might not be able to "come up with brilliant ideas" on how to move forward, but "as long as police are beating people up for no reason, we will be wherever we are needed." He himself belonged to a small group of musicians and other artists who got involved in several aspects of the protest and did not rule out regrouping later.

(Wen Wei Po) December 9, 2014.

According to Ms. Chow who runs the Shangri-La Rice Noodle Restaurant in Tung Choi Street business fell 20%-30% since the Occupy Movement came to Mong Kok. After the police clearance, she was hoping for business to recover. Instead, some demonstrators started the Shopping Revolution, business has fallen down again by at least 20%. She said that she normally makes $12,000 to $13,000 per day, but she makes only $8,000 per day now. Since the restaurant pays more than $100,000 per month in rent, the impact of the Shopping Revolution poses immense pressure on her. She said: "Workers have to take detours to get to work. They have to explain to the police that they work here, or else the police will think that they are the troublemakers." Ms. Chow said frankly, "Those demonstrators in the Shopping Revolution are disgusting!" "I hope that they know better and not to cause trouble for me and my neighboring stores." As to the claim that the demonstrators came here to s' and stimulate the local economy, Ms. Chow said: "Increase consumption? That would be hard! I just beg them to stop soon."

According to a worker at the Chiu Sing Garden (Hong Kong-style noodle specialist), business has fallen off by 20% to 30% since the Shopping Revolution started. The workers are helpless with the decrease in business at night. "There is nothing else to do. We have to open for business. If customers come in, we welcome them. If they don't come, there is nothing that we can do." As for the long-term impact, he said: "If this goes on every day, it will get impossible."

According to an employee 24-hour-a-day convenience store across the Sin Tat Plaza, the Shopping Revolution demonstrators gathered outside for a few days. Although there was a constant stream of pedestrians passing in front of the store, very few enter to make purchases. Furthermore, the workers were afraid of any clashes on the street might spill into the store. Therefore, they closed for business as early as 8pm and no later than 10pm. Nowadays, they keep an eye on the number of people gathering outside and make their decision to close as things happen.

As for the Korean skincare specialty store Innisfree which has two stores in Mong Kok, they have closed at 8pm five nights in a row. On its social network page, the company explained that store hours have been changed to guarantee the personal safety of customers and workers. According to workers, large numbers of people gathered on the street but very few enter. Those who come in only look around and few make purchases.

According to the owner Mr. Lee of an upper-floor coffee shop on Sai Yeung Choi Street South, the Shopping Revolution demonstrators show up around 10pm every night. Some people even want to shop at 2am. Naturally, business in the area is being impacted. "Business has fallen down by 105." He is concerned that the Shopping Revolution is disrupting the daily lives of residents. He hopes that the movement would not last too long.

(Wen Wei Po) December 10, 2014.

Although these shoppers seem to come out of nowhere in response to calls on the Internet, they are actually not "directionless." Here are always a few "instigators" in the crowd. These people distribute placards to passersby. As more people gather, they being to chant loudly: "I want genuine universal suffrage," "Buy things, buy things" but they don't move forward. Clearly they had motives other than shopping. As more people gathered on the sidewalk, these leaders suddenly disappeared. Clearly, these leaders were there to incite the emotions of the crowd and then try to control things from behind the scene. According to informed sources, these leaders are mostly middle-aged whereas the participants are mostly young people.

Here are some detailed scenes. Scene #1: A thin middle-aged man has been showing up nightly around Soy Street. He walks back and forth holding a placard saying "I want genuine universal suffrage." According to informed sources, this person is a member of People Power. Scene #2: At around 9pm one night, a private vehicle came to a stop in the Shopping Revolution area, and Civic Passion leader Wong Yeung-tat rolled down the window to wave to the crowd while yelling: "Continue, continue, buy things, buy things." (note: see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Za00EBYLuc @5:09) Scene #4:  On Soy Street, a short man kept giving instructions to people. According to information, this man is a Cheung Kwun O district triad gang member nicknamed Dwarf Chu. Early last month, he led his gang members to challenge the police many times. He has allegedly been paid a lot in order to come from Cheung Kwun O to Mong Kok.

Many of the participants are members of radical groups such as Civic Passion and People Power as well as triad gang members. Civic Passion is a small radical political party. Although their numbers are small, they are central in the planning and execution of violent acts. The assault on the Legislative Council is their doing in retaliation for the clearance of Mong Kok. Meanwhile People Power is a radical alliance of different pan-democrat groups. Many people characterize this group as "the Sect of Fists" and "the Bath Salt Army."

As the Occupy Admiralty area gets ready to be cleared today, there is talk of starting a Shopping Revolution there too. Here is a reminder as to what Occupy Admiralty already did to the local businesses there.

(Oriental Daily) December 10, 2014

Many shop owners applaud the coming clearance of the Occupy Admiralty area. According to worker Ms. Chan at a florist in United Centre, the shop has been in business for ten years and business fell by 50% during the Occupy period. Traffic in the area has been re-routed due to road blocks, making it hard to unload supplies. "Every time I see the television coverage of the Occupy areas, I get very angry!" Ms. Chan said that the florist did not even make enough to pay rent the past two months. She said that young people have never had to suffer and therefore they don't understand suffering. She said that the government should chase them away as quickly as possible.

According to Mr. Chow who has been running a computer shop for three years at United Centre, business has fallen by 20%. Due to traffic problems, it was hard to bring in large computers and equipment. He originally supported the Occupy Movement. But when he looks at his 5-figure monthly losses, he thinks that it is time for the Movement to stop.

Meanwhile over at Admiralty Centre, Ms. Chan who sells handmade accessories said that the Occupy Movement has been an unmitigated disaster for her. Most of her regular customers get there by car, and they cannot come due to the road blockage. And now she can't even get anyone to come during the golden Xmas period. Ms. Chan also objected the shopping centre management for permitting people to sleep on the floor, to re-charge mobile phone batteries and use the restrooms. People are even gambling publicly there. She wondered if these people are genuinely fighting for democracy. She angrily accused Occupy Central founder Benny Tai of being a legal scholar who teaches his students to break the law.

Meanwhile for the restaurant industry as a whole:

(Oriental Daily) December 11, 2014.

According to the Hong Kong Federation of Restaurants & Related Trades, October and November are supposed to busy months of the year for the restaurant industry. The normally expected volumes are $8 and $9 billion respectively. During these two months, the Occupy Movement caused a contraction of 10%, mainly concentrated in the Occupy areas of Sheung Wan, Central, Mong Kok and Causeway Bay. In those areas, the restaurants lost an average of 40% in business.

For a typical Chinese cuisine restaurant, the actual net profit is only about 2%. To recoup the lost of one month's business, it would require more than 10 months of profit. More than 260,000 workers are affected.

As for the minimum wage being increased to $32.50 per hour, waiters and servers already start at $35.0 and cleaners at $40.0. So restaurant workers already make more than the proposed minimum wage. Even so the restaurant industry is still looking at a shortfall of 30,000 workers. The Federation urges the government to study the possibility of importing workers to deal with the labor shortage problem.

Wave 3
December 8-9, 2014
Respondents: Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or over
Methodology: Telephone interview by interviewers
Sample size: 514
Response rate: 65.2%

Q1. To what extent do you support or oppose the Occupy Movement initiated by students and citizens?
14.3%: Strongly support
17.1%: Quite support
18.5%: Half-half
14.6%: Quite oppose
34.7%: Strongly oppose
0.9%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. To what extent d you support or oppose how the government handles the participants of the Movement?
21.4%: Strongly support
16.0%: Quite support
14.0%: Half-half
17.3%: Quite oppose
28.4%: Strongly oppose
2.8%: Don't know/hard to say

Q3. Have you participated in the mass gatherings of the Occupy Movement recently?
12.3%: Yes
87.3%: No
0.4%: Don't know/hard to say

[The above Q1 seems to say that 14.3% + 17.1% = 31.4% support the Occupy Movement while 14.6% + 34.7% = 49.3% oppose. This is lower than the 80% lower than is often being cited nowadays. Well, it all depends on how the question is phrased. In Wave 2 (November 19, 2014), two questions were included:

Q1. To what extent do you support or oppose the Occupy Movement initiated by students and citizens?

12.1%: Strongly support
16.2%: Quite support
13.9%: Half-half
18.3: Quite oppose
39.9%: Strongly oppose
0.5%: Don't know/hard to say

Q6. Should the Occupy movement continue or stop? (If the respondents think it should continue, interviewer reads out answers 1 to 3; if the answer is stop, read out answers 5 o 6; if "don't know/hard to say", there is no need to prompt further. Only one answer allowed.)

4.4%:Continue, with a larger scale
6.1%:Continue, with the scale unchanged
3.3%:Continue, with a smaller scale (include reducing the number of occupied areas)
42.0%: Stop, use other ways to fight for universal suffrage
8.9%: Stop, because the goals have been attained
28.3%:Stop, because occupying is wrong
7.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Wave 2 Q1 says that 12.1%  + 16.2% = 28.3% support the Occupy Movement initiated by students and citizens and 18.3% + 39.9% = 58.2% oppose. These numbers are similar to obtained for Wave 3 Q1. Wave 2 Q6 says 4.4% + 6.1% + 3.3% = 13.8% want the Occupy movement to continue, while 42.0% + 8.9% + 28.3% = 79.2% want it to stop. This is where the 80% comes from. But HKU-POP decided not to ask Q6 in Wave 3 for whatever reason. So some people now have the impression that opposition to the Occupy Movement has just tumbled down from about 80% (Wave 2 Q6) to under 50% (Wave 3 Q1).

The Wave 3 HKU-POP press release includes this piece of editorializing:

On the latest PopCon Survey, Director of POP Robert Chung observed, Our survey shows that those who support the students or the government are both minorities. To overcome this lose-lose situation, both sides must exercise restraint, try to understand, tolerate and not agitate each other, in order to resolve the problem in a civilized and rational way.

The second sentence can be used in any context. The first sentence is true in terms of survey outcome for Q1, but not true for Wave 2 Q6. What is the difference? Q1 refers to the Occupy Movement "initiated by students and citizens" as a protest against the August 31st decision by the National People's Congress. As originally conceived, Occupy Central with Love and Peace would not last more than a couple of days and would only take place in the Central business district. Wave 2 Q6 refers to the Occupy Movement as it stands today. It is now more than 70 days later. It had taken place in some mixed business/residential areas. It has inconvenienced almost everybody and inflicted economic losses on some businesses and workers, some more so than others. And it has no discernible impact on the Central Government and the HKSAR government on the issue of "genuine universal suffrage." That is why 79% said "Stop" with 42% saying to "use other ways to fight for universal suffrage." The HKU-POP editorial talks about mutual understanding and toleration, but it doesn't address how to deal with the occupation of the streets. Should it stop? HKU-POP did not editorialize on the significance of Wave 1 Q6 and Wave 2 Q6 in their press releases (Wave 1 and Wave 2). That had been the focus of press coverage. Instead, Q6 was eliminated in Wave 3 of this tracking study and an editorial statement was made with respect to Wave 3 Q1.]

Day 70.

We are made by our times. If I wasn't a policewoman today and I was still a student, I might be one of you. This is not surprising at all. All our information come from the media. If they want to write us up a certain way, then I become such a person in your eyes.

Our team began working on September 27. On the first day, I worked 39 hours straight. I slept for less than six hours and I was back at work again. I thought that this would go on for only a week or so. But today turns out to be the 70th day ...

I thought that I aged ten years over these 70 days. During the first month, we worked the night shift most of the time. Even now, we work 13 to 14 hours a day. As a mother, one such workday is too many already, much less than 70 days. Suddenly I feel sorry about my two children, especially since my son is just learning to work. The other say, he was still unable to stand up. When will he be ready to walk steadily? Suddenly I felt that something was lost ... my daughter told her teacher that she doesn't get to see her mother ... my heart feels sad ...

When I am at home, I spend the time sleeping. Never mind taking care of the children, because I don't even have the energy to play with them. Obviously, my husband has to take care of them. If you are a parent, you note that it is tiring enough to put two children to bed. As a Yellow Ribbon supporter, he suddenly said one day that he hoped Occupy Central would stop soon ...

Yes, you heard right. My husband is one of you. I remember clearly the day when a Yellow Umbrella profile picture appeared on his Facebook. I broke into tears immediately.

Yes, we have to accept other people's opinions. Besides, he is my husband. When society overwhelmingly says that the police are wrong, even your bedside partner says so too ... but I am grateful to him because he let me know how to tolerate others. That sounds easy, but it is so hard to carry out. God let me know that I am imperfect. He wants me to continue to love, to love God, to love people, to love those who hold ideas different from mine.

On the day when tear gas was released, I was over at Tim Wa Avenue. On the night when Mong Kok was occupied, I was there. I also dealt with the Shopping groups. I don't know whether it was right or wrong to use tear gas, but I know that I began to be cursed everyday on the street and on the Internet. The police faced its greater challenge in history.

Actually, I was born in the same era as you. You and I should get the same respect. So why do you want to say "Shame on you!", "Shameful," "Evil police," "Beasts," "Police dogs" and use obscene language against us? You won't even spare our children or grandchildren? My friends, why do you say on your Facebook, "If you still think the police are righteous now, please unfriend me." Even my Christian brothers and sisters are like that. We get surrounded and cursed out in the street. Do you know how we feel at that instant? When I read my friends' comments on Facebook about the police force, I was so hurt that I couldn't sleep all night. I told myself not to visit Facebook anymore, but I couldn't help myself ...

However, I believe that some of you are silent people who go and march in the streets for an ideal.

I have not insulted or assaulted any demonstrator. As you say, we are not your enemies. As for the news reports about the police assaulting people, I cannot say that they are false. But the media only report the key segment of the assault but completely ignore what happened before or afterwards.

As a frontline police officer, I have seen how my colleagues deal with citizens. I don't always agree with how the police deal with citizens. But even if I disagree, I nevertheless understand them. It is not that they are correct. But anyone who has gone through what we went through will feel just as angry. Yes, we have undergone training and we should know how to restrain our selves. But I am sorry that we are not always able to do that. We are humans and we are frail.

We all hope that this will end quickly, but we don't see a way out.

As a civilized society, Hong Kong should be able to accept different ideas, different voices. It is wrong for anti-Occupy people to attack the Occupy people that day. But I don't see any humor in Occupy people drowning out the anti-Occupy voices with the loud singing of the birthday song.

I also support democracy. As a student, I attended the June 4th candlelight vigil and the anti-Article 23 march. I also know how to sing The Flowers of Freedom. Today, it is not as if I don't support democracy, but I wonder how important is democracy. Is it truly the best government system? For mankind, it may be. But as a Christian, I wait more for the Heavenly Kingdom to come.

I remember that I joined the Police in order to be a public servant to help others. Today, I still regard myself as serving others. Please do not treat us as your enemies.

You may well ask whether I hate those Occupy people. If I say no, you won't believe me anyway. Occupy Central caused me to miss witnessing my children grow up and insufficient rest. My husband reminded me that this is the Devil's work. The Occupy Movement has caused enough damage to my friends, family and society. I really don't want it to surface in my home too. This is not what God want to see. Really, when the demonstrators stand in front of us to curse our children, I told myself that God also loves them.

Prior to the Occupy Movement, the police held training sessions to conduct large-scale arrests. On that day, as an observer, we saw how much resources was put in to deal with this. Tears were in my eyes.

This is my beloved Hong Kong, the home in which I grew up. Since when do we end up only criticizing and attacking each other?

I know that there is nothing we can do. We can only pray in tears. On some days, when things calm down, I want to cry. Cry for the police, for Hong Kong, for my church ... In the worst moment, I thank my university Christian roommate for reminding me that God is watching everything. God has not forgotten us, He has not forgotten Hong Kong.

As Occupy goes into the 70th day, we will continue to work everyday on Occupy Central. Each day, we work 13 hours or longer, we can't be with our families, we can't see our friends and I can't see when this movement will end in the near future. Helplessness. But life has to go on.

You can continue to criticize us, but please do not curse and demonize us. When we ask you to step back on the sidewalk, please do not say: "The government doesn't listen to our demands, so why should we listen to you?" Please do not say that we are dogs or we are being used by the government. Law enforcement is our job.

Christmas is coming soon. We hope that there is more love and understanding among us.

(HKU POP) December 9, 2014

For the period June 25-30, 2014

  • Satisfaction rate of Hong Kong Police Force = 56%

  • Dissatisfaction rate of Hong Kong Police Force = 19%

  • Net satisfaction rate = 56% - 19% = 36%

For the period November 25-28, 2014

  • Satisfaction rate of Hong Kong Police Force = 56%

  • Dissatisfaction rate of Hong Kong Police Force = 27%

  • Net satisfaction rate = 56% - 27% = 29%

So here was a change of 29% - 36% = -7% in the net satisfaction rate.

The HKU-POP editorialized:

In terms of absolute ratings, all top 5 disciplinary forces get more than 60 marks, four of which are above 70, which is very good. In terms of net satisfaction, Hong Kong Fire Services Department registers positive 93 percentage points, and is definitely the most popular disciplinary force in Hong Kong. However, that of Hong Kong Police Force registers positive 29 percentage points, which is record low since July 1997 ... The popularity drop of the Police is obviously due to the recent Occupy Movement, which has caught the Police in between different political forces. To overcome this problem, the Police will have to strengthen its professionalism in executing its duties, and also its affection and care for the society. It should not lean towards any political force, nor resort to improper means, just let political problems be resolved in political ways.

[HKU-POP was asked by the press to justify this interpretation. TVB reported that HKU-POP refused to offer any more comments beyond the above. This interpretation is problematic because it may not be the only possible explanation. An alternate interpretation is that people are dissatisfied with the performance of the Hong Kong Police Force because it did not act forcefully enough to enforce the law and restore social order in a timely manner Instead, the police waited more than 2 months while watching the demonstrators cause inconveniences and economic losses. This kind of view is prevalent at certain Internet discussion forums. If you need to distinguish between these two opposite interpretations, you need some further probing (e.g. Asking "Why are you dissatisfied with the performance of the Hong Kong Police Force?" among those who are dissatisfied). Otherwise, this is just one person's personal opinion.

This HKU-POP editorial is also unprofessional in another aspect. For the November 25-28 poll, margins of sampling error are included. For the 29% net satisfaction rate for the Hong Kong Police force, the 95% confidence interval is 29% +/- 7% = (22%, 36%). For the June 25-30, 2014 survey, the 95% confidence interval is 36% +/- 7% = (29%, 43%). The difference in satisfaction rate of -7% has a 95% confidence interval of -7% +/- 10% = (-17%, 3%). That is, I see that the standard error for each net satisfaction rate is 3.5%. Therefore the standard error of the difference in net satisfaction rates is SQRT(3.5%**2 + 3.5%**2) = 5%. Therefore the 95% of the difference in satisfaction rates is 2 x 5% = 10%. In summary, the result is not significantly differently from zero for these sample sizes. This was not pointed out by HKU-POP. Actually, why bother providing 95% confidence interval if you are going to ignore them anyway? Instead, they spent a lot of time making a particular political point of theirs ("The popularity of the Police is obviously due to the recent Occupy Movement ...", which is unsupported by the data.

(Sing Tao via Yahoo.com.hk) (This screen capture is used to preserve a news report which may well be deleted or corrected later).

[The sentence "警隊民望跌至歷來新低,評分只有61分,滿意率僅29%" is translated as "The popularity of the Hong Kong Police fell to a record low with a popularity rating of only 61 and a satisfaction rate of only 29%." Well, the HKU-POP reported a net satisfaction rate of 29% which became a satisfaction rate of 29% in this news report. The reporter who wrote this and the editor who approved it are careless and/or innumerate. This is a huge mistake because of the bad impression given by "a satisfaction rate of only 29%".]

For comparison, here are some approval ratings for other persons/organizations/countries:

Wouldn't these people like to have a net approval rate of +29%? (Forbes) But Russian President Vladimir Putin has no such worries.

[On the Internet discussion forums, most people were not reacting to the contents of this poll. Instead, they were ready to reject the results as soon as they saw that the pollster was the HKU-POP. They do not treat polls from other universities with the same contempt. The backdrop was the relationship between the HKU-POP and the Occupy Central Movement (see The Standard). Specifically, the HKU-POP received a donation from an anonymous donor through Benny Tai, a founder of the Occupy Central. When asked to identify the source, Tai said it was Occupy Central co-founder Chu Yiu-ming who in turn got it from an anonymous donor. That $800,000 was spent on a referendum on constitutional reform as a prelude to Occupy Central. Some Internet users believe that this constitutes a conflict of interest which taints any polling by HKU-POP on political reform.

Some Internet comments:
- I am not satisfied with the police. They were too restrained. They hit too lightly! Too few people bled, too few people were arrested!
- I am anti-Occupy Central and I am disappointed with the police. They should have beaten up the rioters just like the American police do.
- I tend to believe in this poll. Simply put, 80% to 90% of Hong Kong citizens are opposed to Occupy Central. The police are too gentle to these Yellow Ribbon thugs and have not yet cleared the sites. As a result, the normal lives of the citizens are disrupted. That is why they are dissatisfied with the police! The only way for the police to regain public support is have no mercy on these Yellow Ribbon thugs. The police should beat the hell out of them until they get down on their knees and beg for mercy!
- A truism: Lawbreakers don't like the police.
- Yet another black gold public opinion poll!
- How much money did HKU-POP receive under the table to conduct this poll?
- "(The police) should not lean towards any political force, nor resort to improper means, just let political problems be resolved in political ways." This sentence implies political judgment, and it is sufficient to make this poll fucking rubbish. Oh, I see, it's HKU-POP. Obviously. Never mind ...
- "Just let political problems be resolved in political ways"? It is news to me that blocking the road is a political problem. Hey, it is breaking the traffic laws. And the police should be enforcing the laws.
- In that poll, the Hong Kong Police Force has a satisfaction rate of 56% versus a dissatisfaction rate of 27% for a net satisfaction rate of 29%. Previously, HKU-POP found that 83% think the Occupy Movement should stop, while 13% think it should continue. The net difference is 83% - 13% = 70%. HKU-POP did not editorialize that the Occupy Movement should stop in view of the overwhelming public opinion.
- Why don't they run a public opinion poll on confidence/no-confidence in HKU-POP? They won't like those results!]

(SpeakOut.HK via Hong Kong Economic Journal) Evidence required in accusation of "improper means" of Hong Kong Police Force. By Cheung Chi-kong. December 11, 2014.

HKU-POP announced the latest survey on the Hong Kong Police Force, which received an average rating of 61, satisfaction rate of 56% and dissatisfaction rate of 27%. Based upon these numbers and other data such as the median and quartiles, these are good numbers. But the interpretation says that these hit a 17-year low, which makes it sound less than satisfactory.

I have previously said criticized the limitations of using average ratings, because the tendency for people to choose a rating towards the middle. The police have to handle many controversial matters which means support is necessarily polarized. In this case, the satisfaction rate is unchanged at 56% but the dissatisfaction rate rose by 8%. As a result, the net satisfaction rate went down.

Overseas polling organizations usually only publish the numbers in their polls, especially when the subject pertains to governments or officials. Readers are left to decode and interpret the results themselves. After all, they conducted the study themselves, and they want to avoid taking a fixed political position. However, Robert Chung has the habit of inserting his comments and making subjective analyses of his data, including certain terms and concepts not included in the polling process. For example, "dangerous level" and "edge of failure." What is danger? What is failure? Only Robert Chung knows.

On the current poll about the Hong Kong Police Force, Robert Chung once again interceded. He called for the Hong Kong Police Force to exercise professionalism and social concern without using improper means. Political issues should be solved by political means.

Robert Chung does not explain what the "improper means" are. It is serious charge to say that the police is using "improper means." The police are the main force in law enforcement. Obviously, professionalism is required of them. Over and above professionalism, they are required to uphold the law themselves. If someone thinks that the police are using "improper means," they need to produce concrete evidence and forward the charges to the relevant departments.

As for solving political issues by political means, I am 200% in agreement. But is "Occupy Central" a political issue that should be resolved by political means? Of course not. Political means are presumed to be in accordance with the law. So the Palestine issue is a political issue. But the 9/11 incident cannot be resolved by political means because it is an act of terrorism. In the context of Hong Kong, the development of the political system and the 2017 election of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage are political issues. However, "Occupy Central" was not a political solution. Instead, it was an attempt to resolve by illegal means. If these political issues are to be resolved by political means, then Admiralty should never have been occupied on day one, the Legislative Council should not be assaulted and the Central Government Office should not have been besieged. All these means were illegal. The relevant persons attempted to use illegal, even violent, to achieve their political goals.

If the Occupy Central founders did not initiate "Occupy Central" and nobody assaulted the Legco, and instead they went to hold forums and conduct marches, the police would not have intervened. They would have even helped the organizers to maintain order at their activities. But Occupy Central broke the law and the police have to enforce the law according to court injunctions and government orders. On the television screen, everybody can see how the actions of the Occupy people made the police resort to using force. Under these actual conditions, it is nonsense to insist that political issues must be resolved by political means.

I personally think that dissatisfaction against the police has risen, because the police are the frontline force for the government to deal with the illegal blocking of the roads. I have seen certain public opinion polls in which only more than 20% support "Occupy Central" while more than 30% oppose the government using force to clear the sites. It is reasonable to assume that the 20% is a part of the 30%. This leaves more than 10% who are opposed to Occupy Central but, at the same time, they don't support clearance by force. These people cannot offer a reasonable way to solve the problem but, no matter what, they just don't want to see a clashes of forces!

It is therefore reasonable that the dissatisfaction rate should rise to 27%. After all, more than 20% support Occupy Central, and their impression about the police have gotten worse. In these terms, the 27% dissatisfaction rate is not unreasonable.

Legislative Councilor Kwok Ka-Kee (Civic Party) set up a table at the Tsuen Wan MTR station to urge citizens to support democracy/genuine universal suffrage. Here is the video of the reception from citizens.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=843365572371483&set=vb
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqp0-_jT-bk
Several men directed their words at Kwok, who did not say a thing.

0:03 (Man) Go away! Go away! Do not make trouble here! You don't know me? Go away, don't make trouble!
0:16 (Man) Are you working for Hong Kong citizens? If you are working for Hong Kong citizens, then it is inconvenient to get around town right now. Inconvenient for citizens.
0:18 (Man) Look what you have done! Look at this!
0:20 (Man) Shit stirrer!
0:24 (Man) Look at the results. Democracy? What democracy? It is inconvenient for us. Who is helping us? Who is helping us?
0:33 (Man) It is just right that you came here. I didn't have time to visit you in Admiralty.
0:34 (Man) You are crazy! You have nothing but grass inside your brain! Democracy? What democracy? Look what you got us into! We have nothing now. You are stupid!
0:43 (Man) What are you looking at? You don't know me? Hong Kong citizen. Chinese person.
0:50 (Man) Support you? Support you?
0:51 (Man) Support you! You eat shit!
0:57 (Man) Go back to Admiralty, go back to Mong Kok!
0:58 (Man) You came to Tsuen Wan so that I can scold you. It is good that you came here for us to scold you. The roads were blocked for several dozen days.
1:05 (Man) Eat shit!
1:11 (Man) No buses. What for? You caused such a bloody mess (actually, he said "Chicken feathers, duck blood").
1:20 (Man) I am fucking cursing you out. The Civic Party! What is so great about you!?
1:24 (Man) You conducted so many public opinion polls and you know that many people do not support Occupy Central.
1:39 (Man) Civic Party lawyers caused so many lawsuits.
1:32 (Man) You bastards!
1:25 (Man) You conducted all those public opinion polls. Did you ever publish any result? So many people are opposed to Occupy Central. They don't support you. Why won't you publish the results? You hid all that research.
1:47 (Man) Public opinion is not the most important thing. It is more important to have your photos taken. So what happens to us?
1:52 (Man) Go call the police. Dickface!!
1:57 (Man) You hid everything in the drawers. Which of you democrats now dare to show his/her face?
2:03 (Man) You have great education credentials, but you think like an elementary school chicken. You wasted so many lawsuits on us citizens.
2:15 (Man) When you want to, all of you twenty or so people show up together for a 9 o'clock press conference. When the students got their heads beaten into a pulp ... dozens of them ... bleeding ... why didn't you Civic Party people come out?
2:22 (Man) You pushed the students out to die. You fucking dick!
2:23 (Man) You pushed them out there. You should have come out.
2:27 (Man) But you went home and slept.
2:30 (Man) You come out and announce to the public ... to condemn ... Now even the citizens are cursing you out. You are besieged everywhere you go. You are scolded everywhere you go. The citizens are angry. I am telling you.
2:40 (Man) Pack up this station!
2:43 (Man) For more than sixty days, I've had to go to work. I didn't have time to look up you people and pay you back. You came here today just at the right time. You listen to the sounds of the citizens of Tsuen Wan. Does anyone wear black clothes anymore? Does anyone wear yellow ribbons anymore? Nobody does that.
2:58 (Man) Support China. I don't even dare to wear yellow clothes. Black clothes? Are you in mourning because your parents passed away? Black clothes. Your parents died? Black clothes.
3:14 (Man) Pack up this station!
3:18 (Man) You think that you always get the say. In the end, the citizens must be allow to have a living. We can't even live now.
3:21 (Man) Harmony is the greatest justice. This is not the justice that you are talking about. You have the troublemakers' justice.
3:26 (Man) We can't even live now. So why are we talking about pursuing some kind of ideal? You look at the Occupy Central trio. They are pursuing an ideal. All they've got is an ideal. They have been reading too many books and their brains are rotten. Divorced from reality. Occupy Central. Sit down and wait for the police to arrest them. Non-resistance. Even held rehearsals. So what happened to the Movement in the end? It deviated thoroughly. Because such is your idealism.

(Oriental Daily)

On December 3, a Facebook user posted a call on behalf of the "Leadership Party". There was a plan to incite supporters to gather at the Mong Kok Chao Luen minibus stop, the intersection of Nathan Road and Argyle Street and the Legislative Council on December 24-26 at 6pm. The participants are reminded to wear heavy armor and bring other supporting materials.

The group is organized into 6 teams of 60 persons each. The teams are:

- The brick team, which is equipped with bricks, metal bars and hammers
- The fire extinguisher team, which is equipped with portable fire extinguishers to use against the riot police
- The bomb squad, which is responsible for setting fire to police vehicles as well as fire walls to isolate the riot police
- The shield team, which is equipped with iron/steel/wooden long shields to stand in front to hold off the police charge
- The long rod team, which is equipped with long bamboo poles and will stand behind the shield team
- The "Shopping Revolution" team, which is the reserve.

This post was circulated via mobile phone and computer. On December 4, the police arrested a 31-year-old man named Koo at his home in Cheung Kwun O on suspicion of "accessing a computer with criminal or dishonest intent." The police removed a computer and a mobile phone for further investigation. The individual admitted to having written and disseminated the said Facebook post.

According to the police, the suspect came from a well-off family. He attended a boarding school in England, and returned to Hong Kong to attend the University of Science and Technology. Six years ago, he was arrested for theft and drug possession. Four years ago, he started a home decoration company in Kwun Tong. He has no political party affiliation, and he is active on Facebook, especially the Occupy Central groups.

(Apple Daily)

The police made the arrest on Thursday but waited until yesterday noon before issuing the press release. Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party mouthpieces Wen Wei Po and Ta Kung Pao had already reported on the case one day earlier.

Tertiary institution student Mr. Yip said in Mong Kong during his second attendance of the Shopping Revolution that the police arrest of this Internet user was clearly intended to manufacture White Terror. "They don't want us Shopping Revolutionists to come out. They are stupid. We come out to shop, and how can that be illegal? They can try to arrest all of us!" Mr. Yip said that he will continue to "window shop" until the government responds to the demand of the Hong Kong people for genuine universal suffrage.

Three middle-school students Cheng, Wong and Lam came together to "window shop" in Mong Kok on Saturday. They thought that the police arrested the Internet user in order intimidate the "window shopping" teams. They are prepared to be arrested and they won't give up as a result.

(Ming Pao)

The Internet user named Koo said that he was only forwarding some information about a Christmas cosplay party. He said that there was nothing inflammatory therein and the police are being over-sensitive.

Previous link: Internet Crackdown In Hong Kong - Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7IiXgz1ors
0:00 (subtitle) After the Umbrella Revolution began, people began to debate whether the umbrella is a weapon (this question even merits a debate). Legislative Councilor
0:05 (subtitle) Legislative Councilor Leung Che-cheung stated at the Legislative Council that the umbrella is a weapon. He was made fun of by various people. Let us look at what the "Poisoned Fruit" newspaper has to say.
0:10 (Apple Daily) Can you guess the answer to the question on the big television screen?
0:12 Leung: "During the early days of the Republic of China, the umbrella was an offensive weapon. If you have watched the Wong Fei-hung series, you know that Wong Fei-hung used an umbrella to fight with the bad guys ... fight with our so-called Bad Guy Kin (note: a character played by a famous bad-guy actor Shek Kin)." Is the answer: Umbrella? Wrong! If these umbrellas are used as weapons, they can injure people. So this basic knowledge ... or can we say that our colleagues have absolutely none of this historical knowledge?" Is the answer: Sophistry? Right!
1:00 (subtitle) So the "Poisoned Fruit" newspaper says Leung is using sophistry.
1:01 (Apple Daily) Quite a few Internet users question these film segments. How can you take them for real? Movies are fictional. But what about reality? A fourth-generation pupil of Wong Fei-hung, Peng Chi-ming, was interviewed by phone: "There is such a set of kung fu skills. It is called the 'Hung Fists Dragon and Tiger Umbrella.' Many of the objects in our daily lives can be developed as a weapon. So we have 'bridge chairs,' 'pipes,' 'fans,'  even ropes." Wow! This is so awesome! Legislative Councilor Leung was not totally wrong.
1:34 (subtitle) Let us look at how Legislative Councilor Raymond Wong Yuk-man made fun of Leung Che-cheung.
1:37 Wong: I marked it all down today. I teach him one at a time. For example, Leung Che-cheung said that Wong Fei-hung had an umbrella. Your mother ... (laughter) So I would ask ... fuck your mother! ... did you know that Tso Tat-wah used the Buddha's Palm technique? This was in the Legco meeting records.
1:59 Video segment from the movie "Silent Night Deadly Night 2"
2:51 Video segment from a Japanese anime video
4:09 (subtitle) (subtitle) How do kids learn to use the umbrella as a weapon?
4:10 Q: "Do you think that the umbrella is a weapon?" A: "Of course it is. Have you watched Whack Your Boss?" Q: "What is that?" A: "You kill your boss. It is a game with twenty-four ways to kill your boss." Q: "What has that got to do with the umbrella?" A: "One of the ways is to use an umbrella to kill your boss. Don't you know?" Q: "Really? Is there such a thing now?" A: "Of course there is ... you are so deficient in knowledge."
4:37 Video segment from Whack Your Boss.
4:52 (subtitle) There is even a Whack Your Teacher that the child may not know about (or maybe he is just pretending not to know)
4:56 Video segment from Whack Your Teacher.
5:06 (subtitle) You can even watch Whack Your Ex on YouTube.
5:13 (subtitle) How do you kill someone with an umbrella in real life? Here are some news stories:
5:16 (subtitle) On September 7, 1978, a dissident Bulgarian reporter named Georgi Markov was waiting for the bus when someone used a modified umbrella to stab his leg and inject the poison ricin. He died four days later.
5:19 (subtitle) On July 13, 2004, two young persons quarreled at the tram station. The 14-year-old stabbed the 12-year-old in the head, causing a 9.5cm gash. The 12-year-old died later.
5:23 (subtitle) Brian Hann was a mathematics professor at the University of Cape Town. He quarreled with his student Maleafisha Steve Tladi and the latter beat him unconscious with an umbrella. Hann was taken to the hospital where he died several days later. This happed on May 2, 2014.
5:27 (subtitle) On November 15, 2011, 51-year-old Pudkov killed a man with a umbrella for refusing to give him a cigarette. The medical examiner said that the victim was hit hard at least three times in the head, and then stabbed in the chest.
5:30(subtitle) On December 13, 2012, 9-year-old Karissa McDonald was killed when she was hit in the head by a parasol blown down by a strong gale.
5:35 (subtitle) 54-year-old taxi driver Orji-Ama Uro argued with a couple of passengers. The male passenger used an umbrella to stab Uro through the right eye up into his brain. Uro died. The couple fled.
5:38 (subtitle) On December 12, 2009, 31-year-old Lordtyshon Garret use an umbrella to severely injured the 4-year-old cat belonging to his maternal grandmother. The cat eventually died, and Garret was arrested by the police who found cat furs and blood on the umbrella.
5:49 Video segment to advertise an unbreakable umbrella as an ideal self-defense weapon.
7:37 Video segment demonstrating how to use an umbrella for self-defense, but it is clearly more offensive in nature (as in the adage "The best defense is a good offense")
8:21 (Raymond Wong) He does not know that our umbrellas are used to shield against pepper spray. Why are there so many umbrellas? The pepper spray is not the one that can be kept in a pocket. The kind that we were sprayed with in the past. I have been sprayed several times before. It was the kind that looked like Indian Sacred Ointment. A small sprayer. Fuck you! Now they use a big tool. They spray you. So we use umbrellas to shield. On September 27, we set up a station at Admiralty Centre. We bought many umbrellas. That was how umbrellas came. Why is this called The Umbrella Revolution?  That is why. There was a formation of umbrellas. The umbrella is not a weapon. It is used to shield against the pepper spray. Right or not? It does not matter what you fucking wear? They are spraying you with a large tool. So you use the umbrella as shield. Fuck you! Leung Che-cheung talks about Wong Fei-hung and "The umbrella is a weapon." Jackie Chan used a towel to kill a lot of people too.
9:24 (subtitle) Let us see whether the Occupy Central gang used umbrellas to shield the pepper spay or to stab the police. (News clip of umbrella-waving demonstrators charging the police line)
10:32 (Animated film) I am the Umbrella Revolution warrior. My mission is to eradicate all dissidents and achieve genuine universal suffrage. All those who stand in my way must die! The ultimate target: 689 (= Chief Executive CY Leung). Other targets: pro-government party members; Blue Ribbons and groups with the word Love in their names. All those Communist bands, Communist dogs and leftist retards. Even spontaneously anti-Occupy Central citizens will not be spared. You are not allowed to oppose, because you will be eradicated. No one can object to what I do, because I am carrying out civil disobedience.
11:42 Just when you think you are so awesome, the ill effects of brainwashing begin to show up.
11:43 The time is up, and you will get your just rewards. A brain that keeps looking at the Poisoned Fruit on the computer monitor. Our warrior is falling into a stupor from Occupying. He is going to expire soon. "It appears that if you give him another fifty cents, he will recover." "How much longer can he still be put on display?" "Not much longer." "I must become Chief Executive, and then I can sell Hong Kong. So the action must be speeded up. I have another mission for him. He will charge up to Beijing." "And then?" "Why ask? Of course, we are going to disavow him immediately and let him live or die as he can."

(SCMP) Hong Kong student activist Joshua Wong gives up on hunger strike after five days. December 6, 2014.

Hong Kong student activist Joshua Wong stopped his hunger strike at noon today over health concerns, but may return and consider resuming the fast to press for universal suffrage. Wong had not eaten food, subsisting on water and energy drinks, for 110 hours. He had joined several other student leaders on hunger strike on December 2. "After more urging from medical staff and seeing [Wong] being extremely weak to the point of breaking, he has ceased his fast," said Derek Lam Shun-hin at a Scholarism press conference held at 3.30pm.

The other remaining three strikers are continuing the action but are physically weak, Lam said.

...

Days into the strike, Wong's sugar levels had dropped to 2.7, requiring him to be given a spoonful of glucose. His last sugar level record was 4.1 taken this morning, according to doctor Chan Shuk-ying, who is part of the team monitoring the hunger strikers' health. His heartbeat had also been dangerously fast, with the highest recorded at 108 - the normal level being not more than 100, said Chan.

...

Meanwhile, a fourth, Isabella Lo Yin-wai, among the first group who started the hunger strike on Monday night, quit on Friday on doctors orders. Dr Wong Yam-hong, spokesperson of the medical team for Occupy, said he had been most worried by Lo's condition. He said Los heartbeat had been quite fast and she had low fever on Thursday night. If she goes on, it is possible that her body would experience permanent damage. We strongly ordered her to resume eating gradually later tonight. Lo said she felt ashamed for the decision to cease fasting. She said she was born with a condition that caused irregular heartbeats. But I will not give up striking for democracy. I will still come back to fight with everyone," she said.

...

Of the remaining three hunger strikers, Prince Wong has been fasting for over 113 hours, while Gloria Cheng Yik-lam and Eddie Ng Man-hin have been fasting for over 75 hours. All of them have only been drinking water.

(Oriental Daily) December 6, 2014.

The third Scholarism hunger striker Prince Wong has abandoned her hunger strike after 118 hours.

(Wen Wei Po) December 7, 2014.

After "surreptitiously taking" glucose and getting caught, Joshua Wong quietly stopped his fasting yesterday morning to "go home and take a short rest." Open University president Wong Yuk-shan asked a university worker to personally bring a letter to Joshua Wong at Admiralty to ask him to take care of himself. It was then discovered that Joshua Wong was gone. Only afterwards did Joshua Wong admit on social media that he had stopped fasting. He said that he felt "extremely uncomfortable" including dizziness, weakness in the limbs and constantly low sugar level. He stopped fasting at the "strong insistence" of the doctor. He said that he did not immediately announce his decision because he wanted to make sure that he wouldn't be disturbed while leaving.

(Oriental Daily) The constant liar is trying to fool the world with his hunger strike. By Lo Wing-lok, columnist, politician and medical doctor. December 6, 2014.

I have been asked many times to attend to hunger strikers, and I always tell them up front: "Hunger strike means not drinking, not eating, not injecting any nutrient that provides energy to the body. Therefore, if you drink glucose, you are not on a hunger strike."

A hunger strike is going to harm the body, starting with the brain. The brain depends on glucose as the source of energy. When your sugar level is too low, you lapse into unconsciousness, your brain may suffer permanent damage and you may even die. The human body can convert body fat into glucose, so your brain can still function normally without taking in sugar or even eating. But this cannot go on forever. Once past the limit, body acid levels soar and you die. Body proteins can also be converted into glucose, but burning up protein is destroying your body organs at the same time. Once past the limit, death awaits.

How long can you go on a hunger strike? In 1981, the Irish Republican Army prisoners went on hunger strike against the British government. Ten people died, with the time of death ranging from 47 to 72 days. They were ready to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to put pressure the British government. Having the above knowledge, hunger strikers do not need medical support in order to fight a sustained battle. But when they summon medical help to examine and check sugar levels whenever they feel uncomfortable, they clearly value their own bodies too much! But how can they apply pressure on the other side when they value their own bodies so much?

Scholarism convener Joshua Wong claimed that his sugar level fell below 2.7 after more than 60 hours of fasting. Therefore, he received emergency aid in the form of glucose. Compared to the IRA hunger strikes, what is a few dozen hours? Nobody is demanding that Wong make the ultimate sacrifice, but he can't even hold on a bit longer to increase the pressure of a hunger strike on the government. At most, Wong's show consists of not eating for more than 60 hours while under medical supervision. Even more shamelessly, he claimed that he was fasting after he took the glucose while promising that he would reveal openly the next time that he took glucose.

Joshua Wong should openly acknowledge that his hunger strike was over the moment that he took glucose and he should apologize for lying about it! But it is unknown whether citizens are still interested in hearing from this "constant liar."

(Oriental Daily) Lo Wing Lok. December 8, 2014.

... On Saturday morning, a media outlet incorrectly reported that Joshua Wong had fasted for more than 100 hours (the correct figure is 60 hours because he took glucose after 40+ hours). The media outlet also added more details in order to make the lie seem more real -- Joshua Wong had took an "electrolyte drink." Everyone knows that electrolyte drinks contain electrolytes such as potassium, calcium, magnesium etc as well as glucose. These drinks are used to replenish body fluids, electrolytes and energy after sporting. When a person who is fasting takes an electrolyte drink, it is the same as eating. The fasting is over ...

Internet user comments:
- Gee, I thought that the hunger strike was for an indefinite period of time.
- (in English) The fasting was so fast!
-
講就天下無敵,做就有心無力 ! When it comes to talking, he is undefeatable! When it comes to doing, he is useless in spite of his good intentions!
- An embarrassment for Hong Kong! An international joke! A farce from start to finish!
- The hunger strike was a huge success because Joshua Wong is on the front page of every Hong Kong newspaper. Pity the two other latecomers because nobody will remember them.
- December 6th is the last day of voting for the TIME magazine Person of the Year. So there is no point in fasting anymore, right?
- His mother wrote that poignant letter in Apple Daily for nothing.
- Come to think of it, how much are people willing to put in for Occupy Central? Most of them show up occasionally. They don't mind giving up other people's interests, but they think very hard before giving up any of their own interests.
- Chin Wan's Facebook:

  - Chin Wan: I support the indefinite hunger strike by Joshua Wong to his death. I hope that he keeps his word and Hong Kong will be free of his evilness. Until all the "lefttards" are dead, Hong Kong will continue to suffer through calamities.
  - The Federation of Students/Scholarism called for warriors to charge at Government Headquarters against the brutal police. Afterwards, these moral leaders said that the warriors behaved rashly. Well, you don't even have the right to be shit-eating dogs! You must not be allowed to speak on the dais. We cannot allow these morally corrupt people to represent us in our fight. We don't even have a trace of hope left for them. Whether Joshua Wong goes on a hunger strike or commits suicide will not matter to us. We will continue our resistance on our own. Our Hong Kong will come from our own fists.
  - What fucking hunger strike, you bastard! So many of us fucking suffered because of you. Go back to school! If you starve to death, many people will set off firecrackers in celebration! It is fucking use to corral sympathy!
  - I don't think they will last more than 36 hours. How can a group of people who don't dare to charge at police lines fast to their deaths?
  - If fasting works, it would have been successful 25 years ago against the same regime.

Here is YouTube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TS_97n4g3k  taken by a bicyclist going down a street. You can fast forward to 1:50 or so. The bicyclist comes up to a green light and hits an old woman. The old woman is at fault for ignoring the traffic lights (a red light for pedestrians and a green light for vehicular traffic). The bicyclist does not stop at all, showing no interest in the condition of the old woman.

The bicyclist Stanley Lam went home and posted the video on his Facebook. He wrote: "You damned old woman. You fucking broke the rules to cross the road. You wanna fucking get me into big trouble?" To which a commentator named Pierre replied: "You damned bastard, be careful that one of these days your bicycle will be fucking slammed into the air by a car."

Stanley Lam replied to Pierre: "Your mother, what the fuck is this to you? I fuck you mother. Did I fucking ram some family member of yours to death? May your family be fucking shot to death by someone. Fucking dickhead!"

What has this incident got to do with Occupy Central? Nothing, really. Except for some photos posted by Stanley Lam, and an assortment of subsequent Internet comments, such as:
- May the bastard hit a truck next time!
- His cycling skills are terrible. There is only one person on the road and he failed to avoid hitting him. The person was walking from left to right, so all the bicyclist had to do was veer slightly to the left.
- What was the brake on the bicycle for?
- Failing to stop after an accident and failing to report an accident are both serious traffic violations. And he has the nerve to post the video onto the Internet as if there is a lack of evidence!
- Even if you get a green light, you should not charge over when there is a pedestrian. And then you curse the person out afterwards on Facebook. What kind of person is this?
- Let us make more forwards and comments until this item reaches the mainstream newspapers.
- Oh yes, Oriental Daily has it!
- He works for the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department of the Hong Kong Government. Let us file a complaint at his workplace.
- It is typical of Yellow Ribbon zombies to always think that they are right in whatever they do and be completely oblivious to the feelings and sufferings of others.

(New York Times) What Next for Hong Kong? Benny Tai on Why Occupy Central Should End. By Benny Tai Yiu-ting, December 4, 2014.

The peaceful protesters occupying the streets of Hong Kong for more than two months have been surprisingly persistent in their pursuit of genuine universal suffrage. It is welcome news that some student leaders are considering bringing the occupation to an end. They are exhausted and have been unwilling to go home without substantial concessions from the Hong Kong and Beijing governments.

Many protesters still think too little has been achieved. They see the lack of concessions from the Hong Kong government as a reason to continue pressing on. I disagree. The Umbrella Movement has awakened the democratic aspirations of a whole generation of Hong Kong people. In this sense, we have achieved much more than what we could have hoped for.

There are clear signs that the occupation is losing public support. In the latest poll conducted by the University of Hong Kong, close to 80 percent of the respondents did not support the continuation of the occupation. That does not mean that support for genuine universal suffrage is in decline but that more supporters are questioning the effectiveness of prolonging the occupation.

Its also clear that elements of the protest movement are starting to deviate from the original intention of nonviolent civil disobedience. The safety of protesters is now a concern.

The police have clamped down hard on protesters recently, and increasingly police officers on the front lines are out of control, letting their emotions take over. Police violence may provoke violence from protesters. For the sake of the occupiers safety, it is time for the protesters to leave their tent city. Occupation is now a high-risk, low-return business.

The Umbrella Generation must regroup and devise a new strategy for winning the support from those Hong Kongers who are still undecided about our democratic future. The occupation has won over as many Hong Kongers as it ever will, and we should consider new ways to convince the public that fighting for full democracy is in their interest. Only when the majority of Hong Kongers are on the side of the democracy movement will the people in power be willing to change the system to make it more just.

Blocking government may be even more powerful than blocking roads. Refusal to pay taxes, delaying rent payments by tenants in public housing estates and filibustering in the Legislative Council, along with other such acts of noncooperation, could make governing more inconvenient. No government can govern effectively if the majority of its people are unwilling to cooperate.

Democratic virtues need to be cultivated throughout the city. More forums on democracy should be organized on the neighborhood level. Through home visits, younger Hong Kongers can meet face-to-face with elderly people living in public housing estates and explain to them the significance of genuine universal suffrage.

Its also important for practitioners of civil disobedience to bear the legal consequences of breaking the law. This shows that they respect the system of law as a whole but want to expose the injustice of some of the laws.

Many young people have already been arrested for protesting. As the police have not taken any action to arrest the older leaders of Occupy Central with Love and Peace, which I co-founded, we turned ourselves in to the authorities earlier this week. We were not arrested, though the officials stated clearly that my case will be dealt with in strict accordance with the law.

Prosecution in open court would be another opportunity for us to explain to all Hong Kong people the goals and underlying reasons for the acts of civil disobedience we have committed.

But the most powerful weapon in winning democracy for Hong Kong is the people of the Umbrella Generation. Compared with the previous generations of Hong Kong democrats, the young people of today are more aggressive, flexible, creative and much tougher.

These young people grew up in a vastly different Hong Kong from that of their elders, who were raised with much less prosperity and security. For many older people, survival was a daily challenge. Having had that past, older generations prioritize economic security and social order, even though many have transcended the tougher times of their youth.

The younger generations, meanwhile, came of age when economic and physical security were no longer major concerns. Their values reflect this: They focus much more on self-expression, sustainability, fairness and justice.

The end of the occupation will not signal capitulation, especially not for young Hong Kongers, who have had a political awakening over the last several months. An undemocratic system and a lack of effective civic engagement by the government will not satisfy the demands of the Umbrella Generation. A more serious crisis will break out in the future if the source of the problem is not dealt with properly and adequately. And the next outbreak will be fiercer.

Even if the Hong Kong government can successfully force the end of the occupation, it will still have to face the demands of the Umbrella Generation in the years to come. Focusing only on how to clear the streets cannot resolve the deep-seated conflicts that led to the protests.

If we can make full use of the momentum gained in the Umbrella Movement to widen the support and deepen the commitment for true democracy, Hong Kongers will see genuine universal suffrage in a not too distant future.

Benny Tai Yiu-ting, an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, is the co-founder of the Occupy Central with Love and Peace movement.

Here are some reactions aggregated from the Internet news discussion forums and blogs (see, for example, Bastille Post; Bastille Post).

First of all, when Professor Tai talks, you should be wary.

Previously, Professor Tai co-founded Occupy Central with Love and Peace. On January 16, 2013, Professor Tai published an article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal in which he proposed an act of non-violent civil disobedience carried out in Central, the business and financial centre of Hong Kong, to put pressure on the government. In his imagined scenario, ten thousand people will show up, lay down on the streets and passively wait for the police to cart them away one by one. With sufficient numbers, it will take the police days to complete the clearance and years for the courts to prosecute and try everyone. On 28 September 2014 at 1:40am, Professor Tai announced the official start of the "Occupy Central with Love and Peace" civil disobedience campaign with the occupation of Government Headquarters (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxjJuic3iyg).

Reality did not match Professor Tai's vision. He called for Occupy Central. The students went and occupied Admiralty instead. Then other persons occupied Causeway Bay, Mong Kok and Tsim Sha Tsui. The latter are not business and financial districts. Instead, they are mixed commercial and residential neighborhoods that are also traffic hubs. The resulting Occupation caused traffic jams everywhere and inconvenienced the majority of the population. The surrounding businesses (and their workers) suffered economic losses, and local residents were greatly vexed. If at first the population was sympathetic towards the students and their causes, public opinion turned after months of occupation. As Professor Tai pointed out, "In the latest poll conducted by the University of Hong Kong, close to 80 percent of the respondents did not support the continuation of the occupation."

Therefore, Professor Tai's Occupation Central with Love and Peace was a scholar's idealistic theory which went awry when reality stepped in.

On the issue of violence, Professor Tai wrote in the New York Times: "Its also clear that elements of the protest movement are starting to deviate from the original intention of nonviolent civil disobedience. The safety of protesters is now a concern. The police have clamped down hard on protesters recently, and increasingly police officers on the front lines are out of control, letting their emotions take over. Police violence may provoke violence from protesters. For the sake of the occupiers safety, it is time for the protesters to leave their tent city. Occupation is now a high-risk, low-return business." From day one, Professor Tai chose not to see the actual violence. On September 28, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfUTqQmF_vU. On December 1, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkArnelAKSU.

On the ending of Occupy Central with Love and Peace, Professor Tai predicted a new world record of 10,000 persons turning themselves in to the police simultaneously. On the designated day, 68 people did so.

The Umbrella Movement did not unfold according to Professor Tai's rosy script.

So when Professor Tai proposes more ideas, we should be wary. Will they hold up to the reality test? Let us look at some of his proposals in the New York Times.

  • Blocking the government by refusing to pay taxes. This seems to imply tax evasion. Actually, there is another proposal in which taxes are partially withheld. For example, Inland Revenue sends you a tax bill of $50,000 and you send in a check for $49,999. That will make Inland Revenue go through the paperwork to chase you for the shortfall of $1. Or you can pay your tax bill in increments of $68.9 per day until you reach the full amount. Professor Tai thinks that if enough people do this, the Inland Revenue will be overwhelmed by the increased workload. Besides, the interest penalty would be tiny (5% on $1 is just $0.05).

Of course, Professor Tai is assuming that the hundreds of thousands of non-payments will overwhelm Inland Revenue. But what if only several hundred people responded to this call? Inland Revenue will take all of them to court, possibly for the more serious crime of acting together to obstruct government functions. All of those involved may end up with criminal records.

In reality, some people will choose to believe that tax evasion is an act of civil disobedience and pay no taxes.

If you work for a company, you may suddenly find your monthly salary reduced. You check with the company payroll manager and you are told that the government is directly deducting your back taxes plus penalties from your paycheck. You switch jobs but the same thing happens there too.

One day, maybe five or ten years from now, you are going through immigration control and the red light comes on. You are invited into the backroom and you are informed that there is an arrest warrant for back taxes plus penalty to the amount of $310,743.23 (or something). You should not expect Professor Tai to defend you because civil disobedience does not constitute a defense for tax evasion.

In another scenario, you apply for a mortgage and the bank loan officer tells you that the government has a lien against you for unpaid taxes. You explain all that about civil disobedience. Because you may have the ability to pay but not the willingness to pay, you are classified as a high-risk client. The bank may reject your loan application altogether or it may grant you a loan at a much higher interest rate. Or maybe you already own an apartment. You decide to sell it and immigrate to Canada. You find that you cannot sell the apartment because the government has a lien against your property for unpaid land taxes.

Professor Tai will say that your action has deviated from his original intentions, just like he only intended to have a one-day loving and peaceful sit-in in Central and not a two-month-plus violence-ridden takeover of Mong Kok.

Worse yet, you even go down to Inland Revenue to demonstrate, clash with the security guards and get arrested. In that case, Professor Tai will deny that you are a member of his non-violent civil movement and his volunteer lawyers can choose not to offer you legal aid.

  • Blocking the government rent payments by tenants in public housing estates. This seems to imply rent evasion altogether. Actually, there is another proposal in which rent payment is partially withheld. For example, you withhold $1 from your monthly rent payment of $1,200. This will make the Housing Authority go through the paperwork to chase you for the short fall of $1. In reality, some people will choose to believe that rent evasion is an act of civil disobedience and pay nothing. Then one day, maybe several years from now, you will get an eviction notice. You go to court and explain about civil disobedience. The magistrate will have no sympathy. After all, he has no way to distinguish between genuine civil right activists and scofflaws who use that excuse. Your rental agreement clearly states the consequences of not making rent payments. Professor Tai will say that he told you to carefully consider the consequences before you take action, and "its also important for practitioners of civil disobedience to bear the legal consequences of breaking the law. This shows that they respect the system of law as a whole but want to expose the injustice of some of the laws."
     

  • Blocking the government by filibustering in the Legislative Council. There are a number of techniques. One way is for pan-democrat Legislative Councilors to attach thousands of amendments to proposed legislation and require all of them to be read and voted upon. This will tag many more days onto the schedule. Another way is to constantly motion for roll calls. When quorum is not made, the session is adjourned. Then there is outright vetoing of proposed legislation, such as the political reform package based upon the August 31 decision of the National People's Congress. Filibustering is a double-edged sword. When the Legislative Council becomes paralyzed, nothing gets done and cost overruns accumulate from the delays, who will the voters blame in the 2015 District Council elections and the 2016 Legislative Council elections? Is it the government? Or the filibustering pan-democrats? This is by no means certain. There is a proposal for some (or all) pan-democrat legislators to resign and trigger a by-election that will be considered a de facto referendum. The pan-democrat legislators are reluctant. What if they lose and give the pro-government side a super-majority to ram through all sorts of legislation (including the political reform of the Chief Executive election and the much dreaded Article 23 on national security)?
     

  • Professor Tai wrote: "Democratic virtues need to be cultivated  throughout the city. More forums on democracy should be organized on the neighborhood level." Here is what happened to previous attempts:
    - Scholarism Reaches Out To Local Communities (2014/11/16) On November 17, Scholarism set up stations at five locations across the city to share their views on universal suffrage.
    - Reaching Out To The Local Communities - Part 3 On November 24, Occupy volunteers, students and pan-democrat lawmakers will be stationed at 21 locations across the city to share their views on universal suffrage.
    - Reaching Out To The Local Communities - Part 1 A collection of YouTube videos. In each case, a small number of Occupy Movement activists try to set up a beach head in a densely populated residential district. Immediately and spontaneously, they are surrounded by a large crowd. The situation gets heated and the activists have to summon the police to help them leave in a hurry.
     
    If Professor Tai hands out leaflets outside an MTR station, he will have to call the police to help him leave safely. If he holds an open town hall meeting, it will be a wild egg-tossing, shoe-throwing affair. If he holds a forum with pre-screened supporters, it will be pointless. That applies to him as well as anyone else associated with the Occupy Movement/Umbrella Movement.
     

  • Professor Tai wrote, "Through home visits, younger Hong Kongers can meet face-to-face with elderly people living in public housing estates and explain to them the significance of genuine universal suffrage." The reason why Professor Tai emphasized "elderly" is that the University of Hong Kong showed that while about 80% of the population wants the Occupy Movement/Umbrella Movement to cease, that percentage is near 100% among the elderly. Scholarism convener Joshua Wong does not help by essentially saying that the future belongs to the young people of today who will be in charge in 30 years' time while the elderly people today will be dead by then.
    Here is what happened on some previous attempts:
    - Knocking On Doors (2014/11/24)
    - Reaching Out To Local Communities - Part 2 (2014/11/14)

If Professor Tai wants to visit some elderly persons in public housing estates, he is going to find himself talking at cross purposes with them. He says that he wants to talk to them about "the significance of genuine universal suffrage." They want to complain to him about the bus route cancellation which forces them to walk a long way to make that hospital appointment.

What is one to do with a legal scholar who keeps teaching people to do illegal things that he hasn't carefully thought through?

Addendum: (SCMP) December 14, 2014.

Students and civil groups are launching a non-cooperation movement urging people to delay paying their rent and to pay their tax bills in trickles as an offshoot of the Occupy pro-democracy protests.

Alex Chow Yong-kang, secretary general of the Federation of Students, said in a press conference this morning that the actions were entirely legal and hoped to draw the participation of busy workers who were unable to join the months-long protests.

Under the non-cooperation plan, Hongkongers are urged to express their displeasure at the government and the current political system by splitting their tax payments into small sums and for tenants to delay paying their rent till the last possible moment.

Franklen Choi Kin-shing, a community college lecturer in social science, suggests people split their payments into cheques worth HK$689 or HK$6.89 a mocking reference to the number of people in an election committee that elected the current chief executive, Leung Chun-ying. The unrepresentative government has no right to collect taxes from the people, Choi said, but people should pay using tricks rather than default on the bill altogether. This would bring pressure on civil servants, but all sorts of non-cooperation movements inevitably do that, he said, adding the idea had been circulated among Occupy protesters in the past month.

Speaking about the new action following the protests close, Choi said protesting through the tax bill has been historically employed in the United States and Britain to protest war or fight for womens right to vote. There are 1.74 million tax-paying individuals and 2.3 million residents of public housing in Hong Kong. High housing costs and the inability of the younger generation to get on the property ladder has been widely said to be one of the issues that drove people to the streets during the Occupy protests.

An alliance of public housing tenants said some residents had in the past deferred their payments to protest the governments refusal to cut the rent in an economic downturn. It said it would promote the idea among residents in as many as possible of the 180 housing estates, hoping that the first attempt would start on December.

This is most bizarre. There are many different strands of anarchism (see Wikipedia).
"Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful." "Anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organization in the conduct of human relations, including, but not limited to, the state system." So how can these purported anarchists profess the desire to support the fight for a genuine universal suffrage to elect a Chief Executive and a Legislative Council?

The interesting thing is that the demonstrators found a pile of bricks. That would be hard to move one by one. Then they found a handcart on wheels that contained a number of bricks. Should they move this cache to the front line to throw at the police? Previously, the standard stance of demonstrators is to raise their hands to show non-aggressiveness. On this night, someone threw plastic water bottles and soda cans, which may cause some bruises and cuts. However, throwing those bricks may be lethal. And some of the hundreds of press reporters will see or record the action. This may provide an excuse for the police to escalate their use of force. So this video is about a discussion between the moderate and radical wings of the Umbrella Movement.

At 0:20, the young bespectacled man in a black t-shirt is recognized as Eason Chung, a leader of the Federation of Students. Chung was one of the three students who attempted to travel to Beijing to meet with senior government officials.

0:45 Chung: It is very dangerous. Actually, if you have this cart, it should be enough.
0:49 Masked man: I want to know if you have been beaten up?
0:53 Chung: This is dangerous.
0:54 Masked man: I ask you, Have you beaten up before?
0:57 Chung: I know. If you move this out, it won't do much good for defense. But if you move this out, it will be very simple ... the police are going to charge in and beat people up.
1:03 Masked man: You think so? It makes no difference.
1:11 Masked man: Are you concerned that the police will clear the site even quicker if these things show up.
1:13 Masked man: It makes no difference.
1:18 (The masked men tried to push the cart forward, but Chung blocked their way) (cross talk simultaneously)
1:38 Masked man: Then we might as well as do nothing.
1:42 Chung: We can use other things.
1:48 Masked man: Can we use smaller bricks?
1:49 Masked man: They are all large bricks.
1:50 Masked man: You say that it is dangerous to throw large bricks.
2:05 Masked man: If we wanted to throw bricks, we would have already thrown them when the police bashed us earlier.
...
3:27 Masked man: Tell me who the two of you are, first.
3:28 Chung: We are from the Federation of Students.
3:29 Masked man: The Federation of Students. You are the ones who told us to escalate. 3:35 Chung: We want to surround, not assault.
3:36 Masked man: So we are surrounding. Fuck you!
3:39 Chung: There is no need to use such ...
3:45 Masked man: How are we supposed to surround ...?
3:46 Student: We have already occupied. We are trying to defend it. Do you know? Do you know? We are at Tim Wa Road. Do you know? Answer me.
4:00 Chung: I ask one question. I ask one question. How can we defend with these things up at the frontline? This is going to be used as an excuse by the police.
4:11 Masked man: Anything can be used as an excuse.
4:14 Chung: The problem is that nothing else is going to be like this.
4:17 Masked man: You are fucking getting in our way.
4:21 Masked man: This is an assault weapon.
4:25 Masked man: Everybody is angry. Do not make it as if the whole world is your enemy.
(cross talk)
4:46 Masked man: Let's talk about democracy. Will all those in favor of moving this out raise your hand!
4:47 Masked man: Raising hands is not necessarily democracy. Democracy is everybody joining in discussion.
4:55 Masked man: You must respect everybody's opinion and that is democracy.
4:58 Masked man: You must not say that a vote makes it democracy.
5:00 Masked man: Who says that this isn't democracy?
5:01 Masked man: It does not have to be be. Everybody should discuss. We have to listen to the dissident views.
5:06 Masked man: And then what?
5:07 Masked man: If everybody ... if ten persons vote on whether to rape someone and nine of them say yes, then should the tenth be raped? There has to be discussion within democracy.
5:22 We are going to move ...
5:23 Masked man: Let us go and move metal barricades.
5:24 Masked man: You find me some metal barricades. You go and move some metal barricades here. Go and move them!
5:25 Masked man: Let's go. Let's go.
5:30 Masked man: Fuck you, you said to move metal barricades. I'll help you move them.
(the demonstrators move the cart back)
5:55 Masked man: Again and again. Fucking beaten by them.
6:04 Chung: There is no need to quarrel over a little materiel. We are all striving for the same goal. Alright? Let us not quarrel. Alright?
6:12 Masked man: It is very hard to defend against the police.
6:12 Chung: We are going to surround them until ...
6:18 Masked man: You raise your hands up in the arm and then you kick them beneath.
6:30 Masked man: If you throw a brick, it is the problem of the motion. Not any problem with the danger. There are a lot of bricks out there. You go and seal those bricks again.
6:38 Chung: There are bricks up front?
6:39 Masked man: There are a lot of bricks ahead. I am telling the truth. I am not lying to you. I am not lying to you. I can prove it to you.
6:42 Chung: So let us leave these here. We don't have to move them. Let us go and look for metal barricades. If there aren't any, we will take them then. Alright?
6:53 Masked man: It is no help for us to keep quarreling.
6:55 Chung: Let us go and find metal barricades. If there aren't any, then we come back. Alright?
6:58 Masked man: The Federation of Students has an aura.
7:04 Chung: Let us move on. Do not quarrel about this anymore. Alright?

The two highlights are (1) the discussion of democracy by these pro-democracy activists beginning around 4:46; (2) the demonstration of the proper unarmed technique to attack the police at around 6:18.

We ask that the United Nations Human Rights Council launch a formal and unbiased enquiry on the Hong Kong SAR Police Force and Hong Kong SAR Government over the abovementioned actions that have violated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as to investigate the Peoples Republic of China for the violation of Hongkongers right to take part in their government by denying their right to democratic elections for Hong Kongs legislature and government. We also ask that the United Nations to ban the use of chemical weapons, including teargas, which are banned in war, against civilians and protesters.

At the Internet discussion forums, some commentators noted the irony behind the whole campaign. Indeed, it would be very amusing if the United Nations Human Rights Council investigated and found against the Hong Kong government. First of all, the so-called "genuine universal suffrage" of "civil nomination of Chief Executive candidates" does not exist in four of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (United States of America, United Kingdom, France and China). Only Russia has it. To say that it was wrong for Hong Kong not to have it meant that it was wrong for the USA, UK, France and China not to have it. Secondly, the Hong Kong police handled the clashes in much more gentler fashion than elsewhere
(see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7joK9QumOU for a comparison, American action up to 0:45, Hong Kong action after 0:45;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6VmmKrFkaY Occupy DC clearance in 2012;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTLRL4vSHa4 Occupy Riverside clearance in 2011;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QngE6kKk8Lg Occupy Oakland clearance in 2011;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpO-lJr2BQY Occupy Oakland clearance in 2011).
Do you want the Hong Kong police to adhere to "international standards"?

Q1. What is likelihood of having universal suffrage in the Chief Executive election in 2017?
29.2%: Very pessimistic
32.8%: Somewhat pessimistic
25.6%: Half-half
9.2%: Somewhat optimistic
2.1%: Very optimistic
1.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. Do you agree with the statement "The Central Government takes Hong Kong seriously"?
42.6%: Tend to disagree
25.6%: Half-half
31.8%: Tend to agree

Q3. Do you think it is effective to use the economic development of Hong Kong as the chips to bargain with the Central Government to open up the democratic system?
45.1%: Tend to be ineffective
22.6%: Half-half
28.7%: Tend to be effective
1.5%: Hard to say/don't know
2.1%: Refused to answer

Q4. If the Federation of Students/Scholarism are forced to leave the Occupy Admiralty area, would you also leave?
10.8%: Yes
75.9%: No
11.8%: Don't know/hard to say
1.5%: Refused to answer

Q5. If the Federation of Students/Scholarism leave the Occupy Admiralty area on their own after due consideration and encourage other citizens to do likewise, would you also leave?
33.3%: Yes
35.4%: No
29.7%: Don't know/hard to say
1.5%: Refused to answer

Q6. If the Occupy movement were to end without achieving "genuine universal suffrage", what would you recommend to do in order to gain democracy?
57.3%: Reach out to the communities and persuade the masses
28.6%: Carry out even larger-scale and more extreme activities
4.0%: Give up the fight
8.5%: Don't know/hard to say
1.5%: Refused to answer

Q12. In the next Legislative Council elections, what would you do for your preferred candidate?
49.2%: I will vote and I will lobby my friends
42.6%: I will vote but I won't lobby my friends
2.1%: I won't vote but I will lobby my friends
3.6%: I will neither vote nor lobby my friends
0.5%: Don't know/hard to say
2.1%: Refused to answer

Q13. If the 2017 Chief Executive election is held under the August 31 framework set by the National People's Congress, would you vote?
53.3%: Yes
28.2%: No
16.9%: Don't know/hard to say
1.5%: Refused to answer

(Apple Daily video report) "Levi's worker suspected of using violence: Do you have the film?" November 29, 2014.

0:07 Reporter: We received several complaints. Did you assault someone yesterday?
0:09 Man: Huh?
0:10 Reporter: Yes.
0:10 Man: Do you have a film? Show me a film.
0:11 Reporter: We have photos etc. You lowered the gate. Therefore I want to ask if such an incident took place.
0:15 Man: Alright, show me a photo first.
0:17 Reporter: Was there such an incident, first?
0:17 Man: No.
0:19 Reporter: You didn't assault anyone?
0:20 Man: Yes.
0:21 Reporter: Did you lower the gates yesterday? That is, did some citizens quarrel with you?
0:27 Reporter: That is ...
0:29 Man waving to the police: Nobody. Sir, someone is interfering with us conducting our business.
0:32 Reporter: Did you assault anyone?
0:37 Man: I am ignoring you. Please do not interfere with us conducting our business.
0:39 Reporter: Actually, did you assault anyone yesterday? There is a complainant who complained that you assaulted someone and the person wanted to file a police report.
0:45 Man: Please do not interfere with us conducting our business, okay?
0:47 Reporter: Did you assault anyone, mister? Or maybe is there a company telephone number that I can call and ask?
0:53 Man: Hmmm?
0:53 Reporter: Is there a company telephone number that I can call and ask your company?
0:56 Man: Call 999 (=police).
0:58 Reporter: Oh. Thanks a lot.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1029942010366063&set=vb.160696287290644&type=2&theater; On December 2, a group of "shoppers" showed up outside the Levi's store and caused the staff to lower the gate again. Some comments by Internet users:
- This is so fucking funny!
- Bad people deserve bad outcomes. The guy had it coming.
- We are just supporting CY Leung's call to shop, thus helping the local economy. I don't understand why the store wouldn't let us in.
- I will visit the store every day, to provide the sales people with a chance to assault me.
- I will visit the store every day. I will unfold any folded jeans and then put them back in a heap on the display table.
- I will visit the store every day. Levi's has so many different styles. It will take a long while before I can try all of them on.
- Because the action of this one salesman affected business, the company should fire him immediately. Then the problem will be solved!
- Some people object to messing up people's livelihood. But the whole point of Occupy Central is to mess up the economy and transportation.
- I think I am pro-Occupy Central, but this is really fucked up! Stop messing around with people! It will make people hate us even more.

TVB video: http://news.tvb.com/local/547e99036db28c8021000001/ (00:00 to 01:20) "Shoppers" won't let Levi's lower the gate. In the second half of the video, the "shoppers" moved down to the minibus stop belonging to the company that obtained the court injunction to clear the Occupy Mong Kok area. The police formed a line to keep people on the sidewalk. At 1:57, a woman said: "I only want to go home. I am standing here crying for help. Does this group people care about how I feel? I am eight months pregnant. What kind of attitude is this of yours?" The policeman said: "Miss, we are trying to protect you." This leads Internet users to question why an eight-month-pregnant would still want to go out and demonstrate.

Apple Daily video: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20141204/18957282 For another night, the Shopping Revolution came to visit the Levi's store in Mong Kok. The manager tried to lower the gate, but more and more people entered. The gate was lowered halfway and the manager hid in the changing room. Some shoppers asked to try on jean, others fumbled through the clothes. One shopper took out a thick wad of money and asked why the salespeople don't like local consumers. Another shopper spent more than HKD 300 to buy a shirt and came out to display his trophy, saying that he was genuinely trying to stimulate the local economy. The police came and asked the customers leave. On this night, Levi's closed early at 9pm.
Internet comments:
- Two hundred shoppers and all they did was buy one HKD 300 shirt? The economy would be dead if it has to depend on these so-called "shoppers".
- I don't see any connection with universal suffrage. This is just a bunch of muddled thugs disrupting the rule-of-law and people's livelihood.
- What Occupy Central has done is to create a class of bullying thugs who can do anything to anyone anywhere in the name of Democracy.
- I see that Civic Party legislator/senior barrister Alan Leong said that these activities may not be illegal. But the real question is, Does he think it is right? And what would he do if people like that show up at his office and pretend to shop for legal advice? I think he would call the police.
- Yellow Ribbon democracy means that anyone with different views will have neither democracy nor freedom.
- If the whole point of democracy is to create a system to put people like these in charge of governance, then we are all screwed! I don't want this kind of democracy. I will do anything to stop them.
- Such are the high-quality, highly educated Umbrella Revolutionaries.
- This reminds me of the protection racket that "Teddy Boys" movie in which a group of triad gang members walked into a dim sum restaurant, sat separately at different tables, ordered only a roast pork bun each and sat for many hours.

There is a prequel here at https://www.youtube.com/embed/M-bDGDXgiWE?html5=1 (0:06 to 0:55) in which the man who got hit was arguing with another man who accused the first man of raising the middle finger at the crowd.

(RTHK via The Standard) The Secretary-General of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Alex Chow Yong-kang, admitted that the plans to escalate the civil disobedience campaign were ultimately unsuccessful -- even if protestors disrupted government operations for a short time. "The aim was to disrupt the government. We can say we were successful for a short time. But it ultimately failed and there is room for improvement," Chow said.

(Ming Pao) Scholarism convener Joshua Wong has announced that he is going on hunger strike. Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow admitted that he was surprised when Scholarism announced that decision. Previously, the organizations had agreed upon accepting responsibility for the failed escalation, but postponed discussion of future plans. But Chow said a hunger strike is "one method." He emphasized that the two organizations are merely dividing labor and not going their separate ways.

(Bastille Post) Last evening, a large group of volunteers stood on the Admiralty stage and demanded the student leaders explain the causes for failure. Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow blamed poor coordination, but the frontline volunteers disagreed. They called Chow's explanation "utter lies." Prior to the escalation, the Federation of Students met thrice with the volunteers to explain the arrangements and tactics. They rejected all the suggestions from the volunteers. The volunteers said that right before the demonstrators retook Lung Wo Road, police presence was sharply reduced whereas their numbers increased largely on the east side of the Central Government Office. The volunteers asked Chow to call from the grand stage for the demonstrators to withdraw. But Chow said "Let's give them more time". The result was that the police surged in and cleared the field, causing many demonstrators to be injured. The volunteers said that the Federation called for an escalation with insufficient numbers, leaving them "arrested and injured." They demanded an explanation. On that evening, there were around 4,000 demonstrators at the peak, but they were facing more than 3,000 police officers. When the demonstrators became fewer near daybreak, they could not defend against the clearance which everybody knew had to come before the workday starts. But the Federation refused to withdraw, and many demonstrators were injured as a result.

(Oriental Daily, with 6 photos and 1 video) At around 9pm last night, more than a dozen masked men suddenly rushed up to dismantle the speaker's dais in the Occupy Admiralty area. They cut off the plastic strips and removed the metal barriers. They complained about the failure to call for another escalation. This aroused the anger of other attendees who yelled at these masked men. There was some physical contact, but no fight.

(http://youtu.be/YJSsi1gHWqM) A bespectacled man wanted the Federation of Students/Scholarism to get on stage and debate. But the student leaders failed to appear. So how did it all end? Someone fainted and drew attention away.

(Oriental Daily) A number of Occupy Mong Kok veterans have moved into the Occupy Admiralty area. They complained about the Admiralty leadership. During the siege of the Central Government Office, the Mong Kok veterans led the frontline charge while the Admiralty people were too scared to charge. After the Mong Kok veterans seized territory, the Admiralty people did not know how to defend the gains. As a result, the campaign failed. They also criticized Joshua Wong's hunger strike as being useless. They are now mobilizing more than a hundred people to "take action," which does not exclude extreme actions.

(The Sun) As the bloody battle of Lung Wo Road raged on, the Occupy Central trio of Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and Professors Benny Tai and Chan Kin-man were nowhere to be seen. Early morning, Benny Tai showed up as a keyboard warrior on social media to criticize the government and the police. "Even if they can successfully defend the Central Government Office, they cannot prevent the downfall of governance in Hong Kong." For his troubles, Tai was pilloried by Internet users for exploiting the situation to his personal advantage, once again.

(RTHK via The Standard) The chairwoman of the Democratic Party Emily Lau says if pro-democracy protesters resort to violence, they'll lose the support of people who originally backed the Occupy movement. Lau told RTHK this morning that the Occupy movement had to make sure its message got across, adding that most people in Hong Kong supported democracy but might not support the occupation strategy.

(Oriental Daily) Legislative Councilor Ronny Tong said that the pan-democrats explained the difficulties to the students beforehand, but the latter "refused to listen." Tong was pessimistic about whether the demonstrators will voluntarily withdraw. Tong said that he saw the demonstrators moved up in a phalanx with ample supplies of helmets, etc. They looked as organized as an army. Since it is illegal to form a militia, these demonstrators are clearly breaking the law although they may not know it. Tong said that an honorable retreat may help the political reform process a little bit. Otherwise all is lost. He was also concerned that if the pan-democrats lose popular support as a result of their support of Occupy Central, then they may lose veto power in the Legislative Council.

(Bastille Post) 23 pan-democrat Legislative Councilors made a joint statement last evening to urge the Federation of Students/Scholarism to quickly end the action to lay siege to the Central Government Office. There should not be any more calls to escalate to avoid more injuries. The movement should not incorporate violent elements because this will provide an excuse for police clearance.

(Bastille Post) City University's Dr. James Sung said that the government used delay tactics to cause the Occupy leaders to divide among themselves. The major clashes in the previous evening caused the Federation of Students/Scholarism to lose popular support. Subsequently, the government can use court injunctions to clear sites.


(Oriental Daily, with 12 photos) A summary of developments of the two police clearances
01:00 About 2,000 demonstrators were gathered at Lung Wo Road
01:30: About 100 Special Tactical Squad members used pepper spray, tear gas spray and batons to disperse the demonstrators and retake Lung Wo Road
01:45 The police pursue the demonstrators into Tamar Park and disperse them
03:10 The police re-open car traffic on Lung Wo Road
03:30 With reduced police presence, the Federation of Students call for demonstrators to re-take Lung Wo Road
06:35 About 1,500 demonstrators set up barricades at Lung Wo Road and make plans to paralyze the Central Government Office
07:00 The police cleared the field again. 200 Special Tactical Squad members dispersed the demonstrators, using tear gas spray and water hose. They pushed forward to Tamar Park, Admiralty Centre and Harcourt Road.
07:30 Lung Wo Road is re-opened for car traffic
07:40 Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow showed up and appealed for calm. The clashes stopped for now.
09:06 Three off-duty police officers and one on-duty police officer were assaulted by two middle-aged men when they went through the Admiralty Centre mall. A 30-year-old man was arrested.
09:16 The police set up a wall outside Admiralty Centre. The demonstrators charged at them. One person was arrested and two persons were hospitalized.

[Strategic analysis by an armchair television viewer:

It is very important to note that Lung Wo Road is a length of road without any natural barriers (such as hills or walls). Thus, it is hard to defend across the entire road. Any group can breach the defensive line by concentrating its forces at any one point. For this reason, the Occupy leadership had been against any takeover of Lung Wo Road because they couldn't defend it. However, Lung Wo Road appears to be an obsession with the more radical elements. In particular, any takeover of Lung Wo Road would mean the total paralysis of all east-west vehicular traffic in the harbor front. If all east-west traffic have to wind through the narrow Mid-Levels road, it would be living traffic hell. In addition, Lung Wo Road borders the Chief Executive's Office and the Central Government Office, both symbols of government power.

On this day, the police tried to hold the defensive line at the passageway leading from Tamar Park to Lung Wo Road. There were only about 100 police officers manning the defensive line. But because the passageway was narrow, they managed to hold their own with pepper spray and batons after repeated clashes. Meanwhile, another group of demonstrators breached Lung Wo Road further down and walked through the tunnel to come out next to the passageway. They were met by around 10 police officers who held the hundreds of demonstrators at bay. The deployment of the police was very odd. It was reported by the media that the police had almost 4,000 police officers deployed in Admiralty. But fewer than 200 can be seen at this hot spot of the evening. There were some seesawing skirmishes. The police on the road now numbered around 30. Periodically they surged forward, gained some ground and removed some barricades. But they declined to pursue the demonstrators. In fact, they actually took one step forward and two steps back so that the demonstrators were encroaching on them. Eventually, the demonstrators swarmed the entire roadway in front of the Chief Executive's Office.

At that point, the police line was backed up with the police cars right behind them. They had nowhere to retreat now. Or so it seemed.

It was at that moment (circa 1:30am) that a Blue Team (Special Tactical Squad STS) of about 100 police officers was unleashed in a flying wedge that drove through the demonstrators' front line and scattered them. From then on, it was just a chaotic retreat. The police did not make many arrests. They were more focused on making the demonstrators leave. The police did not venture far into Tamar Park in hot pursuit, because the park was dark. At this point, Lung Wo Road was cleared. The Blue Team took less than 20 minutes to do their job. The uniformed police came forth, cleaned the debris off the road and re-opened it for traffic. After that, the police withdrew most of their people (including the Blue Team) from Lung Wo Road.

After a while, the demonstrators noticed the reduction of police presence. They reappeared in numbers (circa 3:30am) and established barricades to block car traffic again. The police did not return immediately in numbers. There was a long standoff as both sides did nothing.

At 7am, about 100 or so Blue Team members suddenly hurdled the metal barricades and advanced towards the protestors who slowly retreated. Meanwhile, it could be seen from the corner of the eye that another 100 or so Blue Team members sprinted down the left side into Tamar Park and then swung right to come out on the right side of the demonstrators. This caused the demonstrators to retreat quickly in disarray. The police did not make many arrests which they could have. They wanted the demonstrators to move on. Since there was daylight by now, the police could see where the demonstrators were. The police herded the demonstrators down to the main Admiralty camp.

On the strength of the rout, the police could have cleared the Admiralty camp that morning as well. But they stopped short, leaving the job for another day when they will help the bailiffs enforce court injunctions.

The spirit of the demonstrators was broken after two defeats in one night. They did not return, and they probably never will again. It should be clear that the Blue Team can clear any site anytime. But they were previously held back for political reasons as the government waited for public opinion to swing in their favor.]

Here are the details:

9:00pm (The Standard) Hong Kong Federation of students committee member Nathan Law Kwun-chung issued the rallying call to rapturous cheers from the crowd. "Surround the Central Government Offices, target the regime," he told the crowd. "We want to paralyze, completely paralyze the government's operations," the crowd chanted. More than 10 members of Scholarism, wearing full protective gear, were in the frontline, leading activists in confronting police at the Tamar Park entrance to Lung Wo Road. They screamed: "Open up the roads! We want genuine democracy!"
(SCMP)
Oscar Lai Man-Lok, spokesman for student group Scholarism, said the crowd was the biggest in at least two weeks. He told protesters to stick to their non-violent principles and not to provoke or charge at police.

9:35pm (The Standard) Violence quickly escalated at about 9.35pm as police used pepper spray on at least 15 protesters, shoved them backwards and tore up umbrellas as the two sides clashed near the Lung Wo tunnel. The offensive by activists was short-lived as riot police moved in to disperse the crowd. One activist who fell to the ground was surrounded by police and dragged through a sea of officers.
(RTHK) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDJ6GyL91p8 First confrontation at the top of the stairway leading from Tamar Park to Lung Wo Road, action beginning at 0:36.
(TVB iNews) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TxguAfsbxo Live action begins at 1:21 of this video, corresponding to 10:01pm.
(SpeakOut HK) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gisNixIsJZk Regimentized quality of the demonstrations. At the bottom of the stairwell from Tamar Park to Lung Wo Road, shields were passed from the back to the front.
1:26 Police: "There are many people in the rear. Do not push towards the front because it may affect the safety of everybody."
1:38 Demonstrator using megaphone: "If you continue to suppress our right to proceed to the front of the Chief Executive's Office to lay siege, we will use our own method to get out."
1:45 Demonstrator: "Will the police show some restraint and retreat!?"
1:55 Demonstrator using megaphone: "Friends up front! Friends up front! Our fellow warriors! Do we want to get out there!?"
1:58 Crowd: "We do!"
2:00 Demonstrator using megaphone: "Do you want to get out there!?"
2:01 Crowd: "YES!"
2:02 Demonstrator using megaphone: "Are you determined?"
2:02 Crowd: "YES!"
2:04 Demonstrator using megaphone: "One! Two! Three!" Crowd surges forward.
2:11 Crowd: "Open the road! ..."
[So much for the Federation of Students' plea "to stick to the non-violent principles and not to provoke or charge at the police."]

10:08pm (Oriental Daily, with four photos and a video) Hundreds of demonstrators have just broken out of Tamar Park onto Lung Wo Road towards the Chief Executive's Office/Central Government Office. They have blocked the eastbound and westbound car lanes.

10:23pm (Oriental Daily, with eight photos and a video) The demonstrators who had been facing off the police suddenly decided to make a countdown and charge at the police. The police responded and detained a number of demonstrators. Several demonstrators were wounded.

10:30pm (TVB iNews) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE0W_nwXJYM Lung Wo Road confrontation, with a masked bystander getting very excited and threatening to jump off the wall if the police doesn't stop. The demonstrators set up metal barricades.

10:56 pm (Oriental Daily, with six photos and a video) Almost 200 demonstrators faced off against 20 police officers in the lane next to the Tamar Park public restroom. At 10:55pm, the police raised the red banner to warn the demonstrators not to charge. The demonstrators ignored the warning and pressed forward. The police used pepper spray.

11:35pm (Oriental Daily, with three photos) At around 1130pm,a large number of demonstrators went out on Lung Wo Road again and clashed with the police near CITIC Tower. Some demonstrators were arrested, and some were injured.
(Apple Daily; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r6ZbBehLps ) An aerial video showing how demonstrators poured onto Lung Wo Road.

00:04 am (Oriental Daily, with four photos and 1 video) At around midnight, some demonstrators laid down wet rock pieces on Lung Wo Road in the Wanchai direction. They said that they wanted to "make it hard for the police to come in" and they themselves have no intention of leaving the Occupied area. Another demonstrator converted a police traffic cone into a funnel to pour water into the water barriers.

00:26 am (Oriental Daily, with five photos) The Federation of Students called for citizens to occupy five key locations to prevent government workers from going to work the next day.

01:23am (Oriental Daily, with 10 photos and 1 video) At around 130am, a group at Lung Wo Road asked Legislative Councilor Lee Cheuk-yan to lead the way and charge the police. Lee refused, because he wanted "peace and non-violence." The demonstrators decided to charge without him. The police counter-attacked and used baton, tear gas spray and pepper spray. In addition to the uniformed police, the Blue Team (formed from the Anti-Terrorism Squad and the Airport Security Unit) also took part in clearing Lung Wo Road quickly. The whole action took less than 20 minutes.

01:26am (Cable TV news, http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/news_video/index.php?news_id=446950 ) Live coverage of the clearance, just before the Blue Team surged.

01:30am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOrzJ-ABhmA&list=UUMRE8g4fldjxnAQwVARUH6A This starts with a fast-motion video of the first clearance of Lung Wo Road.

0:122am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG4tCs7Lgks This video covers the clearance from a lower altitude. Basically, people at ground level cannot see what is happening in the frontline. Real action starts at around 8:00.

1:30am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GpvPY_tvoM This video covers the clearance from behind the police line. After the action moved on, there is a detailed look at the debris left on the ground.

01:30am (TVB iNews, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7j9hoiPPKA ) Live coverage of the clearance, just after the Blue Team surged.

1:30am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOOZ2SKUjwY A demonstrator used a fire extinguisher against the police. [This would be described by Reuters as "a cloud of tear gas".] You would think that the police would go crazy and go on a hitting spree? But all the police did was to tell the demonstrators to move on. At 1:07, the policeman said: "Just go! We won't be crossing over."

01:43am (Oriental Daily, with 2 photos and 1 video) During the clearance, the demonstrators countered with a fire extinguisher. The police also found a cart loaded with bricks that may been intended . The police arrested a man who was found carrying two sticks on him.

01:45am (Oriental Daily, with 8 photos) Police cleared Lung Wo Road and pressed towards Tamar Park.

03:13am (Oriental Daily, with 1 photo and 1 video) Police announced that Lung Wo Road is opened for cars again.

03:24am (Oriental Daily, with 5 photos and 1 video) After the police cleared Lung Wo Road, they withdrew. Around 3:30am, the demonstrators returned and blocked Lung Wo Road again with water barriers, metal barriers, wooden pallets and other obstacles. The police returned but did not take immediate action. The two sides faced off each other.

07:00am (Oriental Daily, with 1 photo and 1 video) At around 7am, a group of police officers (including the Blue Team members) suddenly jumped over the metal barricades and charged at the Lung Wo Road demonstrators. The demonstrators dispersed, with some being arrested. During the clearance, the police sprayed water at demonstrators. (Some reports said that a water cannon was deployed, but that is inaccurate because the police merely used a fire hose connected to a fire hydrant. Observers describe the water sprout as "lame".) The whole action took just over 10 minutes.
07:00am (TVB iNews) Second clearance of Lung Wo Road.
07:00 am (INT News Channel) The Blue Team chases demonstrators into Tamar Park

07:13am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S704jYpF324 Fisheye camera lens view, taken from above the ground.

09:00am (TVB) After an argument over the placement of obstacles on Harcourt Road, demonstrators assaulted a plainclothes police officer outside the MTR exit in Admiralty Centre. A police officer was injured and taken to the hospital for treatment.
(Bastille Post, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLqm1yHe5bc ) Demonstrators dump garbage on the escalator to the pedestrian overpass from Admiralty Centre to the Central Government Office.

09:20am (Oriental Daily, with 5 photos and 1 video) An off-duty police officer passed through Admiralty Centre to go home. He was identified by demonstrators as a policeman. They shouted: "Don't let him get off work" and assaulted him. The police officer passed out and was taken to a hospital by ambulance. When other police officers arrived at the scene, the demonstrators chanted: "Evil police causing trouble!" They charged at the police officers, some of whom took out batons and peppery spray canisters. The police arrested one man. Another man was injured in the head and hospitalized.
(SCMP) http://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/1652942/occupy-protesters-fight-suspected-undercover-police-officers-one-knocked-out (Pay special attention to 1:30)
(Now TV) http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=119350 More in this video about what happened afterwards.
(Apple Daily) A man who said that he was a retired policeman named Chu called in to an Apple Daily radio show and claimed to be an eyewitness at the scene. He said that the three plainclothes policemen came into Admiralty Centre from the pedestrian overpass and used obscene language to curse at the demonstrators. The policemen did not identify themselves and were not carrying any police identification. When a female student demonstrator argued with them, one of them said: "If you make any more noise, we will arrest you, take you back to the police station and rape you." The crowd was in an uproar. At that point, the three identified themselves as police officers. The female student was angrier and continued to argue with them. The three police then grabbed the her, and she fell in fear down the stairs. At this point, other demonstrators surrounded the three policemen. One of them took out a flexible baton but he was subdued. Another policeman fell down and pretended to lose consciousness. The third policeman called for help. The eyewitness then said that two groups of policemen came, yelling: "You hit our colleagues!" Then chaos broke out in Admiralty Centre.

Other related matters:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkArnelAKSU (from Speak Out HK) Detailed depictions of demonstration tools.
0:33 Police warned that the wooden shields may be considered "assault weapons."
0:55 Police: "Put your wooden shields down immediately!"
1:00 Demonstrator: "This is merely cardboard."
1:07 Police: "You are holding wooden shields whose sharp corners may cause physical injuries to other persons. Put your shields down immediately!"
1:23 A shield with screws jutting out front is being passed from the back to the front line.
1:35 Water bottles being thrown from the rear
1:47 Laser beam being shined from the rear at the eyes of police officers
1:58 Bricks being carted. What for?
2:31 Metal chain
(Oriental Daily) Photo of shields with screws jutting out and photo of policeman's arm with punctured holes from such a shield.

(Ming Pao Editorial) A violent departure from the principle of peace   December 3, 2014.

IN AN ATTEMPT TO paralyse the government and put pressure on it, the Federation of Students and Scholarism in the Admiralty occupied area called on the demonstrators to surround and blockade the government headquarters. However, in the attempted blockade yesterday, they resorted to violence, and were met with strong police responses. As a result, many were wounded on both sides. If the students are to lead the democratic movement in this way, progress can hardly be expected. Indeed, the movement may suffer irreparably. This is something we should all be concerned about.

On the 18th of last month, a handful of radicals stormed the Legislative Council building late at night and broke a glass window. The violence was condemned by almost all sides, including the pan-democrats, who took care to keep themselves apart from radicalism. However, the Federation of Students and Scholarism did not join in the condemnation, drawing criticisms (even from some of the occupiers in Admiralty) that they connived at violence. Their attempt to blockade the government headquarters yesterday may well explain why they were reluctant to condemn the storming of the legislature - a reluctance which may go to show that they did not resort to violence on the spur of the moment.

The lengthy Occupy movement has now run out of steam and can hardly go on. The public, disillusioned and demoralised, is almost unanimously calling for the end of the movement. The Federation of Students and Scholarism, understandably disheartened by the lack of any positive response from the government since the Occupation movement started two months ago, are known to have discussed with their supporters and sympathisers how to escalate the movement. However, most of the pan-democratic parties did not agree with the plan to blockade the government headquarters, dismissing it as ineffective and risky. Instead, they suggested that the students should now try to bring the movement to a close honourably. Unhappily, the students turned a deaf ear to all such advice, and their wilfulness has tarnished the Occupy movement.

A statement made by the pan-democratic legislators about yesterday's attempted blockade criticises some police officers for using excessive and unnecessary force against the protesters, but makes no mention of the protesters' extremist behaviour. This is disappointing since it shows the legislators' lack of moral courage to tell what is right and wrong.

The Federation of Students and Scholarism, which have come to lead the Occupy movement, are not prepared to listen to others' opinions. Many of the students believe, erroneously, that the forerunners of the democratic movement have over the past thirty-odd years failed to achieve anything through purely peaceful means. However, their "no peace" strategy seems to lie only in the occupation of roads, which harms society as well as the interests of the majority of the people. After what has happened over the past two months or so, only the very naive or the very ignorant will believe that you can secure genuine universal suffrage by occupying roads.

Now that the Occupy movement is drawing to an end without achieving anything, the reckless and the desperate, unhappy with the result, may try to revitalise the movement by an escalation of violence. Given their present plight, the Federation of Students and Scholarism are not immune to this possibility. However, daring recklessness can lead to no positive results, but will only do further damage to the democratic cause.

The above compilation of mostly Chinese-language reports should be contrasted with the depiction by western media. We are talking about different spatio-temporal dimensions and realities.

(Reuters) Hong Kong protesters clash with police near heart of financial district. By Clare Baldwin and James Pomfret. November 30, 2014.

Hong Kong police baton-charged and pepper-sprayed thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators in the early hours of Monday who were trying to encircle government headquarters, defying orders to retreat after more than two months of protests. The skirmishes were perhaps the most violent in recent weeks, with the protesters answering a call by two student groups leading the campaign to escalate their actions, after two months of stalemate in their push for full democracy.

The crowds, chanting "Surround government headquarters!" and "Open the road!", had blocked a major road running in front of the offices of Hong Kong's leader in the Admiralty district, next to Hong Kong's central business district, late on Friday.

Hundreds of riot police scattered the crowds in chaotic scenes, forcing protesters back with pepper spray and batons, aimed at the backs and heads of those trying to scramble over walls to safety in a crush of bodies. A cloud of tear gas rose up in the middle of one particularly violent scuffle. Scores of volunteer medics attended to the injured, many with open head wounds. Police said at least 18 arrests were made.

Despite the relatively swift clearance of Lung Wo road outside government headquarters in the early hours of Monday, large crowds, many in protective goggles and makeshift body armor, refused to leave the area and continued to press against police lines, chanting "We want universal suffrage!". Others held up yellow umbrellas, a flimsy defense against police batons and pepper spray that have become a symbol of the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, which reverted from British to Chinese rule in 1997.

The protesters are demanding free elections for Hong Kong's next leader in 2017, not the vote between pre-screened candidates that China's Communist Party has said it will allow. The movement has threatened to become the biggest challenge to the party since its bloody 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy student protests in and around Tiananmen Square in Beijing, as a new generation demands greater political freedom.

The Hong Kong rallies drew more than 100,000 on to the streets at their peak, but numbers have since dwindled to a few hundred and public support has waned. The Admiralty flare-up came after four nights of clashes in the working-class district of Mong Kok, one of the city's largest and most volatile protest zones, which police had cleared of protesters on Wednesday.

(Additional reporting by Diana Chan and Kinling Lo, Editing by Anne Marie Roantree and Kevin Liffey)

Q1. The Hong Kong government is delaying the clearance of the Occupy areas, and the Occupiers are refusing to obey the court injunctions. What does this show?
41%: When the law is being broken, it encourages law-breaking
25%: Political bickering has destroyed the authority of justice
19%: The last defense of rule-of-law has been breached
9%: There isn't any problems here
6%: No opinion

Q2. The pan-democratic Legislative Councilors are starting a non-cooperation movement. What do you think?
43%: Livelihood policies will be blocked and citizens will suffer
23%: Legislation will be paralyzed and governance will be blocked
14%: New policies will be hard to introduce and old policies will be hard to implement
17%: There isn't any problems here
3%: No opinion

Q3. The Legislative Councilors are filibustering and the Hong Kong government cannot push policies. What does this show?
34%: Governance is being obstructed
31%: The foundations of social stability are being eroded
26%: Failed policies mean failed governance
8%: There is no problem here
1%: No opinion

Q4. In Hong Kong, justice, legislation and administration are being challenged. What is the crisis?
36%: Social instability with unimaginable damage
31%: Failed governance and hardship
17%: Business will be hindered, and investment will be dampened
14%: There is no crisis here
2%: No opinion

Q5. Who bears the biggest responsibility for the Occupy movement?
37%: The Occupy Central trio/the Hong Kong Federation of Students/Scholarism
25%: Jimmy Lai and other backroom financiers
23%: The pan-democratic Legislative Councilors
10%: Nobody has to bear responsibility
5%: No opinion

Q6. What is the price that pan-democratic Legislative Councilors will have to pay?
35%: Bankruptcy of public trust and popularity
24%: Rejection by voters who will make them pay
22%: Election setbacks and loss of elected seats
15%: No price needs to be paid
4%: No opinion

The anti-Occupy website SpeakOut HK announced that it has detected a malicious imitator SpeakOut Hong Kong. The imitator uses the same logo with the change of one word (which sounds the same in Cantonese). If you can't beat them, join them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gs5FFrz1TxM (from SpeakOut HK)
0:10 Woman: "Buy things."
0:15 Woman: "If you can squeeze outside, you can buy things."
0:18 Woman: "I want to buy things."
0:20 Man: "I want to buy things."
0:26 Crowd: "Buy things, buy things, buy things ..." (all the stores are shuttered long since)
0:37 Girl in school uniform: "I want genuine universal suffrage." Crowd: "I want universal suffrage."
0:48 Girl in school uniform: "I want to walk across the street."
0:58 Girl in school uniform: "Police and citizens cooperate." Crowd: "Occupy Mong Kok."
1:10 Girl in school uniform: "I want (martial arts grandmaster) Wong Fei-hung." Crowd: "I don't want (Police Commissioner) Tsang Wai-hung."
1:20 Crowd: "Fuck you mother! Fuck your mother! Fuck your mother!..."
1:26 Man: "You have Lee Si-yin. I have Shum-yau Baby."
1:36 Police officer: "Everybody please get off the roadway. Do not cause a jam. Thank you for your cooperation."
1:39 People gathered around in the middle of the road and pretended to drop money accidentally. They exclaimed in surprise and took photos.
3:15 A bar of soap was found on the ground as people wondered who left it there. A man said, "Police sir, let me stand behind you and you can pick up the bar of soap."
3:37 Police officer: "Do not stop and stand on the roadway, please."
3:55 Police officer to man: "You pick it up." Man: "I don't dare to pick it up." Police: "Please move back to the sidewalk. Are you picking it up? Do you like to pick up soap bars?"
4:12 Police officer: "Please move back onto the sidewalk. Cars are coming through. Thank you for cooperating. Please move back, excuse me. Let the cars through."
4:27 A man drops a money bill on the ground and picks it up. Other people pick up coins, drop them, pick them up again, etc.
5:16 Man: "I want genuine universal suffrage."
5:22 Man: "I want genuine universal suffrage."
5:30 Crowd: "I want genuine universal suffrage. I want genuine universal suffrage. I want genuine universal suffrage."
5:44 Crowd: "Fuck your mother! Fuck your mother!"
6:00 Crowd imitating dog barks: "Woof! Woof! Woof!"
6:13 Police officer: "Citizens, please do not stay around here."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOpIbbL_rc (from SpeakOut HK)
0:03 Crowd: "Evil police, evil police, evil police ..."
0:18 Man: "Go back and eat dog food."
0:21 Photo of Tsui Po-ko is shown (with the young boy giving him the middle finger at 0:40)
0:48 Crowd: "Eat shit! Eat shit!"
0:56 Crowd: "Evil police, evil police, evil police ..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8jf4o9nx-s
0:06 Policeman: "Citizens, please make way because a car is coming through. Please get back on the sidewalk as quickly as possible."
0:20 Crowd: "Louder. Louder. Louder..." (as if they can't hear) "Can't hear you. Louder. Can't hear you. Louder..." A truck approaches.
0:58 Policeman: "Please get back on the sidewalk. A car is coming to Soy Street."
1:00 Crowd: "Putonghua, putonghua, putonghua ..."
1:13 Crowd: "Nathan Road, Nathan Road, Nathan Road ..."
2:08 Crowd: "Buy things, buy things, buy things ..."
2:28 Crowd: "Nathan Road, Nathan Road, Nathan Road ..."
2:43 Crowd: "Buy things. Nathan Road. Buy things. Nathan Road ..."
3:56 Crowd: "Buy things. (two bangs on a garbage can/recycle bin) ..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKqlhQ64I8 (INT News Channel)
20:26 video, action mainly within the first five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAG7CYDrX5M
Kicking a bar of soap in the middle of the road

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onDaTMuPHR0 Mobile Occupy Mong Kok
0:00 Watching big screen television
1:20 Play-gambling
3:00 Milling crowd along Nathan Road; jewelry store Chow Sang Sang lowers gates
3:12 Crowd: "Open the doors, open the doors, open the doors ..."
4:03 Jewelry store Chow Tai Took lowers gates
4:37 Crowd: "Cross the road, cross the road. ..."
5:04 Cars coming down the pedestrian street Sai Yeung Choi Street South.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_qfbwfH_Uc&list=UUVCcf9cH4F_THEiEtCY5Fbg (INT News Channel)


Federation of Students/Scholarism has this poster for the event of November 30 (Sunday) 6pm at Umbrella Square, Admiralty. The slogan is "Do not forget our original intentions/resistance by all of the people." Indeed, what have the incidents in Mong Kok over the past several days to do with the original intentions? This is just a bunch of people chanting slogans including obscenities, crossing the road slowly back and forth, lining up to wait for buses which are bypassing the stop anyway, watching the large-screen television as a group, pretending to drop loose change on the road and looking for them, finding a bar of soap on the ground and debating who should pick it up, throwing paper airplanes, etc. They are only making themselves (and therefore their cause) even more unpopular.

P.S. The phrase "Buy things" was chanted many times during these demonstrations. The demonstrators claimed that they were responding to Chief Executive CY Leung's plea to citizens to go out to the formerly "occupied" Mong Kok area and spend money (consume) to help out the local economy. So they chanted "Spend money (consume 消費)" in Cantonese. But they also chanted "Buy things (購物)" in putonghua. In fact, these particular demonstrations are being named the "Buy Things" Movement or the "Shopping Revolution". The psychological backdrop is interesting.

The main demonstration is now off the major thoroughfares Nathan Road and Argyle Street and onto the pedestrian street Sai Yeung Choi South between Argyle Street and Dundas Street. If you walk down this street, you will find electronics stores (Broadway, Fortress, Chung Yuen, Suning, etc), telecommunication services (PCCW, Now TV, 3, HK Broadband, Cable TV, China Mobile, Wilson, etc), pharmacies (Manning, Watson's and many independent stores), beauty products (Sasa, etc), jewelry (Chow Tai Fook, Chow Sang Sang, TSL, Luk Fook, etc), fashion wear (G2000, Bossini, Mirabell etc). Thus, the main part of the customer base for this busiest shopping street of Hong Kong is mainland individual travelers who sweep up everything with wads of cash. Meanwhile the beloved traditional stores (fish ball noodle shops, bookstores, etc) have been squeezed out by high rents. Therefore, going out there and hurting business is a measure of revenge. By the way, most of the stores here belong to big companies with many branch stores and can easily absorb any losses in their Mong Kok branch stores.

But even if all the jewelry stores and pharmacies go out of business, the traditional small stores are not going to return. The calculations are simple: How many fish balls do you have to sell a day in order to pay the rent for a 200-square-feet stall in Mong Kok? Would you believe 50,000? You can't make that many fish balls by hand; if you order ready-made ones, then they are not "traditional"; even if you do make 50,000 every morning, you won't have that many buyers (50,000 fish balls per day at 5 fish balls per order is 10,000 orders per day, which divided by 12 business hours = 833 orders per hour = 14 orders per minute that you have to prepare, collect money and give change).

P.P.S (Wen Wei Po) November 30, 2014

Our reporter visited a number of upper-floor businesses on Sai Yeung Choi Street South to see whether they benefited from the "spending spree" of the demonstrators.

According to Ms. Yeung for a coffee shop, the nightly gatherings have meant that they go zero business three nights in a row. During the Occupy period, the business volume had dropped to 30% compared to before. However, since rent and salaries still have to be paid, she continued to open doors. "If the doors are open, then there is a chance of some business. If the doors are closed, there is zero chance." Ms. Yeung said that the demonstrators made a lot of commotion at the street entrance and pretended to watch television. But they have no intention of buying anything. She characterized the demonstrators as "elementary school chickens."  She was worried that the demonstrators would continue and cause her business to suffer. She said angrily: "If I jump out the window onto the street, business may become better!"

According to co-owner Mr. Cheng of the coffee shop, the demonstrators are not college students. "A lot of people are slipping in." He was worried enough that he closed the coffee shop early. He will have to see how things are on the weekend before deciding. Mr. Yeung and Mr. Cheng supported the clearance to normalize their business. They declined to be photographed because of fear of retaliation from the demonstrators.

Mr. Chan owns an 11-year-old upstairs bookstore. Business has been down 35% since Occupy Mong Kok. After the police clearance, business still hasn't improved due to the continuing demonstrations. "Basically, there is nothing to be afraid of. I'll just have to take it one step at a time." When asked about Scholarism urging the demonstrators to leave Mong Kok, Mr. Chan said that the demonstrators have said that Scholarism does not represent them and therefore they may return. He supports the police for clearing the area in accordance with the law. Again, he declined to be photographed because of fear of retaliation from the demonstrators.

Mrs. Cheung owns a 20-year-old upstairs bookstore that specializes in student textbooks. During the Occupy period, business fell by 50%. Since she sells mainly textbooks, there was no other way to reduce loses. "Business has never been this bad." Mrs. Cheung supports the police clearance. It is too soon to tell whether business will improve. She is concerned that Mong Kok will be re-occupied. She will look at the situation before deciding whether she will close the early.

Mr. Lo is the owner of an upstairs eyeglass shop. Traffic and business was clearly lower during the Occupy period. After the clearance, business has picked up 20% to 30%. He said that he can only accept passively: "Nothing to fear. I don't control things." He hopes the police clearance will bring business back to normal levels. He declined to be photographed, because of fear of retaliation from the demonstrators.

Mr. Wong runs a sports gear shop upstairs. Business has not picked up since the clearance because some people continue to make "trouble" the past few evenings. The shop closed several hours early on Friday. He expects to close early on Saturday and Sunday as well. He said that his business is only temporarily affected. Compared to the chaos in society, his business losses are trivial. He supports the police enforcing the law.

In the end, you have to ask one important question: Is this going to bring "genuine universal suffrage" any closer?" Methinks that it will be even further away.

(SCMP) Tramways loses HK$7.8 million revenue after being stopped in its tracks. November 29, 2014.

Hong Kong Tramways has urged pro-democracy demonstrators to release its occupied track in Causeway Bay, saying it had lost 3.9 million passengers and HK$7.8 million in revenue during the Occupy Central movement.

Tramways reached an agreement with Admiralty protesters to unblock the Queensway section, and services to Happy Valley resumed on October 14. But it said the occupation of Yee Woo Street in Causeway Bay had left 50 vehicles unable to return to the main repair depot in Whitty Street, Western District.

... Vivant said the company had lost up to 55,000 passengers a day since the Occupy movement started in late September. Before its Admiralty section reopened, the company was losing 45 per cent of its passengers, but this had been trimmed to 25 per cent, he said.

That was what Hong Kong Tramways said. But there are three parties involved here. Hong Kong Tramways is the operator of the tram service, and is owned and operated by a French company. The fact that a big foreign company might be losing some money won't bother too many Hong Kong citizens.

Then there are the citizens who use the tram service to go about. Finally there are the Occupy people who have staked out a tent city in Causeway Bay over one of two tram rails. What do they think about the situation? Here is a video that illustrates some of the thinking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKeaVOHtoPs (from SpeakOut HK)
0:01 Title: "86 year-old Grandma Ng and Central-Western District and Southern District councilors went to Admiralty to persuade demonstrators to open the roads."
0:10 Location: intersection of Queensway and Cotton Tree Drive
0:15 Grandma Ng: "I am 86 years old now. The government lets us take public transportation for two dollars.  But now even two dollars is rendered useless. No trams, no buses, nothing. I cannot walk too far. My feet hurt. I have a male companion at home. He is in the fourth stage ... liver ... lungs. If we have to call the ambulance and the ambulance can't come, he is going to die for sure. Right down you are occupying Central. How are you different from taking over by force? Taking over by force. I can't go here, I can't go there. I can't walk. I can't take transportation. I want you to communicate this for me. Tell them to give us our roads back. Tram routes, bus routes, all the roads. All that has to be given back to us."
1:02 Occupy man: "If you want to look for someone (to speak to), you should look for the Federation of Students folks. You shouldn't be talking to us."
1:04 District Councilor Chan: "Are you taking part in Federation of Students activities? Are you together?"
1:09 Occupy woman: "We are following the positions of the Federation of Students to do things."
1:10 District Councilor Chan: "Citizens have to take buses."
1:02 Occupy man: "About the buses. You can check with Citybus, New World First Bus. They have also ... helped the Southern District and your Central-Western District citizens.

1:24 Title: "Lobbying a second individual"
1:30 Grandma Ng: "I am getting angry now."
1:30 District Councilor Chan: "You are making life ..."
1:32 Occupy man: "So there is an opposite effect."
1:33 Grandma Ng: "Yes, an opposite effect."
1:35 Grandma Ng: "I ask you. I plead you."
1:39 Occupy man: "If they re-open Civic Square. Or in the preceding incident ... Tsang Wai-hung ... if he resigns, then this road will re-open immediately."

1:45 Title: "Lobbying a third individual"
1:51 Grandma Ng: "It is very bad for us, because we have ailments.
1:57 An Occupy man continues to eat his instant noodles and does not even look at Grandma Ng.
2:00 Another Occupy man: "This is none of our business. You ..."
2:00 Grandma Ng: "I hope that you can relay on my behalf ..."
2:01 Another Occupy man: "You go ..."
2:02 District Councilor Chan: "You are affecting ..."
2:03 Grandma Ng: "I am sorry. We want to ask you: If it is none of your business, then why are you sitting here?"
2:08 Second Occupy man: "We sit here ..."
2:10 Title: "Occupy friends, please give us a road to use!"

On the tram users side, it is straightforward. If Hong Kong Tramways lost 3.9 million passenger-trips, then some of those users can accept it by using alternate modes of transportation, but others are very much inconvenienced and cannot help but be displeased.

On the Occupy side, one response is "This is not my problem. You go and talk to those in charge." Those in charge are not necessarily illuminating (see, Alex Chow On The Record). Another response is to recite a list of conditions for re-opening the roads:

- Chief Executive CY Leung must resign
- The Political Reform trio of Chief Secretary Carrie Lam, Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam must resign
- Hong Kong Police Commissioner Tsang Wai-hung must resign
- The proposed political package must be withdrawn
- The National People's Congress must rescind its August 31st decision
- The National People's Congress must apologize to the people of Hong Kong
- Civil nomination must be used in place of the nomination committee for Chief Executive election in 2017 (and the relevant part of the Basic Law will be amended to reflect this change)
- The Functional Constituencies of the Legislative Council must be eliminated in the 2016 elections (and the relevant part of the Basic Law will be amended to reflect this change)
- the forecourt of the Central Government Complex will be formally named Civic Square and be open to the public
...

On one hand, some citizens want their roads back and don't care much about the Occupy issues. On the other hand, the Occupy people want their demands met and don't care much about what those citizens need. The net result is a huge public opinion swing against the Occupy movement.

In its original conception, Occupy Central involves 10,000 persons in a sit-down in the Central district. Some roads may be blocked temporarily, and it may take the police two to three days to remove all the people. Then those people will willingly go to court and plead guilty to illegal assembly. The point will be made about the demands of these people. In practice, the Occupy movement resulted in the spontaneous occupation of major thoroughfares in Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok, causing inconveniences (extra commuting expenses and time spent) for most people and economic hardship for some people, with some more so than others.

Here is another tram news story.

(Oriental Daily) November 28, 2014.

According to Hong Kong Tramways, the blocking of Yee Woo Street by the Occupy people in Causeway Bay has stranded about 50 trams on eastern Hong Kong island. These trams are unable to return to the Whitty Street depot on western Hong Kong island for maintenance/repair. The Occupy people in Causeway Bay apologized for the impact of the Occupy movement on tram service, but they said that they government caused it.

Occupier Ms. Wong apologizes for the impact of the Occupy movement on the tram service. But she does not agree the trams are not being maintained/repaired because she has observed maintenance workers working on trams near the Occupy zone.

Ms. Wong also pointed out that Hong Kong Tramways should question the government about using forceful, violent and unpopular means to make the people bend to its will, and also not engaging in negotiations to respond to public opinion. Ms. Wong said that she also has the habit of taking the tram. But she pointed out that the reason why Hong Kong Tramways is losing its competitive edge against alternate modes of transportation is that the government has introduced the HK$2 fare for senior citizens and qualified physically handicapped people on all public transportation. She said that impact (on tram service usage) is even larger than the Occupy movement.

Student Tse said that there are many factors that can cause Hong Kong Tramways to lose customers. If there is a traffic jam, the tram cannot take an alternate route. Besides there are many other substitute transportation for the tram, such as the MTR and buses. Therefore, the problem cannot be solely attributed to the Occupy movement. Besides Student Tse said that she has seen workers working on the tram by the roadside. Therefore, she does not think that the trams need to return to the depot for maintenance/repair.

[Note: It is true that some minor maintenance/repair can be made right there and then. However, major activity may require the entire tram be raised by a crane at the depot.]

The Occupy people keep saying that they 'apologize' for the inconvenience (but very seldom about the economic hardships) caused by their movement. But saying "I apologize" is not enough to be an 'apology.' A genuine apology contains these ingredients:

1. State what you have done
2. State why that was wrong
3. Make a statement of apology
4. Promise that you will cease and desist
5. Promise that you will make amends for the damage caused by you

For example, consider a hypothetical oil company:

1. Statement of what was done -- "An oil tanker belonging to our company went aground off the coast last night and spilled 1 million barrels of crude oil into the ocean."

2. Statement of why that was wrong -- "The resulting oil leakage has polluted the surrounding environment and negatively impacted the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people in the fishing, tourism and other industries."

3. Statement of apology (simple and direct) -- "Our company apologizes for what has happened."

4. Promise of future action -- "Our company will be responsible for cleaning up the site, starting immediately with all available resources. We will review our safety procedures to insure that this never happens again."

5. Promise to make amends for damages -- "Our company accepts our responsibility in this matter and we will compensate all those affected for their losses. We will also make a contribution of $10 billion to an environmental fund to help restore the ecology in the impacted areas."

Switch to the Occupy movement and it may go something like this:

1. Statement of what was done -- "During the Occupy movement, we blocked a number of major thoroughfares in Hong Kong and prevented access by trams, buses and automobiles."

2. Statement of why that was wrong -- "Although our intention was to apply pressure on the government, the fact was that we have created inconveniences for many citizens, some more so than others. We have also caused economic hardship for a number of businesses and workers. This was never our intention, and it was wrong to have done so."

3. Statement of apology: "We apologize to those people who were inconvenienced and/or suffered economic hardship."

4. Promise of future action -- "We will immediately open all the roads again. We solemnly promise that we will not repeat this in the future. No social/democratic movement can succeed if its actions directly and negatively impact the people."

5. Promise to make amends for damages -- "We will reach out to those who have suffered economic hardships as a result of the Occupy movement, and assist them to the best of our ability."

Nobody has ever said anything like that.

Addendum: (Apple Daily; YouTube backup https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gwv5ZqUaNMI ) December 9, 2014

The Occupy Causeway Bay people thanked Hong Kong Tramways for accepting the economic losses without getting an court injunction (like certain other businesses did), thus not being exploited by the Hong Kong SAR government. They also apologized to the local residents and businesses who have been inconvenienced by the continual road blockage.

They took a bow at 0:19 in the video. The press complained that they were not ready at the time, and requested them to take another bow at 0:27 to the call of "One, Two, Three." At 0:55, the spokeswoman said: "Sorry, sorry about that. Like this." This is not an apology. It is an insult by characterizing the economic losses as "inconveniences."

Addendum: (Bastille Post) December 13, 2014

Occupy Central continued for 75 days. The businesses in the Occupy areas suffered, and many transportation companies suffered tremendously. The Kwun Chus Company and the Mong Kok-based Chiu Hing Minibus Company obtained court injunctions. But these are the largest transportation companies out there. Does this mean that the largest companies did not suffer economic losses? That doesn't seem to be the case.

In the case of Hong Kong Island, the Hong Kong Tramways was most affected. Because of the blockade in Causeway Bay, about 50 trams were stuck on the east side of Hong Kong Island. The Hong Kong Tramways spent more than $200,000 to transport equipment back to the Sai Wan depot to repair and back to Sai Wan Ho for re-installation.

But the repair costs are nothing compared to the lost revenue. Due to the Occupy Movement, five of the six routes were affected. The company lost 3.9 million passenger trips at $7.8 million revenue. But the Hong Kong Tramways said that it is not contemplating legal recourse at this time.

I can see that the Occupy Movement was clearly impacting traffic in Hong Kong, especially the transportation industry. But this is seldom reported in the media, which deliberately sought out persons who are not affected. For example, after the police cleared Mong Kok, a media outlet interviewed a taxi driver who said that it made no difference to revenue. It is not hard to find exceptions, but why won't the media interview some typical cases in which people are negatively impacted?

I wondered why the large bus companies did not try for court injunctions, leaving it only to the medium-sized companies. I spoke to senior persons at large companies and I found that they were angry but also afraid. If they seek a court injunction, they would be standing on the opposite side of the Occupy people. They are afraid of being attacked, besieged and boycotted. Even though the Occupy Movement was illegal and hurt the interests of the passengers, companies and workers, they were too afraid to speak up.

The case of the Hee Kee Crab Restaurant owner is an example. Internet users started a boycott campaign against him. So it is understandable that the big companies are keeping quiet in spite of their anger. I often hear that freedom in Hong Kong is lost because people are engaging in self-censorship due to their fear of the mainland authorities. Perhaps that is the case. But on the other side, should keeping silent because of the fear of what demonstrators might do be counted as self-censorship too?

Q1. Have you been unhappy over the increasingly severe social conflicts?
26.0%: No
73.0%: Yes
1.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. How unhappy were you? (Among those who said that they were unhappy in Q1)
24.9%: Slightly unhappy
37.7%: Somewhat unhappy
36.7%: Extremely unhappy
0.7%: Don't know/hard to say

Q3. Have your relationship with other people gotten worse due to differences in political opinion?
80.0%: No
18.5%: Yes
1.5%: Don't know/hard to say

Q4. With whom has relationship gotten worse? (Among those who said that relationships have gotten worse)
58.8%: Friends
27.0%: Immediate family members
22.3%: Colleagues
19.6%: Relatives
9.5%: Fellow students
4.1%: Neighbors
6.8%: Other
1.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q5. Do you accept the increasingly radical behaviors of anti-government people?
68.8%: No
19.3%: In-between
8.7%: Yes
3.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q6. Do you accept the increasingly radical behaviors of pro-government people?
61.8%: No
21.4%: In-between
12.9%: Yes
4.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Q7. Are you concerned that these social conflicts will frequently take place in Hong Kong?
22.7%: No
19.5%: In-between
54.8%: Yes
3.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Q8. What is the trend for these conflicts over the next years?
40.4%: More severe
25.8%: About the same as now
19.1%: More moderate
14.7%: Don't know/hard to say

Q9. Do you agree that only extremely radical methods can make the government respond?
62.6%: Disagree
22.6%: In-between
12.4%: Agree
2.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q10. How should one fight for social/public rights?
14.4%: Hold on to the principles, never yield
76.3%: Both sides should take a step back and seek common ground
2.6%: Neither
6.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Watch this video of the Mong Kok clearance on November 27: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwOBd4fkIyw. At 1:51, a young man told the TVB reporter: "After work, I came to stroll in the streets. The Chief Executive asked us to come and shop. I bought a cup of ice cream when I got here. Without any cause, a police officer grabbed me on the chest."

An Internet user pointed out that a doppelgnger was previously seen in a Scholarism t-shirt handing out Occupy Central leaflets.

In another case, a taxi driver was first interviewed about business conditions after the Mong Kok clearance. "There was no traffic jams prior to the clearance. There are now traffic jams after the clearance. (During the Occupy period), people waited for taxis. Now my taxi is waiting for people. Things have gotten worse." Later, the same individual was photographed by Oriental Daily walking his dog in support of Occupy Central.

These are the second and third instances of TVB  interviewing people without disclosing the conflict of interest. The first case is at #OccupyCentral_1.htm#013. Why is TVB so "lucky"? These events cannot be happening on a random basis, because the probability of three lightning strikes in a row is infinitesimally small.

(Oriental Daily)

The Luk Fook Jewelry Group has three branch shops in Mong Kok. They re-opened for business at 1pm. During the Occupation, "our workers would shutter the shop whenever there seems to be trouble on the street. This was bound to affect business. Mong Kok should have been cleared after the first couple of weeks. But it went on for two months. Our losses are tremendous."

The manager of Hai Yun Pharmacy on Shan Tung Street said that tourists disappeared during the Occupation, and they lost about 20% of their business volume.

At New Town Mall and Mong Kok Centre, the shop owners had previously petitioned the landlord to reduce rents due to smaller crowds. Our reporter observed that there were about 20 customers on the third floor of New Town Mall, which was triple the number during the Occupation. At Mong Kok Centre, there were also more customers.

New Town Mall accessory shop owner Mr. Yan said that this autumn was the worst in terms of business volume across the eight years that his shop has been in business. Mong Kok Centre accessory shop owner Ms. Yang said that she was glad about the clearance, and said: "I hope to make up the business during the Christmas season. I am worried that those Occupy people may return. If this goes for another six months, I would have to close the job and go out to look for a jog."

By the evening, clashes began to break out. Shan Tung Street Kowloon Tax Free Pharmacy manager Mr. Yeung said, "I lowered the shutters twice today already. With so many people around, no customers would dare enter!" The pharmacy usually closes at midnight, but he decided to close early today.

The demonstrators returned in another form for the next couple of nights. This time, they did not pitch tents on Nathan Road. Instead, they stood around the pedestrian mall of Sai Yeung Choi Street South and pretended that they were shopping. When the store managers saw the large crowd outside, they shuttered their stores and so they did zero business. The crowds chanted loudly in the streets until 4am. It was a great party for them. The residents upstairs got no sleep. This is why the Occupy movement is not welcomed in high-density commercial/residential districts. The demonstrators either don't know or don't care, and they wondered why public opinion is swinging against them, or why resident throw objects down the street at them.

Here are some videos of the night:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4MrOJ2nFUQ Chants of "Spend money, spend money, spend money ..." in Cantonese and then "Buy things, buy things, buy things ..." in putonghua.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QHiHV-yNNs November 26, 2014 1130pm. Police woman asked people to leave because the situation is getting dangerous, but she is booed by the crowd. At 0:48, the crowd chants "I want genuine universal suffrage." At 1:02, the crowd raised their middle fingers to salute. From 1:22, there is a series of make-believe games by the people. A 1:23, happy-looking people raised ostensibly lost-and-found objects in search of their owners. At 1:35, the crowd chanted "Spend money, spend money, spend money ..." in Cantonese. At 1:44, a man yelled "I want to buy a telephone." At 1:54, the crowd chanted "Buy things, buy things, buy things ..." in putonghua. Of course, they were just standing around and all the shops are shuttered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9LUzc7CEtQ&list=UUD6ApgB89vPuRplh6y5GjEw&index=2 Street fighting. Once upon a time, the movement began as the organization named "Occupy Central with Love and Peace (OCLP)". The love and peace have long gone since.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXyiz8PL1Hw A group of demonstrators have trapped a small number of police officers in a cul-de-sac. The police just stood there, while the demonstrators chant obscenities at them. At 1:27, they began chanting "Fuck your mother, fuck your mother, fuck your mother ..."

This brings us to Friday, for which a much larger turnout is expected. After all, people work during the week and protest during the weekend.


The front page A1 story in The Sun is: "Battle sure to restart in Mong Kok tonight."

(The Sun, Wen Wei Po) Yesterday, the self-proclaimed Facebook group "Hong Kong V-mask team" called for a "people's arm insurrection". They called the masses to show up to do "shopping" in Mong Kok. They made a list of protective gear such as helmets, goggles, body armor, and umbrellas which can be purchased at hardware stores, war game shops and bicycle stores. Shields cannot be purchased at this time, but they can be converted from pot covers, luggage or large wooden boards.


The V-mask banner says:
"November 28 Friday
Armed insurrection by all the people
The people of Hong Kong ... defend firmly ... counter-attack"

[The description is puzzling. What is being defended here? The cleared Nathan Road tent city? The Sai Yeung Choi South pedestrian mall? The original goal of genuine universal suffrage? And what is the objective in counter-attacking? Set up a tent city on Nathan Road/Sai Yeung Choi South and defend it until the end of time? Beat up a few police officers? By the way, what percent of the people will support an armed insurrection?]

The explanation for this event is:
"We are not violent thugs ... we wear protective gear solely in order to protect ourselves.
In the face of powerful authorities, we have no other choice but to resist with our blood and flesh."

[This explanation is incoherent. First of all, "全民武裝起義" means "armed insurrection by all the people." According to Google, an insurrection is "a violent uprising against an authority or government." An "armed insurrection" is an insurgency, "an organized rebellion aimed at overthrowing a constituted government through the use of subversion and armed conflict." If insurgency is the action, you need offensive weapons and not protective gear.]

Reference reading: Manual for an Armed Insurrection (1866) by Auguste Blanqui.

The police already have 4,000 officers in and around Mong Kok, and they intend to bring in another 3,000 on Friday night.

(SCMP) Students threaten to target government buildings after night of clashes in Mong Kok. November 27, 2014.

The Federation of Students has threatened to target government buildings in response to the police clearance of the Occupy camp in Mong Kok following violent clashes overnight. "I think we have made it very clear that if [the police] continue the violent way of clearing up the place, we will have further actions," Federation of Students core member Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok said on an RTHK radio programme this morning. "The further actions include a possibility of some escalations pointed at government-related buildings or some government-related departments," she said. Leung, president of the University of Hong Kong students' union, said details would be released later but not before tomorrow.

Here is a priority list of Occupy targets as graded by perceived strategic importance.

Level 1 (top): Chinese People's Liberation Army Forces Hong Kong Building, Central district, Hong Kong Island. This building is the symbol of the rule/sovereignty of the Chinese Central Government in Hong Kong. An Occupation (or even an attempted assault) is an open declaration of insurrection/rebellion/war, and will likely bring the PLA into the fray.

Level 2: Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Sai Wan, Hong Kong Island. This is the representative of the Chinese Communist Party/Central Government in Hong Kong. This is like occupying the consulate of a foreign country against which one has kind of gripe. This is an open declaration of hostility.

Level 3: Police stations, such as the Hong Kong Police Headquarters at Arsenal Street, Wanchai, Hong Kong Island. If the police are the tools of repression, then it is logical to counter-attack their home base. More importantly, everybody knows that there are guns and ammunition inside. There are many possible consequences, not all of them favorable. If this happens, it will probably a bunch of guys in V-masks charging in, seizing the guns and handing them out to the following students. Then the V-masks guys will disappear in a hurry, leaving the students holding guns that they don't know how to use and looking down at the Special Duties Units (Flying Tigers) rushing in.

Level 4: The major traffic hubs/arteries: Hong Kong International Airport, the tunnels and bridges and the Mass Transit Railway. The airport is different from the rest because its security is operated along the Airport Authority Bylaw which means security units carrying H&K MP5 A3 sub-machine guns and Glock 17 pistols. The tunnels and bridges are easy to block but impossible to hold due to supply problems. That is to say, you can block a tunnel/bridge by blowing the tires of a few trucks. If you are few in numbers, you will be arrested and the trucks towed away. If you bring one thousand friends with you, then you won't have a continuous supply of food and water. Then is why Legislative Councilor Leung Kwok-hung once suggested a four-hour block of the Hung Hom Tunnel only. The MTR is easy to stop. You can just jump on the tracks and the authorities will have to shut down the system to avoid electrocuting you. The storm of public opinion backlash will be incredible, because there is no other way for some people to get around at all (e.g. a truck delivering perishable goods from the airport to Hong Kong Island). You will have inconvenienced a lot of people, but this won't bother CY Leung and the Central Government.

Level 5: Major government buildings: Government House, Chief Executive's Office, Government Headquarters, Legislative Council, High Court. There is some symbolic value (e.g. "today we have taken over the heart of the government"), but the government won't stop running as a result. Government workers will go to back-up locations to continue to work.

Level 6: Major financial institutions: IFC (which houses the Hong Kong Monetary Authority; Mandatory Provident Fund Scheme Authority; Hong Kong Mortgage Authority), also the tallest building on Hong Kong Island; Exchange Square (which houses the Hong Kong Stock Exchange); ICC, also the tallest building in all of the Hong Kong SAR housing the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank and Morgan Stanley; Bank of China Tower; HSBC Building; Citibank Plaza. The major financial institutions should all have contingency plans in place to bring their operations off-site.

Level 7: Major pedestrian/vehicular hubs, major commercial/residential centers: Admiralty, Central, Causeway Bay, Tsim Sha Tsui, Mong Kok have already been occupied before with the result of having a massive public opinion swing against those actions. Right now, more than 80% of the people want the Occupy people to retreat. It hurts the local businesses and vexes the local residents, and it inconveniences almost everybody. It does not hurt CY Leung and the Central Government. The initial targets were the most obvious ones, and others can only be lesser targets.

Level 8: Government departments: Immigration Department; Inland Revenue Department; Land Registry; Security Bureau; Food and Health Bureau; Independent Commission Against Corruption; etc. Much less symbolic value than Level 5. Like, so what if you block foreign visitors from extending their visas? How does that hurt CY Leung and the Central Government?

Level 9: Major tourist attractions: Golden Bauhinia Square; Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre; Ocean Park; Disneyland; Wong Tai Sin Temple; The Peak. It will hurt those who make a living at those locations, but not CY Leung and the Central Government.

Level 10: Government institutions: Hong Kong Public Library; Hong Kong Cultural Centre; Hong Kong City Hall. It will inconvenience some citizens who use these facilities, but not CY Leung and the Central Government.

If the students want to escalate Occupy actions, then there is nothing here that will simultaneously (A) win public support for the actions because they won't hurt people and businesses while still fighting for "genuine universal suffrage" and (B) force CY Leung and the Central Government to come to the table and give concessions on "genuine universal suffrage."

Two months ago, the Hong Kong Federation of Students issued a statement (see BBC) that if the government does not respond by midnight on September 28, then they will escalate their protest movement. Specifically, they called for work strike (罷工), business strike(罷市) and class strike(罷課) for an unlimited time period until "victory for the people" is achieved. Some students went out on strike for a period of time; a hundred or so workers at the Swire Beverages Factory went on strike for one day; and no business was known to have joined the strike. That was then, and it will be even harder now.

According to The Sun (2013 June 6), the Sun Hing Building has a concentration of Finnish bath houses and mahjong houses. According to resident Mr. Tong, who has lived there for more than a decade, "all sorts of people come and go here. I never answer any knocks on the door!" She constantly reminds her children never to open the door for strangers. There are multiple entrances to the building. The Sun reporter waited around one security post for more than 20 minutes, but did not see any security guard.

According to Wen Wei Po (2007 February 26), Portland Street is the centre of the local sex industry. The Sun Hing Building used to be the base for solo brothels (note: In Hong Kong, prostitution is legal on a one-to-one basis between prostitute and client, but not if someone else makes money off the activity). The building is 18 storeys tall, with 19 units per floor. At the peak, there were more than 50 solo brothels. The building was erected in 1966, and most of the residents are elderly. Through soft persuasion of landlords to rent selectively, there are only about 10 solo brothels left.

Here are the recent search results at Oriental Daily about this building since October.

October 19: http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141019/00176_011.html A 34-year-old dim sum chef named Yeung was returning home with his wife and mother after a company dinner. When they got to the front of the Sun Hing Building, they found a file of garbage cans and metal barriers erected by the Occupy people in front of the entrance. So he moved the materials aside in order to go home. Suddenly five men wearing surgical masks with long hair and dyed-blond hair rushed up and accused Yeung of being an anti-Occupy person. There was some arguing and shoving, and Yeung was beaten up with a metal rod and an umbrella. Yeung said that he was hit eight to ten times. He suffered a broken bone in his right hand. Yeung said that his family depends on his salary, but now he is worried that he won't be able to work until the bone heals.

October 19: http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141019/00176_015.html At around 3am, three water bombs were thrown down the street from high up on Sun Hing Building, seconds apart with loud bangs. The demonstrators thought at first that the police had fired tear gas canisters at them. The demonstrators attempted to enter the Sun Hing Building to find the perpetrator(s). But some tough-looking men working as bouncers for the night clubs chased them out.

October 23:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141023/00176_002.html At around 2pm, about 50 taxis drove down to Argyle Street to support counter-demonstrators removing the barricades. There were violent physical clashes. The police formed a human war to separate the two sides. At around 5pm, there were further clashes outside Langham Place. As precaution, the Sun Hing Building erected a wooden wall to close down the main entrance.

October 28:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141028/00176_008.html At 10pm, someone threw glass bottles from the Sun Hing Building. A female demonstrator was cut by the broken shards.

October 29:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141029/00176_016.html Another glass bottle was thrown down from the Sun Hing Building. Nobody was hurt.

October 31:
http://www.orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141031/00176_013.html
Last time, Crime Investigation Department officers arrested a man and a woman who were suspected of throwing glass bottles down on the street from the Sun Hing Building. There have been at least three incidents stemming form the Sun Hing Building over the past two weeks. The two individuals are believed to have been "high" on drugs.

November 1:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141101/00176_010.html A 36-year-old man and a 42-year-old have posted bail after being detained on suspicion of throwing objects from above at the Sun Hing Building. The Occupy volunteers have decided to erect nettings in the area to catch flying objects from above.

November 6:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141106/00176_016.html
Early in the morning, a drunkard entered the tent city and yelled: "You are not allowed to sleep in this street ... I don't want your parents to worry about you." The man was taken away by the police.

November 14:
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20141114/00176_037.html A Sun Hing Building night club mama-san was beaten up by a papa-san after one of the girls complained that a customer was hard to "please."

November 26:
http://hk.apple.appledaily.com/realtime/breaking/20141126/53167784
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvUSCH41R5g&list=UUD6ApgB89vPuRplh6y5GjEw
Such being the case, what happened today was expected. On this day, when Nathan Road was being cleared by the police, the demonstrators began retreating south. The Sun Hing Building owners/tenants blocked off its front entrance with a wooden wall. The guards behind the wall got into a verbal fight with the demonstrators, and objects were thrown before the police showed up.

More at Occupy Central 2014 Part 1.


Archives:

Occupy Central Part 1, Occupy Central Part 2
Brief Comments
Blog Posts

Google  
Search WWW Search www.zonaeuropa.com

        Blogroll   Press