(v3.0)

Section 1 of 3:  Recommended Photos/Videos/Reading

Global (in English) Greater China (in English) Greater China (in Chinese)
Are Cell Phones Changing the Narrative on Police Shootings?  Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone
Disremembered Charles Leadbeater, Aeon
TSA 'Behavior Detection' Program targeting undocumented immigrants, not terrorists Jana Winter, The Intercept
TSAs Secret Behavior Checklist to Spot Terrorists The Intercept
Learning My Lesson Marina Warner, LRB
How Robots & Algorithms are taking over Sue Halpern, NYROB
About Face
Patricia Marx, The New Yorker
The Wonderfully Elusive Chinese Novel Perry Link, NYROB
New Zealand plotted hack on China with NSA
The Intercept
China: What the Uighurs See Ian Johnson, NYROB
Taiwan's Master Plan to Defeat China in a War J. Michael Cole, National Interest
Japan's Master Plan to Defeat China in a War Kyle Mizokami, National Interest
Metamorpolis: Q& A with Tim Franco  Roads and Kingdoms

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

Section 2 of 3:  Brief comments

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

(SCMP) Protests hit Carrie Lam's neighborhood 'bus parade' to promote Hong Kong electoral reform. April 25, 2015.

An open-top bus parade by officials seeking to drum up support for the government's political reform package ended in arrests and chaos yesterday as opponents made themselves heard along the route.

The bus trip marked the start of a massive publicity campaign intended to get the public behind the contentious plans for the 2017 chief executive poll before lawmakers vote on it. But their efforts received a blow earlier when the European Union said it supported Hongkongers in their wish to have a "genuine choice" of candidates in 2017.

Thirty officials boarded the bus, including Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah and Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung. They teamed up to peddle the blueprint for reform officially announced on Wednesday, which they hope will form the basis for the city electing its leader by universal suffrage for the first time. Based on a framework set by Beijing, the package limits the number of candidates to two or three, who will need majority support from a 1,200 strong nominating committee.

Pan-democrats say that amounts to political screening and fake democracy, and have vowed to deny the plan a two-thirds majority in the Legislative Council in June.

The bus made its first stop at Kennedy Town in the afternoon - but sped off seconds after arrival amid clashes between pro- and anti-government protesters and police. Three protesters were arrested on suspicion of wounding police officers and interrupting them in the course of their duties. The officials never stepped off the bus as they continued to Kowloon and New Territories.

Lam, whose voice was largely drowned out during the tour, said afterwards her team would continue to reach out to the public to explain the reform plans. But the failure of the officials to engage did not impress some. "I clearly saw them coming in and leaving like rats in three seconds," said Jack Chan Hon-ting, 30, of Kennedy Town. "I couldn't even see their faces clearly." In a joking reference to Leung's comment on Wednesday that community outreach was an "easy job", Chan said "he is right in this sense".

The Federation of Students, Scholarism and radical groups such as the League of Social Democrats and People Power were among the protesters.

(Apple Daily) April 25, 2015.

Government officials took an open-top double-decker bus to tour three districts to promote the electoral reform. They did not have any contact with citizens on the way. Scholarism convener appeared in Lok Fu in the afternoon first. Then he hurried over to the Tai Po.

Wong told the media: "Under the blazing sun, a group of senior citizens waited for three hours. The DAB as event organizers did not pass out a single bottle of water to them. They were forced to sit three hours as backdrop." Wong criticized the senior government officials for refusing to make contact with citizens, both supporters and opponents.

Just at that moment, the government bus passed by. Wong wanted to rush over to petition, but a plainclothes policeman grabbed him and he fell. There was chaos at the scene. Afterwards, Wong said that he only wanted to go to the roadside to chant slogans at Carrie Lam. He was grabbed and he fell. He criticized the police for using violence.

(Ming Pao) April 26, 2015.


Joshua Wong and his GoPro Hero4 camera


Student demonstrator piling on top of plainclothes policeman. Another demonstrator is fully occupied with filming.

Members of the Democratic Party, Labour Party and Civic Party could not be found in Tai Po, Kennedy Town or Lok Fu yesterday. According to an unnamed pan-democrat Legislative Councilor, they have their own event today and therefore they didn't have to show up yesterday. Besides, the pan-democrats do not normally launch ambush attacks on government officials. As to whether the pan-democrats were deliberately avoiding to be identified with the radical elements, this pan-democrat Legislative Council said that the citizens are smart enough to tell the difference between the two.

(Wen Wei Po) April 26, 2015.

Yesterday, government officials took an open-top double-decker bus around Hong Kong to promote the electoral reform proposal. At the first stop in Kennedy Town, League of Social Democrats chairman Leung Kwok-hung, People Power member Tam Tak-chi, Federation of Students members, and regular demonstrator Captain America showed up. Leung and Tam used megaphones to try to out-shout counter-demonstrators while Captain America waved the British colonial flag in support of Hong Kong independence (that is, he believes that Hong Kong needs to be returned by China to the United Kingdom first, and then the United Kingdom can grant independence to Hong Kong).

The government bus came by at 2:45pm. The demonstrators attempted to rush onto the roadway. But the police stopped them. There were at least two rounds of clashes, as people pushed and shoved, stepped onto the flowerbeds and charged into the roadways. A foreigner pedestrian jumped to demand the police to cease and desist. The police raised the yellow warning banner.

According to the police, a 22-year-old man named Ng tugged at the police identification card of a plainclothes policeman and another 27-year-old man named Ip pushed the plainclothes policeman onto the ground. When the police attempted to stop Ip, a 39-year-old woman named Leung interfered. These three individuals were arrested on suspicion of assaulting a police officer and/or obstructing the police in the line of duty. The plainclothes policeman sustained injuries on his hand and hands.

The government buss arrived in Lok Fu at 3:30pm. Several dozen League of Social Democrats, Scholarism and Hong Kong University Student Union members demonstrated outside the MTR station. When the bus arrived, the demonstrators tossed ripped-up copies of promotional leaflets as well as Hell Money. The demonstrators were unsuccessful in trying to reach the bus due to congestion.

The bus went by the Tai Po Complex at 410pm. Demonstrators raised yellow umbrellas and some of them charged onto the roadway in the direction of the bus. It was a dangerous situation. Demonstrators and counter-demonstrators cursed and shoved at each other. The police set up a human chain to separate the two sides. Some pro-government supporters shouted: "Tai Po does not welcome you people!"

When the bus came by the scene again, Joshua Wong was in the middle of an interview. He turned around and tried to dash onto the road. The police tried to stop him. Wong fell down on the road and stayed there for a while pretending as he was "dead." He claimed that he was "pushed down" by the police.

(Oriental Daily) April 25, 2015.

At around 3pm, the government promotional bus arrived at Kennedy Town. The government officials sat in the bus and called for citizens to support the electoral reform. Their supporters chanted : "Universal suffrage for Chief Executive in 2017" and "Popular election of Chief Executive" while waving placards and banners. Meanwhile the demonstrators were shocked that the government officials did not come off the bus. So some of them ripped up promotional materials and tossed them towards  the bus. This left the demonstrators with no choice but to try to chase the bus at various stops. Finally in Tai Po, Joshua Wong chased the bus to Tai Po. But as he rushed towards the bus, he fell down with face on the ground and one shoe off. It was very awkward. The proceedings stopped before 530pm. The demonstrators said that they will block the government officials anytime that they show up in local communities in order to stop the government's promotional campaign.

(Oriental Daily, Oriental Daily, Oriental Daily)

More than 100 demonstrators met the government officials in Kennedy Town. At least 3 persons were arrested. According to information, one of the arrestees was Occupy veteran Ah Sam. Another was a female People Power supporter named Leung. According to City University Student Union vice-president for external affairs named Leung, one of their students was arrested. Leung criticized the police for arresting people during the physical pushing and shoving without offering any explanation for the arrests. He thought that the government officials because they did not get off the bus and therefore were insincere. He said that the government did not provide a suitable site for the citizens to express their demands. Leung was also present to demonstrate against the Chief Executive on the day before.

Videos:

(Cable TV with additional footage of greyhound racing from SaluteToHKPolice) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCpKoaAvdRA

(Truth Media Hong Kong) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u6d8hQtFY8

(DBC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZeeE5i_1as Wong sat on the ground, and refused to answer the repeated single question from the uniformed police officer, "Mister, are you injured?"

(Apple Daily) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5mY0KDUGSQ At 0:05, Wong turns away from the press and sprints away; at 0:07, a tall plainclothes person (in black clothes but with a white earplug) grabs Wong's waist. At 0:10, Wong is down on the ground. Was this a tackle? Was this a dive? Will you issue a red card?

Internet comments:

- Hong Kong's Little Red Guard

- I wonder how many newspaper will have "Joshua Wong puk gai" as the headline story tomorrow? (Wikipedia) Puk gai literally means "falling onto street" which is a common curse phrase in Cantonese that may be translated into English as "drop dead." It is sometimes used as a noun to refer to an annoying person that roughly means a "prick." The phrase can also be used in daily life under a variety of situations to express annoyance, disgrace or other emotions.
- Puk gai refers to someone who fell down on the street. But this person is so reviled, no relatives, friends, supporters or even strangers offer any help.
- Joshua Wong will win the TIME/Fortune Most Puk Gai Person of the Year hands down.

- Why did the Apple Daily news report headline say that Joshua Wong wore a GoPro Hero 4 camera? Is GoPro an advertiser? Has Joshua Wong signed on to become an official GoPro spokesperson?
- Joshua Wong was allegedly wearing a GoPro camera on this occasion. Will he share his own video of the incident? Update: Here is the video.

- If the bus went from Lok Fu to Tai Po, how did someone without a car reach Tai Po faster than the bus? By subway, a person get on the MTR at Lok Fu, get off at Kowloon Tong and walk over to change to East Rail. Based upon previous cases, it is most likely that Apple Daily used its press vehicle to take Joshua Wong there! This is not reporting news; this is creating news.

- On this occasion, all the action took place in the open with multiple videos for all to see. People can either listen to the separate wildly divergent accounts, or else they can see if they trust their own lying eyes more (see Richard Pryor).
- The video showed an Evil Policeman assaulting a citizen.
- The video showed a Puk Gai falling on the street.
- The video showed the photojournalists nearby have gleeful expressions because they were close to the action and got good footage.

- Joshua Wong was talking to the press when he suddenly turned around and sprinted away. How was the plainclothes policeman supposed to react? He had less than two seconds to evaluate these possibilities:

- Wong just executed a snatch grab and is sprinting away
- Wong experienced a sudden diarrhea attack and needed to find a restroom
- Wong heard the bus approaching and wanted to rush over and set off the bomb in his backpack
- Wong heard the bus approaching and wanted to throw himself under the bus
...

- There are reasons why he refused to answer the uniformed policeman's question: "Mister, are you injured?" If he answers that question, he will be put into a no-win position. On one hand, if he says "No, I'm not injured," then that is the end of the matter. Everybody will walk away. On the other hand, if he says "Yes, I'm injured," then the police will summon an ambulance to talk him down to the hospital for a medical examination. Then he can't continue the media show. Therefore, Wong had to keep saying other things except answer that question. And that question is what a policeman is supposed to ask in such situations.

- The uniformed policeman asked: "Mister, are you injured?" Wong replied that he only came here to meet a friend. The policeman then asked: "Are there friends of Mr. Wong here? Please come over." Wong changed the topic immediately.

- Joshua Wong lives in a constant nightmare about being taken down the police station to file charges against the police.
(The Standard, November 28, 2014)
The public face of Occupy Central, Joshua Wong Chi-fung, together with student leader Lester Shum and other activists have been banned from the heart of Mong Kok as a condition of bail. Wong, 18, and Shum, 21, claimed after appearing in court that they were assaulted by police following their arrests. Wong, who studies at Open University, said he was punched, insulted with foul language and that his scrotum was groped seven times.

- I have read all of the preceding 280 comments in this forum thread. Not a single one displayed any sympathy for Joshua Wong. You can imagine how unpopular he is. If you add the other threads on the same incident, there have been more than 1,000 unfavorable comments in just a few hours.
- Update: Comment #594. The worst Puk Gai in Hong Kong got cursed out for 40 pages.
- While there is no official statistics, I believe that this forum comment thread is the one with most number of "puk gai" used in the entire history of the Hong Kong Internet.

- "I want genuine Puk Gai:  Umbrella Movement"

- Joshua Wong said that he felt sorry for the senior citizens who sat out there for three hours to wait for the event to start. He has never said that he feels sorry for the citizens of Hong Kong who had to wait for 79 days before their roads were given back to them.
- No water for the senior citizens? How about squeezing a few hundred dollars out of the $20 million Federation of Students slush fund to buy some water? No? That means you don't really care about the senior citizens themselves, but you only care to exploit their condition to your own advantage.

- The demonstrators pronounced victory because the government officials did not get off the bus. They said that the government officials were insincere because they did not interact with citizens.
Well, here is a video of Joshua Wong
himself seeking police protection from irate citizens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FehwQ87JDi0

0:21 "Go away! Go away! Don't mess with Tseung Kwun O!"
0:36 "What? You are getting police protection again?"
0:37 "Go away, bastard!"
0:39 "Are you very scared?"
0:44 "Go away, bastard!"
0:45 "You are very much detested!"
0:51 "If you don't fucking like Hong Kong, you should leave. Scram back to America!"
0:58 "Scram back to America!"
0:59 "Eat shit!"
1:02 "You think that you are very fucking welcomed?"
1:06 "Fuck your mother's cunt!"
1:11 "You don't have a clue about what you are doing."
1:12 "Fucking getting in the way!"
1:18 "Look at that dickface."
1:22 "Shut up!"
1:44 "Fucking chase him away!"
2:24 [A young man tries to film the cameraman, who films him back. The young man turns around to leave.]
2:29 "Not fucking filming? Don't leave yet."
2:34 "Hey, if you film me, you should expect that I will film you back. Why are you leaving? His mother's stinking cunt! Fucking get in the way!"

The intolerance is contaminative and symmetrical. If you approve a particular style of behavior (such as pushing and shoving people who want to deliver a speech or attend an event function), then your opponents can do likewise. So Joshua Wong is a loser because he no longer dares to set up a street booth in a local community. He is insincere because he only talks to the press and he dares not interact with regular citizens.

By the way, this type of behavior is not "international standards." The rest of the world know that if such behavior is normalized, then civil discourse becomes impossible.

- Collage of previous instances of Puk Gai acts by Joshua Wong, either literally or figuratively (my favorite is the Hunger Strike).

- I appreciate that the United States has to promote "pro-democracy activists" all around the world in order to protect their own national interests, but surely they could have found a more appealing character than Joshua Wong.

- (Wikipedia) Diving: In soccer, diving is an attempt by a player to gain an unfair advantage by diving to the ground and possibly feigning an injury, to appear as if a foul has been committed. Dives are often used to exaggerate the amount of contact present in a challenge. Deciding on whether a player has dived is often very subjective, and one of the most controversial aspects of football discussion. Players do this so they can receive free kicks or penalty kicks, which can provide scoring opportunities, or so the opposing player receives a yellow or red card, giving their own team an advantage. Diving is also known as flopping, simulation (the term used by FIFA), and Schwalbe (German for swallow).
- Ah, yes, just like the Fake Car Accident Caught on Dash Cam.
- See also: (SCMP) Viral video of man staging fake car accident on Hong Kong street.
- See also: (YouTube) Worst Soccer Divers and Cheaters

- The government officials are shameless because they refused to have close contact with the citizens. The entire event was just another hand-waving exercise in passing.
- The government officials are shameless because they refused to be beaten up by violent street thugs. The entire even was just another hand-waving exercise in passing.

Videos on the Magical Mystery Bus Tour

(ATV) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCHQA9FVI0g (evening news report)

(INT News Channel) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TesQWRrr024 (Kennedy Town, 2:47pm)
(INT News Channel) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-XtvY2fc1I (Kennedy Town, 2:59pm)
(INT News Channel) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpkdnrPG-uM (Kennedy Town: 3:30pm)

(dbc) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lsk84FOX5Q (Kennedy Town) Police make arrest.
(dbc) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jQXqY700H4 (Tai Po) People Power member stages speech about heroic attack on government promotional bus. Interesting part: "These guys won't raise umbrellas. Rainy season is coming. So the next time they come out, we'll be praying for rain. Right or not, citizens?"

(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erKYIqxewMI (Kennedy Town) Government promotional bus passes by in under 10 seconds.
(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaGTsQJCbx8 (Kennedy Town) Hysterical women screaming in front of a mass of "reporters" (=anyone with a camera/smartphone in hand.
(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhupmIIMQMs (Kennedy Town) People suspect that a person is being taken away by the police.
(SocRec) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLrgUvkazvM (Kennedy Town) Counter-demonstrators heap curses at demonstrators. "Captain America" Andy Yung waves British colonial flag for Hong Kong independence.
(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcpA_FX8P04 (Kennedy Town) City University student demonstrator was arrested.
(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWc4CA4ac_k (Kennedy Town) Female student landed in flower bed.

(The Standard) April 24, 2015.

Critics say Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and his top aides should not visit districts during the government's propaganda campaign on the political reform package as it is likely to cause more chaos than unity.

A clear sign of this was in Mei Foo on Wednesday, hours after the package was unveiled, when Leung joined Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor onstage and gave her a jar of honey. Activists swooped in with loudhailers, drowning out speeches by Leung and Lam and forcing them to cut short their visit.

"The situation was quite chaotic and many police officers were deployed," Lam said. "If chaos erupts each time, it will be difficult to announce details on those visits." In such a case, Lam said she and other government officials can only call for people to support the political reform package without approaching them directly. Lam said the government will still go ahead with its large-scale propaganda campaign to "Make it happen" tomorrow.

Pan-democratic lawmaker Leung Yiu- chung said visits by Leung will only cause more chaos and rowdy protests.

Meanwhile, the chief executive said on his blog that Wednesday's demonstrators were like flash mobs and that such protests had become more fierce. He said it showed that activists are afraid of the government directly approaching people. Leung said he will continue with the district visits to communicate with residents at a close range. He said that on Wednesday night, some young people who look like students gave him the dirty finger and used foul language. He questioned if such uncivilized acts can be called democratic. Nevertheless, the government remains willing to listen to the views of different parties, he added.

(SCMP) Hong Kong electoral reform likely to leave pan-democrats out in the cold, analysts say. April 23, 2015.

Under the proposal based on the framework set down by Beijing last year, the 2017 chief executive election will be divided into three stages: pre-primary, primary and, finally, the public ballot.

First, an aspirant must secure at least 120 votes from the 1,200-member nominating committee to enter a primary. The committee is expected to be dominated by Beijing loyalists.

Each nominating committee member can cast just one vote and an aspirant can get no more than 240 endorsements at the pre-primary stage, so mathematically there could be as few as five or a maximum of 10 people qualifying for the primary.

Judging from past experience, getting to the primary stage should not be difficult for a pan-democrat. In the 2011 election for the Election Committee, pan-democrats won about 200 out of the 1,200 seats. The committee selected current Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying in March 2012.

The camp had enough votes on the committee to back Democrat Albert Ho Chun-yan, who ran alongside Leung and Henry Tang Ying-yen.

Moving on to the primary, the potential candidates must fight for more than 600 nominations, or more than 50 per cent of all members of the committee.

Officials have argued that in this round, public opinion will still have a part to play. Candidates would be expected to take part in televised debates, explain themselves over any impropriety or scandals anyone might unearth and face public opinion polls on their popularity. The nominating body cannot ignore the ratings, they say.

Legislative Council president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing said earlier that the credibility of the chief executive race would be challenged if the nominating committee barred a pan-democrat who excelled in the campaign and scored well in opinion surveys from going forward to the public vote.

Developments in the 2012 race pointed to a tricky scenario in which Beijing and the Election Committee could not turn a blind eye to the weight of public opinion.

In the first half of 2011, only a few people doubted that Tang, then the chief secretary and seen as Beijing's favoured choice, would land the top job.

But the jockeying for the position took an unexpected turn in early October that year after Tang confessed to marital infidelity. His popularity plunged.

In February 2012, Tang's popularity dropped even further in the wake of a scandal over illegal structures at his home in Kowloon Tong.

Leung, who enjoyed a wide margin over arch-rival Tang in public support, won the top job in March 2012 with support from 689 committee members.

Under the latest government proposal, nominating committee members will vote on each potential candidate. Each member must cast at least two votes. Since Beijing has capped the number of candidates at three, this means the top two or three potential candidates who win more than 600 nominations can proceed to the public vote.

Pan-democrats such as Kenneth Leung, the legislator representing accountants, has said that even if a candidate from his camp managed to garner enough nominations, he could still lose if there were three pro-Beijing candidates winning more votes.

Ma Ngok, a Chinese University political scientist who studies electoral systems, said the voting arrangement "would make it much easier for Beijing to oust the pan-democratic candidate".

But a government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, says this arrangement would actually create a small chance for a pan-democrat to enter the public vote.

"Supporters of pro-establishment candidate A may want to stop candidate B from the same camp from winning in the primary. They may vote against B and in favour of a candidate from the pan-democratic camp," the official said.

Assuming that about 200 supporters of the pan-democratic camp sit on the nominating committee, an aspirant from the camp would need to bet on the chance that more than 400 committee members with a government-friendly background, who wanted to block a rival of their favoured candidate from going forward to the popular ballot, would vote for the pan-democrat.

But Ma said this sounded more like wishful thinking, because no pro-establishment candidates could afford to let the pan-democrat join the public vote and risk the chance of losing to the latter.

At the public ballot stage, the "first past the post" system will determine the winner in one round of voting. The government has decided there is no need for a runoff if no candidate can win over 50 per cent of valid votes.

The decision to hold only one round went against the international trend, Ma said. "When an aspirant has to go through two rounds even at the nomination stage, I don't see the logic of holding just one round for the public ballot stage," he said.

(Reddit)

     

(Oriental Daily)


Must have for 2017
If constitutional reform fails now, "it will never ever take place."

Internet comments:

- What is missing so far is a unified vision by the pan-democrats of what happens after the reform proposal is vetoed because fewer than 2/3 of the Legislative Council vote for it. The scenario is played out as follows: If more than 2/3 vote for the proposal, it is passed and turned into law. There maybe some demonstrations afterwards but it is a done deal. If fewer than 2/3 of Legco vote for the proposal, the initiative dies and the Chief Executive will be elected by 1,200 electors in the old method. The threat from the government side is that the once-in-a-time opportunity will not arise again. If so, the stark choice is between "Pocket it first" and "Stand still on the same ground forever afterwards."

Of course, there could be other options too, but there does not exist any consensus about alternatives. Alan Leong fantasizes that the five-step process for electoral reform will start again immediately. Why would the other side be interested? They are under no pressure.

A re-run of Occupy Central to apply pressure? The last one went on for 79 days and achieved nothing. Zilch. A new Occupy Central will have to be bigger (Occupy Admiralty/Mong Kok/Causeway Bay as well as Occupy Sha Tin/Tsuen Wan/Tai Po/Tuen Mun/etc/) and longer. At the end of Occupy Central, 80% of the citizens want it stopped. A new round is going to be even more unpopular.

In the absence of a super-weapon that can force the Central Government to yield, it looks like "Stand still on the same ground forever afterwards" seems more and more likely.

- On one side, the argument for voting nay is based upon "Pocket it first" = "Pocket it forever." This is by no means certain. That is, some people will agree while others will disagree. But let us agree do disagree.
On the other side, the argument for voting aye is the failure to do so will end up with the same system of 1,200 electors voting for the Chief Executive. This is a dead certainty. The 5 million eligible voters can let themselves be heard by voting for the nominated candidates, or cast blank votes, or boycott the vote.

- (Speakout HK) An animated film that illustrates that yellow cross-marks stand for "standing still with no progress."

- Not to worry. As Chinese University of Hong Kong professor and Occupy Central founder Chan Kin-man promised, the Chinese Communist Party is on an unsustainable development path and they will collapse on their own over the next few years. Genuine universal suffrage with civil nomination will be a no-brainer. All we have to do is sit and wait for the moment to come. We won't have to life a finger.

- Young people are whining right now that they will never be able to afford a luxurious apartment. In the meantime, they also reject the smaller and affordable apartments are poorly constructed and dangerous to live in. That is why they will never have a dream apartment of their own. Ditto voting for the Chief Executive. They want the luxury version that is not even unavailable in the major nations of the world (United States, China, United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc) and they reject the proposal. That is why they will never get the universal suffrage of their dreams.

- There is no point in waiting for June to come around. Let the pan-democrats veto the reform plan and we can continue the way it is. First of all, it is a lot of cheaper to hold an election among 1,200 electors than 5 million citizens (something like over $100 million). Secondly, both the central government and the pan-democrats will be happy to work the same way as before.

- According to the Basic Law, Hong Kong's "previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years" after the 1997 handover. During this period, Hongkongers can effect some changes in the political system that they hope to keep afterwards. If they can't work out something satisfactory by 2046, their leader will be a Communist Party Committee Secretary appointed by the central government. That would be a genuine one-person-one-vote election, in which the Chinese Communist Party secretary-general is the sole voter. So far, they have wasted 18 years. If they veto this proposal, it may be at least ten years that the next window of opportunity will appear. In all likelihood, it will be more or less the same proposal.

- (Speakout HK) Legal scholar Albert Chen Hung-yee on radio: "If you veto this proposal, then when will you have universal suffrage to elect the Chief Executive? That will be decided by the Chief Executive who will be elected in 2017 by the 1,200-person election committee. That is, he will decided whether to initiate the five-step process for constitutional reform. If this Chief Executive is not particularly enthusiastic about democracy, he may not initiate the five-step process. Even if he initiates the five-step process, it is 99% certain that the Central Government will re-iterate the decision made in 2014. Universal suffrage in Hong Kong will be based upon that decision. That is, Hong Kong will go back to the same old controversies this year, last year and the year before last. Repeated once more. What good does it do for us to repeat this once more? I do not feel that the Central Government will offer us (the pan-democrats) more because we vetoed the proposal this time."

(Ming Pao Canada, Sina.com.hk) April 22, 2015.

At the Hong Kong Film Awards, the band My Little Airport played the nominated song Beautiful New Hong Kong from the film Golden Chicken S. At the end of the song, the piano player added a segment of the British national anthem God Save The Queen that was not in the original version (see YouTube). The live broadcaster TVB cut off this additional segment with a commercial.

Why did the band do this? According to certain speculations, the song lyrics began with "Ever since you left, nobody knows how unhappy I have been." Also: "There is only one kind of homesickness in this world, and that is being without you. This Hong Kong is no longer my homeland." According to some speculation, My Little Airport added God Save The Queen to put an emphatic point about how they missed British suzerainty.

TVB is being accused of engaging in political censorship because they cut from the unscheduled God Save The Queen to a commercial.

On their Facebook, My Little Airport said that "the fact that TVB only aired half the song fucking expresses the sadness in the song."

[Here is the full broadcast segment as shown in mainland China without commercials. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktfrWOnVDRw . God Save The Queen begins at 2:56.]

Internet comments:

- Gala events have rehearsals beforehand so that the director(s) can run the script (including when television commercials are inserted). So one of two things happened. On one hand, My Little Airport did not include God Save The Queen during the rehearsal so that the director went ahead to cut to a television commercial as soon as the last sentence of the original lyrics was sung. On the other hand, My Little Airport included God Save The Queen during the rehearsal but the producer objected because it was not part of the song as sung in the film itself. Are you so naive as to think anything can say/sing anything that they want (such as making a 15-minute thank-you speech to thank your family, your co-workers, your elementary school principal, your music teacher; or telling people to vote for Albert Ho's designated successor in the Lok Tsui district council election in November; or Simon Yam Tat-wah recommending Nu Pharm health productsi; etc)?

- This little piece of shenanigan disrespects the event organizer, it disrespects the audience (both at the auditorium and home) and it disrespects the other performers. However, it is perfectly consistent with the selfishness of the Yellow Ribbon Zombies. For example, this is the same thing as raising a yellow umbrella at the university graduation ceremony.

- You're going to have to have commercials in order for TVB to air events such as the Hong Kong Film Awards, the Miss Hong Kong Pageant, the Tung Wah Charity Show, etc. When do the commercials appear? Not during the announcement of the nominees/winners and not during the thank-you speeches. You tell me when.

- An awards show is scheduled to run two to three hours. It is not always possible to schedule things exactly, because some people will give long thank-you speeches. When the show is running overtime, the director has to find some way of catching up. Is it so surprising that the director would cut off an unscheduled playing of God Save The Queen?
- When Eddie Pang and Tang Wei were accepting prizes, time was already running tight. They were cut off during their respective speeches. What does My Little Airport expect with their shenanigan?
- In 2008, Paw Hee-ching was cut off in the middle of a speech for Best Actress Award at the Hong Kong Film Awards.
- A few years ago, the "Celestial Empress" Joey Yung got her song cut off by TVB because the program was running too long.
- A performer who wants to inject unscheduled political messages won't get called to perform much in the future. This was unprofessional conduct.

- Cutting away right before an important development? Have you heard of the Heidi Game? On November 17, 1968, the Oakland Raiders beat the New York Jets in an American football game by a score of 43-32. With one minute go, the score was 32-29 in favor of New York. The NBC Television Network decided to break away from the game to air the television film Heidi. The rest was history. Eventually there would be special commercial breaks known as TV timeouts during all action stop in the field while the commercials are played.

- The Hong Kong Film Awards should have gotten ATV to broadcast the show instead of TVB. Over at ATV, they have no advertisers left, so there won't be any commercial interruptions.

- We love Her Royal Highness (HRH) because we used to get an official holiday on her birthday (not the actual date, but some other holiday that went by the name The Queen's Birthday). After the handover of Hong Kong, that holiday became Buddha's birthday.

- Did you know that they played God Save The Queen at every film showing during the British colonial era. They did not play before the film starts, because they know that the local Chinese can be very disrespectful. Certainly you cannot expect them to stand up and show respect. Instead they played the song after the film ended and everybody got up to leave. At least, that could be considered as standing at attention. Those who are complaining about the TVB commercials never seem to complain about God Save The Queen in movie houses, or at the end of the television broadcast day.

- The original lyrics of God Save the Queen were:

God save our gracious Queen!
Long live our noble Queen!
|God save The Queen!Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us.
God save The Queen!

In Hong Kong, the local Chinese sang these Cantonese lyrics.

個個揸住個兜,
刀叉都生晒銹,
污垢又有。
朝朝都當阿茂,
晚晚會發晒吽,
又要睏路旁,
又要踎,
苦困冇盡頭

[Everybody is holding out their bowls (note: prison inmates waiting for their meals)
The knives and forks are rusty
Full of dirt and filth.
Every day we are exploited
Every night we are dazed
Because we'll have to sleep on the roadside
Or else we'll have to squat
There is no end to our suffering.]

Alternate versions are:

個個揸住個兜
踎喺街邊乞食
真係異常

[Everybody is holding out their bowls
Squatting by the roadside to beg
This is really extraordinary]

個個揸住個兜
踎喺天星馬頭
等下就有

[Everybody is holding out their bowls
Squatting at Star Ferry
Just wait and it'll come.]

The Hong Kong Independence Party youngsters will be very distressed that this was what ordinary Hongkongers thought of the British colonialists.

- When God Save the Queen is played, the audience has to stand at attention. Therefore, the audience would have lost the opportunity to use the toilet during the commercial break.

- Why is My Little Airport so nostalgic about being second-class British citizens (see British National (Overseas))? For example, as of April 6, 2014, all BNO's (who are mostly Hongkongers) coming to the UK for longer than six months will be required to pay a "health surcharge" in order to access NHS benefits offered to permanent UK residents.

- Do they think that the Brits would appreciate this display of loyalty? No, the Brits would simply be astonished by this idiocy.

- World Bank database:

China GDP
2010: 5,930,502,270,414
2011: 7,321,891,954,608
2012: 8,229,490,040,100
2013: 9,240,270,462,047

United Kingdom GDP
2010: 2,407,933,767,368
2011: 2,591,846,115,476
2012: 2,615,946,487,602
2013: 2,689,454,886,797

Of course, it is never just about GDP. The difference is that in the United Kingdom, they have the international standard of genuine universal suffrage in which their Prime Minister candidates are determined by civil nomination, just like the President of the United States.

- Storm in a teacup (otherwise titled "Shooting at an airplane in my little airport"). [Note: "Shooting at airplane" means "masturbating" in Hong Kong Cantonese dialect.]
- Yet another international Chinese Communist conspiracy ...

- Did CY Leung make sure that My Little Airport's God Save The Queen wouldn't be aired? Well, Chief Executive Leung is micro-managing the length of a song on television, he would be a very busy busy man.

- Why are young people so nostalgic about the British colonial era? Precisely because they know nothing about it. My Little Airport started out as a two-person band at Shue Yan College around 2001. At the time of the handover of Hong Kong, they were about 13- or 14-years-old. They don't know a lot.
- Daniel Ma, the leader of the Hong Kong Independence Party, is 22-year-old now. At the time of the handover of Hong Kong, he was about 4 years old. When he went up to tell ex-Governor Chris Patten about missing him so much, the fat man smirked and asked, "Can you really remember me?"

- Alternate WHAT IF scenarios:

- What if My Little Airport sang the Chinese National Anthem (March of the Volunteers) instead in order to be nostagic about the Hong Kong Handover Ceremony 1997 (see 7:30 into the video followed by the image of a grinning Jiang Zemin).

- What if Hero won the 2002 Oscar Best Foreign Film and the director Zhang Yimou gets on stage to sing the Chinese national anthem?

- Would the American national anthem Star Spangled Banner be acceptable (see Whitney Houston)?

- What if My Little Airport sang the Nazi marching song Erika (or Auf der Heide blht ein kleines Blmelein) and TVB broadcast it in full?

- What if My Little Airport led the audience to sing The Internationale. It can be quite moving (see, for example, the 1978 Soviet Union National Congress, the movie Reds or the Chinese rock version by Tang Dynasty?

- What about Anita Mui's Bloodstained Glory? On one hand, it is a very popular Chinese patriotic song about Chinese soldiers from the Sino-Vietnamese war. On the other hand, Mui is using the song in conjunction with images from the June 4th 1989 movement. This can please both sides as well as displease both sides.

- What if the Hong Kong Police Choir were to sing La Marseillaise?

- Under the circumstances, anyone saying/singing anything extraneous to the scheduled program would be fucking cut off PERIOD END OF DISCUSSION

- Everybody is talking about everything else except the song itself. Have you tried listening to it? It is really boring and undistinguished. If such a song could become one of the five finalists, there is not much future in the Hong Kong music scene.
- I got up and went into the kitchen a few seconds into the song. I didn't miss any British anthem.
- The British national anthem was out tune. Was that an intentional insult?

- How come they get to see the God Save the Queen segment in mainland China but not in Hong Kong? The answer is that mainlanders wouldn't even recognize the song if they heard it.

(Wikipedia) The Greed of Man.

The Greed of Man is a Hong Kong television series first broadcast on TVB Jade in 1992. The story, spanning three decades from the 1970s to the 1990s in Hong Kong and Taiwan, addresses various social and financial phenomena of the times, from triad violence to corruption in the Hong Kong stock exchange. It featured a top roster cast, including veteran TVB actors Adam Cheng, Damian Lau and Sean Lau. The series is also well remembered for a Hong Kong stock market cultural phenomenon called the "Ting Hai effect".

(Wikipedia) Ting Hai Effect

The Ting Hai effect, also known as the Adam Cheng effect, is a stock market phenomenon in which there is a sudden and unexplained drop in the stock market whenever a film or a television series starring Hong Kong actor Adam Cheng is released. It still remains as a popular topic among stock brokers, years after the television drama The Greed of Man was broadcast in Hong Kong in late 1992. The effect is named after Ting Hai, the primary antagonist in the drama, who was portrayed by Cheng.

1990s

2000s

2010s

The Ting Hai effect has led to Adam Cheng attracting much attention from the press. Whenever a new film or television series starring Cheng is about to be broadcast, some stockbrokers and investors in Hong Kong anticipate a drop in the market.

While some investors have argued that the effect is no more than a series of coincidences and amounts to nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy, the phenomenon is regarded by some as more than coincidental. The French bank Crdit Lyonnais wrote a report on it.

(Apple Daily) The first episode of the re-run of The Greed of Man had an average audience rating of 5.6%. It was shown on pro-establishment TVB at 12:15am Hong Kong local time. This compares to the prime-time(8:00pm-10:30pm) average audience of 0.5% at pro-democracy HKTV.

(CNBC) The TV show that makes a stock market drop. April 17, 2015.

When this Hong Kong actor appears on the silver screen, watch out for a possible selloff in the Hang Seng. The index's recent rally to seven-year highs could abruptly pull back on Tuesday after the television drama "The Greed of Man" from the local TVB network reairs in Hong Kong at 12:15 a.m. local time (12:15 p.m. Monday ET).

First aired in 1992, the show stars Adam Cheng in the role of "Ting Hai." The character is a stock market speculator who put a negative face on the financial world with his triad involvement. The local stock market promptly plunged 20 percent over the following few weeks, kicking off a phenomenon called the "Adam Cheng effect" or "Ting Hai effect."

In the two decades since, nearly every time the 68-year-old Cheng has appeared in a movie or television showwhich has been more than 30 timesthe Hang Seng declined. Most recently in 2013, the index fell nearly 3 percent in the week after the premiere of his movie "Saving General Yang." Even with the April 13 announcement of the reshowing of "The Greed of Man" there was a 1.6 percent decline in the index the next day.

The Hang Seng and the Shanghai composite have recently rallied to seven-year highs, driven mostly by hopes for government stimulus to combat slowing economic growth. "There are things going on that defy logic," Lance Roberts, general partner at STA Wealth Management, said of the recent rise in Asian stocks. "The Chinese have a gambling mentality anyway. This plays into the whole mentality they have about risk-taking."

Chinese futures sold off in after-hours trading Friday on news of coming government regulations to expand short selling and limit over-the-counter margin trading. "China is a market that is idiosyncratic," John Canally, investment strategist and economist at LPL Financial, said of the futures' decline on Friday. "At any given time you could get a ... dose of good news or bad news and those tend to even out."

Representatives of Citi and Standard Chartered in Hong Kong said they did not take the "Adam Cheng effect" seriously. CLSA research reports on the phenomenon have not found a logical cause for the effect.

The actor said that if the effect was really true, he would have generated a fortune already, and financial professionals could have retired already, according to a report by the mainland Chinese paper People's Daily.  For example, the article noted that Cheng's appearance in Hong Kong television dramas in 2005 and 2006 did not cause a selloff in the Hang Seng.

If there is any rational explanation, it would be that the actor's reappearance is a reminder of how volatile and crazy speculation in the stock market can be. Besides the dramatic presentation of the global 1973 stock market crash, the drama's self-appointed stock market "god" tells Cheng's rival Fong Chin-bok the key to winning in the stock market is "to leave early." Whether or not that advice is solid, Fong wins out in the end.

Apart from the so-called Ting Hai Effect, The Greed of Man was popular because of the character of Ting Hai. Here is the summary at Wikipedia (Chinese):

Ting Hai was good friends with Fong Chun-sun, but beat Fong up viciously over a misunderstanding over the 17-year-old girl Lo Wai-ling. The girl merely wanted Fong to listen to her complaints. For example, all she wanted was to go home to live with her uncle, but Ting wanted her to be the mother to his four sons. She said: "I was so tired and sick of this. All I wanted was to go back home. Instead Ting went out and brought a pizza home, because he insisted that was what I wanted. He just never listens to what I say. And then he went and beat up my uncle and smashed his store ..."

Fong was unconscious after the beating, and lost his family fortune. After Fong recovered, Ting Hai showed up again and beat him to death over yet another misunderstanding. Ting Hai fled to Taiwan when he was sent to prison. At prison, he got into more trouble and killed someone else. Meanwhile his four sons formed a triad gang and managed to get their father back to Hong Kong. But Ting Hai had to stand trial for the murder of Fong with all the physical evidence being against him. His sons hired an expert doctor to falsely testify that Ting had terminal cancer. Ting was released and made a fortune in the stock market, until Fong's son destroyed the fortunes of the Ting family.

Ting Hai is a physically strong man, he was a freestyle martial arts champion (he beat Lo Wai-ling's cousin to death in the boxing ring), he is brash, he is barbaric, he is peremptory (that is, he insists on immediate attention or obedience in a brusquely imperious way) and he rationalizes all his actions in fantastical ways.

(Wikipedia) Psychopathy

Psychopathy is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by enduring antisocial behavior (including both isolationist and gregarious social behaviors), diminished empathy and remorse, and disinhbited or bold behavior.

The triarchic model emphasizes three observable characteristics:

With all this background information in place, you now get to see how Ting Hai can be used to psycho-analyze the Umbrella Revolution in Hong Kong.

- (The Stand News) April 20, 2015.


"Ting Hai is violent and brash, he usually think that he is being reasonable ... these characteristics are consistent with what the Hong Kong people think the Chinese Communists are like" from Ma Kit-wai's <Television and cultural identification> (1996).
The Fong family: Upright, westernized, grassroots, law-abiding, civilized, honest, reasonable
The Ting family: Villainous, sino-cized, triad gangsters, law-breaking, barbaric, corrupt, violent

- (Local Press) TV dramas were key to the formation of Hong Kong identity. Benjamin Garvey. April 24, 2015.

TVB is showing reruns of The Greed of Man (大時代). Its a 40-episode drama with a stock market theme broadcast by TVB in 1992. The re-airing of the drama coincides with the recent sharp rise in local stocks.

When I read the news, I immediately recalled that the show had been mentioned in the book about Hong Kong identity that I was reading.

Written by CUHK academics, it cited The Greed of Man as an example of how TVB-produced television dramas had stigmatized mainlanders less after the Sino-British Joint Agreement in 1984: for political and commercial reasons, after the signing of the treaty that signified the inevitable return to Chinese sovereignty of the entire colony, TVB began to emphasize the similarities between Hongkongers and mainlanders and downplay the differences its earlier dramas, made in the 1970s and early 1980s, had highlighted.

Dramas in the 1970s had portrayed Hongkongers as capitalist and affluent and Chinese as poor and uneducated, suffering under the authoritarianism of the communist party. These depictions engendered a local Hong Kong identity.

The Greed of Man, the story of which spans the 1970s through to the 1990s, ostensibly avoided any identity politics.

Fong, the storys hero, becomes rich with investments and eventually takes revenge on the family of the man that caused the death of his step-mother and three sisters, his childhood friend Ting.

According to scholar Eric Kit-wai Ma, most Hongkongers watched the series without seeing any political messages, with the ups and downs of the stock exchange allegory for the struggle between the protagonists.

However, some viewers saw allusions to the anxieties Hongkongers were feeling in the run-up to the 1997 handover, especially after June 4, 1989.
The honest Fong was seen as a Hongkonger; the violent and corrupt Ting a personification of the Chinese Communist Party.

The names of Fongs family members were common in Hong Kong; those of Tings were not and even had negative connotations.

Fong was cultured; he liked Western music and his father studied in the West; Ting was stubborn and uneducated but with a penchant for quoting traditional Chinese proverbs.

Ting persecuted and killed with a false righteousness but said he was honorable. He exercised patriarchal control over his sons, eventually ordering them to commit suicide by jumping off the top of the stock exchange building after theyd lost all their money. (Ting also jumped but survived and spent the rest of his life in jail.)

The Hong Kong versus the nasty CCP narrative might have been what just a few viewers, eager to find political meaning, saw.

Scholars say mass media is key to nation-building and the formation of a national identity. Printing presses in Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries, using different vernacular languages, created different imagined communities.

These communities saw themselves as belonging to the same virtual world, sharing the same thoughts. Their members felt some kind of fellowship with each other, even though they would never meet once in their lives. Eventually, these communities led to the creation of national boundaries, nation states and nationalism.

A comparable identity-building process occurred in Hong Kong in the 1970s through television dramas as the city grew increasingly affluent.

As both the colonial and Beijing governments refrained from stoking any kind of nationalist sentiment (CCP supporters had invoked Chinese nationalism during the 1967 riots), Hong Kong media companies took on the role of creating a collective identity, but one based on culture, not politics.

This local imagined community was reinforced by differences in lifestyles, daily routines, career patterns, aspirations and values in the colony and on the mainland. The authoritarian nature of the Chinese government added to the sense of separateness.

These divisions created a social and psychological boundary, with Hongkongers encounters with mainlanders tending to strengthen rather than dilute the division.

The 80-episode drama The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, (網中人) first broadcast in 1979, included a character nicknamed Ah Chan (阿燦). He was a mainlander who had been separated from his family for 20 years after theyd left for the colony and he stayed.

He joined his family in Hong Kong but didnt fit in as he didnt understand Hong Kongs social norms. Moreover, he wasnt well educated and he was lazy, sleeping at work and staying in bed until afternoon; he threw bottles out of the windows of high-rise buildings; he wanted to become rich but didnt make any effort; he stole from the jewelry shop he worked in.

Following the airing of the series, Ah Chan became a label Hongkongers used to refer to country bumpkin immigrants from the mainland. According to the scholar Ma, the television show effectively initiated a stigmatization of mainlanders that persisted for decades.

Hong Kong identity emerged as mainlanders were portrayed as outsiders and loyalty to the Chinese nation was suppressed.

The media started downplaying local identity after 1984. And since 1997, they have been promoting Chinese national identity and suppressing local identity.

Nowadays, with mainstream Hong Kong media increasingly controlled by Beijing, Hongkongers, particularly the young, are going online to consume media. An imagined community is forming on Facebook and Whatsapp. The local Hong Kong identity thats been suppressed since the handover is reemerging there.

- The Yellow Ribbons as Psychopathic Personalities:

"I don't care about majority opinion. Most Hongkongers are Hong Kong pigs anyway, and their opinions count for nothing."

"If your parents don't agree with your work for the Revolution, then break off relations with them permanently."

- Toleration of unfamiliarity and danger

" I don't care what it takes. I just want civil nomination for the Chief Executive. I don't care if the Basic Law doesn't provide for it. If the Basic Law is getting in the way, just get rid of it then. I only want genuine universal suffrage."

"Don't quiz me about the details of the August 31st decision of the National People's Congress Standing Committee. I don't need to know that. All I need to know is that I must have genuine universal suffrage in the form of civil nomination because it is the international standard."

"Hong Kong independence means war with China? We'll worry about that when the moment comes, but let's get there first."

"War with China means that water, food and electricity will be cut off? We'll worry about that when the moments comes, but let's get there first."

- High confidence and social assertiveness

"I am so uninterested in what other people have to say. All I know is that I am fucking right."

"I know that there are less than 100 of us demonstrating here, but we know that we represent the people of Hong Kong."

"Do not tell me about public opinion poll results. They're all lies. Everybody that I know agrees with me (or else I cut them off)."

"The ten of us are demonstrating here because the citizens are angry and they can't make a living anymore."

"If you disagree with me, then you must be a paid agent of the Chinese Communists."

"We are the Valiant Warriors of the Hong Kong City-State. With bare hands, we shall vanquish the People's Liberation Army. It doesn't matter if they have the guns, cannons, tanks, airplanes and nuclear bombs. We are Valiant and we will win because the people of Hong Kong will stand with us."

- Problems with planning and foresight

"Let's scale the wall outside Government Headquarters and take over Civic Plaza."

"Let's lay siege to Government Headquarters."

"Let's break into the Legislative Council building by force."

"And then what? Why are you asking such silly questions? Are you a leftard (=leftist retard) with all your considerations and concerns? Do as the Nike slogan says: Just Do It!"

"If Chief Executive CY Leung won't resign immediately, then I will mail my estimated tax payments in the form of 2,000 small-amount checks."

"What does it take for us to stop Occupying the streets?
- Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 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
- A formal and thorough investigation of police violence must be conducted
- The proposed constitutional reform package must be withdrawn
- The National People's Congress must rescind its August 31st decision about the 2017 Chief Executive election procedure
- 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 shall be formally named Civic Square and be open to the public
- The Hong Kong Golf Club course in Fanling shall be paved over to make way for public housing
- The original Star Ferry/Queen's Pier shall be restored
- The teaching of putonghua must be extirpated from the educational system
- The third runway at Hong Kong International Airport must not be built until the need actually arises
- The one-way visa program for mainlanders to re-united with their families in Hong Kong must be stopped effectively immediately
...)

- Lacking affect and urge control

"Are people's livelihood being affected by Occupy Central/Causeway Bay/Mong Kok? Why are you telling me this? Just tell those people to get a job. Or go on the dole. Or something. All I care about is that I get genuine universal suffrage here and now."

- Demand for immediate gratification

"We want genuine universal suffrage (defined as the international standard of civil nomination of the Chief Executive) here and now. After that happens, I'll surely come up with something else that I have to have immediately."

- Poor behavioral restraints

(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.
0:03 (Public announcement system): Friends, this is the appeal from Scholarism. Our action tonight has non-violence as the principle. Non-violence as the principle.
0:14 (slogan chanting) Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Escalate action. Escalate action. Surround Government Headquarters. Escalate action.
0:31 (female voice): Everybody continue ahead. Tonight we will surround Government Headquarters and the Chief Executive's Office. Right now, we are crossing Tamar Park towards Lung Wo Road.
0:42 (Police): To avoid causing physical harm to people, please do not push forward.
0:51 [shield being passed from the rear towards the front line people]
0:52 (Demonstrator): Evil cop! Evil cop! Evil cop! Evil cop!
1:00 (Demonstrators) Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress.
1:10 (Demonstrators) Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road!
1:26 (Police): Will the people up front not charge at the police defensive line? There are many people on the stairway. Do not push forward. 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 for a little bit, we will use our own method to get out.
1:45 (Demonstrator): Will the police show some restraint and retreat!?
1:46 (Police): Please do not charge at the police defensive line. Thank you for your cooperation.
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! ...
[Subtitle: So much for the Federation of Students' plea "to stick to the principle of non-violence and not to provoke or charge at the police."]


(Here is a TVB screen capture of an Occupy Mong Kok demonstrator announcing: "I feel that the law comes second.")

- Lacking empathy and close attachment with others

(Occupy Causeway Bay apologized to the local residents and businesses who have been "inconvenienced" by the continual road blockage by taking a collective bow in front of the media.

Some people lost income, jobs and businesses. To Occupy Causeway Bay, this was just minor inconvenience. They have no idea how other people live.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vxUt5QW-yk
0:01 (VO)  It's after 7am.  Citizens walk from Admiralty Centre across the pedestrian overpass to go to work at Government Headquarters.  Some demonstrators have used metal barricades and garbage cans to set up a road block to prevent entrance.  This those who have to get to work from there very unhappy.
0:28 (Male)  I want to go to work one day at a time.  Don't talk to me about those things.  I didn't go to work for four days in order to avoid you people.  To avoid you people.
0:38 (VO) A janitor had to go through here to work at Government Headquarters.
0:42 (Elderly woman)  Hey, hey, don't pull.  I have to pass through.
0:43 (Male)  Grandma, are you going to work?
0:45 (Elderly woman)  I have to eat.  Make way. Don't hold.
0:48 (Rico Lo)  Grandma, at this time, everybody ...
0:50 (Elderly woman)  Do not call me Grandma.  Grandma has to eat.  You don't have to eat.  Yes.  You let me through.  I want to go to work.
0:55 (Male)  The decision to let people leave but not to enter was made by everybody.
0:58 (Elderly woman)  A person has to breathe.  A person lives between breaths.  Why don't you spend your time well each day?  Why do you have to cause chaos in Hong Kong?
1:06 (VO) Ultimately, the demonstrators let Grandma go through by herself.  Afterwards someone else wanted to go through.
1:13 (Female)  Everyday, I go down this road to go to work.  I am just going to work as usual.  This is a very small and humble request.  I want to man my job post.
1:25 (VO)  The police showed up and wanted to remove the barricades.
1:29 (Crowd)  Not allowed to remove!  Not allowed to remove!
1:33 (VO)  A group of contract security guards also asked the demonstrators to let them pass through.
1:34 (Male)  You give us a path to go through, alright?  Okay?
1:38 (Rico Lo)  We really cannot do that.
1:39 (Male)  Then there is no way.  We have to go to work.  The security guards pushed the metal barricades back and forced their way through.
1:45 (Rico Lo)  Our goal is to paralyze Government Headquarters.  If one person gets in, it means that the Government Headquarters will be back in operation.  Whether we let someone through is another matter.  If you remove these metal barricades, then does it mean that you can also remove all the other metal barricades around Government Headquarters?  This is something that we cannot accept.

- (Oriental Daily) October 7, 2014. About a dozen Chinese University of Hong Kong students gathered outside the University Station MTR exit. They knelt down in a row with the banner: "We are forced to disrupt people's livelihood because the people can't make a living anyway."

- Disdain of close attachments

(extracted from DarkKeiKei.blogspot.hk)

A movement has to have the numbers in order to become powerful. Apart from cultivating an elite of valiant resisters, it is also necessary to provide a gradual path to popularize the resistance. Thus, the general stages of such a path are:

Become interested in -> Beginner level -> Intermediate level -> Advanced level -> Elite status.

As you go up the ladder, the number of persons at each level necessarily decreases.

In the context of the resistance movement, the stages are:

"Hong Kong pig" -> Pay attention to politics -> Demonstration march -> Assembly -> Stay and defend -> Resistance -> Valiant resistance

I support valiant resistance, but there has to be a process by which a "Hong Kong pig" evolves into a "valiant resister." If you curse out anyone who adheres to "peace, reason, non-violence, non-foul language," you will chase away many of those have so far progressed to join demonstration marches and assemblies.

So just keep spreading the message of valiant resistance. Those who are capable of thinking and who frequently read information from the Hong Kong City-State may even grow up and become valiant resisters.

- Use of cruelty to gain empowerment

Reclaim/Restore Tuen Mun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FymgsG_ck1A (Apple Daily news report)
0:34 Mother and daughter being harassed
1:06 PrizeMart worker: "A whole group of people came in. They kicked our gate. They cursed people and told people to go back to China, the parallel goods traders to go back to China. But our customers ... most of our customers are Hongkongers."
1:22 The male customer at Chow Sang Sang jumped up and said: "I am a Hongkonger! ... You even make noise when a Hongkonger wants to shop!"
1:50 demonstrator says that he agrees that the method was wrong, but he wants to know where can they assemble to demonstrate without police presence.
2:02 A young man walks up and kicks the luggage of a woman, then flees
2:33 Protestors move barricades onto the road to stop buses from departing. A demonstrator gives double middle-fingers salute to bus passengers.
2:49 Old man wearing Tuen Mun FC uniform is kicked from behind. Another demonstrator tells him not to pretend to be kicked.
2:57 Tuen Mun Park music-playing grandpa Kuen is attacked by demonstrators just because he was pushing a handcart carrying his audio-visual equipment.
3:37 Police arrests a demonstrators who pleads for mercy.

- Exploitative tendencies

"When a demonstrator does something in the name of freedom and democracy, he should be given a lenient sentence (such as a three-month probation) because his intentions were noble even if his actions were ill-considered." 

"Young people are the pillars of our society, so you must not ruin their futures with criminal records."

May 2013 Federation of Students demonstration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJXYdirwsDY.

6:11 Male student in grey t-shirt shoves female student in white t-shirt towards a uniformed policeman in a human chain. High-pitched female shrieks.
6:55 Female student in black t-shirt keeps pushing policemen, shrieking and filming with one hand.
7:57 Male student applies bear bugs to two female students. Female screaming: "Sexual molestation."
9:11 Female student elbows female police officer in chest and the latter tumbles down.

- Defiance of authority

(Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzPMLm7DqGg In this video, the demonstrators use foul language to curse a very passive police force. The YouTube user titled this video "The media won't show you this."
0:32 Go away, police! Your mother was unfortunate to give birth to you!
0:37 (mass chorus) Trash! Trash! Trash! Trash! Trash! Trash!
0:45 Damned policemen!
0:48 Fuck your mother, evil cop!
1:06 Crawl inside (the garbage can)!
1:10 Fuck you!
1:32 The police are shameless! Shameless! Shameless! Shameless! Shameless! Shameless!
1:41 Eat shit! Shameless!
2:09 (A policeman gestures and speaks) I can't fucking hear you! Your mother!
3:28 Fuck your mother!
3:32 Fuck your mother!
4:55 Stinking cunt! Stinking cunt! Madam, your husband doesn't fuck your cunt! He won't, fuck your mother!
5:30 I fuck your mother!)

- Destructive excitement seeking

(Example: Assault on the Legislative Council)

(Example: Occupy Central, 10pm on October 15, 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k71Y557ZuDw. Pro-democracy demonstrators quickly moved some obstacles onto the intersection of Pedder Street and Connaught Road, they blocked traffic for a brief period of time, they took videos of themselves and then they took off in a hurry before the police showed up.)

(Hong Kong Economic Journal) November 7, 2014.

Scuffles broke out at the Occupy protest site in Mong Kok late Wednesday night after a man described by police as an aggressive protester provoked officers with the flashlight on his smartphone. Police tried to arrest him, but several other protesters rushed over to stop them, sparking multiple rounds of confrontation, Ming Pao Daily reported Friday. Eventually, police issued warnings and used pepper spray to disperse the crowd. Police said they arrested four people.

Chan Shu-fai, convenor of the police powers monitoring group of the Civil Human Rights Front, said he contacted the four people who were arrested and found that two of them were injured. Two other people who were not arrested were also injured, Chan said. One of them suffered a serious injury to his left leg and couldnt walk. Chan said the police not only abused their rights, but were violent in dealing with the protesters. He said the police had also failed to explain to the protesters why they were going to use pepper spray, thus angering the crowd.

Chief Superintendent Steve Hui of the Police Public Relations Branch said in a press briefing on Thursday that the police severely condemned protesters who provoked on-site officers by directing a flashlight from their smartphones at them, hampering them in carrying out their duties.

However, an Apple Daily report on Friday suggested that police were the first to use flashlights against protesters. During their attempts to clear Lung Wo Road on Oct. 15, some officers also aimed powerful flashlights at reporters and the video cameras of television cameramen, hampering the journalists work, the report said.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XJre8AYmHY (Apple Daily, November 7, 2014)

(Apple Daily) April 16, 2015.

According to one of the policeman who was shone upon, they were separating the pro-Occupy and anti-Occupy groups from each other. At the time, he was facing the pro-Occupy people, and the defendant shone a flashlight at him, causing him to be unable to see well. But since he had to hold his position, he could only move his head to avoid the light. At first, this policeman said that the shining continued for 10 to 15 minutes. When challenged, he changed that to 1 to 2 minutes.

The prosecutor also summoned inspector Lee Kwok-yiu to testify. Lee said that he observed the defendant shining a flashlight at his colleagues. Although the policemen did not complain to him, his professional judgment was that the defendant was obstructing police business. The defendant also called upon other demonstrators to do the same. Lee said that he warned the defendant. The police tried to move in to make an arrest, but the defendant fled. On November 22, the defendant was arrested in the Occupy Admiralty area.

(Ming Pao) April 16, 2015.

In court, a police video was shown. At the time, a policeman approached the defendant and asked loudly: "Are you causing trouble?" The defendant replied repeatedly: "I am just shining the flashlight at your camera, not at your colleagues." At the suggestion of other demonstrators, the defendant turned off his flashlight for a while. Then he turned it back on again. A policeman said aloud: "You are shinning the flashlight at my eyes!" The defendant replied: "I am shining at your arse?" Then he said excitedly: "I am indeed shining the light at you! Are you frustrated?" Finally Lee issued an warning to the defendant.

(The Standard) Police take dim view of flashlight. April 17, 2015.

Waiter Ken Lo Kin-man denied two charges of obstructing police when he pointed his mobile phone flashlight at four officers. Kowloon City Magistrates' Court heard that 28-year-old Lo turned his flashlight on the officers on November 5 last year at the Mong Kok protest zone on the junction of Nathan Road and Argyle Street.

Deputy Magistrate Lam Tsz-kan questioned whether the charges are valid because the police cordon did not move forward during the protest. Even if Lo pointed the device at officers, would it have obstructed them in their duties, Lam asked.

The prosecutor replied that a 40-second flash would be sufficient to do so, and advice had been sought before the charges were laid. In a video clip played in court, Lo claimed he was pointing at a police camera, not the officers.

Inspector Li Kwok-yiu said he saw Lo flash the light at his colleagues, adding the action could dazzle officers making it difficult for them to execute their duties. Li said he warned Lo that he would be arrested. But when questioned by the defense as to whether the flashlight affected him, Li said it didn't as he was standing at the rear of the cordon. However, he saw some of his colleagues turn their heads aside to avoid the light. When Li tried to arrest Lo after his final warning, he failed to do so because he was hindered by the crowd.

Lau Ming-lun, a police officer at the front of the cordon, said the light temporarily blinded him but he could not walk away. The hearing continues today.

(Cable News) April 17, 2015.

28-year-old Ken Lo Kin-man showed up in court yesterday wearing a surgical mask. The magistrate found him not guilty. When Lo walked out of court, he took off his surgical mask and told the press that he was satisfied with the verdict. He also said that he concurred with the magistrate's criticisms.

The defendant was alleged to have used a smartphone flashlight twice to deliberately interfere with police operations in Mong Kok on November 5, 2014. He was arrested and charged with two counts of interfering with police business. Magistrate Lam Tsz-kan pointed out that the actions of Lo Kin-man were unnecessary, uncivilized and provocative. As such, the actions created inconvenience for the police officers on duty. However, Lo was only using the flashlight on an ordinary mobile phone for a brief period of time. On one occasion, he was somewhat far away (note: 1.5 meters) from the police officers. Therefore, Lo did not affect the police for a long period of time. The magistrate said that at the time, the police were keeping two different groups of demonstrators holding opposite opinions apart, and they were stationary at the time. Therefore, the actions of the defendant did not interfere with police duties. Accordingly, the magistrate found the defendant not guilty. The defendant was released immediately.

(Ming Pao via Speakout HK) By Wat Wing-yin. April 19, 2015.

I have always believed that the great thing about our town is the excellent rule-of-law.

I have always thought that our island is better than the Grand Nation on account of the perfect legal system.

Over the past few months, I have seen case after case ended up as withdrawal of charges, or suspended sentences, or community service, or not guilty ... the various law-breaking activities during Occupy Central are going unpunished. One after another, lawbreakers are returning to society scot-free with the blessing of the judges. Nobody needs to pay any price for 79 days of destruction. Nobody is punished. The blind goddess was never about fairness or justice. The goddess simply doesn't want to witness what is transpiring.

In another recent court, case, the 28-year-old waiter used a mobile phone flashlight to shine at two police officers on duty. He was charged with interfering with police business. The magistrate said that the defendant used ordinary lighting equipment to shine ten seconds at two policemen who were standing still. Therefore, this was not interference with police business. The magistrate found the defendant not guilty.

If a student were to shine a mobile phone flashlight at the teacher for ten seconds during class, do you think that he would be punished? Definitely. It does not matter how long the shining lasted, because the action was offensive.

If a citizen were to shine a mobile phone flashlight at this magistrate for ten seconds in court, do you think that this citizen would be allowed to leave?

The issue is not about the 10 seconds. It is about the action itself. This time, someone shined a flashlight on a law-enforcement agent. Next time, someone else is going to blow a whistle next to his ear. How do you expect the police to enforce the law?

The policeman in uniform stands for the law. If you offend him, you are offending the law. One second is already offensive, and ten seconds is obviously provocative.

I don't know much about the law. After reading about these recent court cases, I understand the law even less. I thought that justice was written in black-and-white. But in the end, it turns out that some magistrate comes out to interpret justice. We can no longer scorn at the mainland courts for their rule-of-man. We may have a sophisticated legal system, but in the end some guy just says, "Release the defendant" and that's that.

(Post852) April 19, 2015.

Wat Wing-yin is so wrong!

First of all, it is not against any law to shine a flashlight at a teacher in class;

Secondly, shining a flashlight at a judge in court is contempt of court; shining a flashlight at a policeman is not against any law given that we don't have anything on the books about contempt of the police;

Thirdly, if Wat Ying-yin had bothered to read the magistrate's statement, she would have learned that the defendant was not interfering with police business. At the time, the police weren't even really doing anything (they were just looking at the crowd while claiming to be conducting crowd control). Therefore, the defendant was not obstructing the police. At the same time, the magistrate criticized the defendant for acting in a provocative manner. Thus, even though the defendant was found not guilty, there was probable cause for the charges and therefore the defendant had to pay for his legal fees.

...

The reason why the rule-of-law is being challenged and trampled in this town is due to poor-quality commentators such as Wat Wing-yin. They know clearly that they know nothing about the law, but nevertheless they proceed to spout nonsense. That is why the rule-of-law is in trouble here.

Finally, it must be pointed out that a uniformed policeman does not represent the law, because the police are merely law-enforcement agents who are given certain authority under the law. The police have been heard to say "I don't know anything about the law." How can a group of people who know nothing about the law come to represent the law?

The representatives of the law are the courts and the judge. After these "representatives of the law" make their ruling, people like Wat Wing-yin completely disrespect their decisions and make ignorant comments. She is the one who said "offending him is offending the law." Is she showing how to slap her own face?

Internet comments:

- What was the 28-year-old waiter trying to accomplish by shining the flashlight at the police? Does he want the police to leave, so that the pro-Occupy and anti-Occupy people can fight it out? Hey, this situation isn't even one in which the Evil Police are beating the valiant warriors of the Hong Kong City-State. The police were only trying to keep the peace!
- When the police leaves and the anti-Occupy people attack, the pro-Occupy people will call the police uncles for help.

- Inside a court room, it is even contempt of court to take out a mobile phone. I am not talking about shining the flashlight at people. I am talking about holding a telephone conversation or taking a photo.

- Is there a photo of this magistrate? I will wait for him outside the courthouse. When he leaves work, I will rush up and shine a flashlight into his eyes. According to this magistrate, this may be unnecessary, uncivilized and provocative, but it is not against the law. And I am not obstructing his work as he is just leaving.
- I'll bet that he'll call the police. When a citizen is harassed, they call the police. When the police are harassed, who can they call?

- The verdict is about right. When someone administers a flying kick to the chest of a policeman and only gets 200 hours of community service, shining a flashlight into the eyes of a policeman should get a not-guilty verdict.

- Was this magistrate elected by universal suffrage? Or was he just appointed to the bench?

- I completely agree with the verdict. Movie stars have flashlights pointed at them everywhere that they go, and that is not a crime. So when the same thing happens to the police, it is not a crime either.

- Next time, the police should bring a searchlight to a demonstration site and shine it at the demonstrators at a close distance. Magistrate Lam Tsz-kan has already said that this is okay.

- I don't want to argue about movie stars or policemen with you. I want to know: What would you do if someone shines a flashlight at your eyes? What would you do?

- It is wrong to shine a flashlight into someone's eyes. The magistrate criticized the action, but he declined to find the defendant guilty. Why? Because the magistrate has to consider the identity of the defendant. In their eyes, the law applies only to some people. We cannot criticize the magistrate's decision, because that would be contempt of court. We can criticize the police though, because we have freedom of speech in Hong Kong.

Rewind the video tape player:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufyykTsEiQM The police runs an ID check on the individuals in the unlawful assembly on XMAS day in Mong Kok and this woman (later identified as Amy But Wai-fan) has no ID. Due to her intransigence, the police put her under arrest. The police woman informs her that she is being arrested. The woman refuses to move unless the police woman releases the hold on the arm. The police woman says that handcuffs will be used, but the woman kept talking about releasing the hold on the arm. The woman eventually enters one police van but was taken to a second van. The van does not leave immediately. Now see the follow-up news stories below.

(Apple Daily with video) December 27, 2014

On December 27, the 19-year-old woman Amy But Wai-fan came to meet the press in the company of legislative councilor Lee Cheuk-yan, who heads the Labour Party and the Confederation of Trade Unions. According to her, when she entered the police van, she fell and was then pushed against the window, leaving bruises on her arm. While in the police van, two plainclothes police women slapped her in the face, ear and hands and cursed her out. This lasted between 5 to 8 minutes. They threatened to file additional charges against her if she dares to file a complaint against the police.

Amy said that she was "very scared" and kept screaming "Don't hit me." She demanded a medical examination and asked for the badge numbers of those who hit her. Instead, she was threatened with being charged with assaulting police officers and interfering with police duty. She did not dare to complain. She left after her family members brought her ID down to the police station. Yesterday, she went to get a medical examination at the hospital. The doctor said that she had a bruise mark on her left arm and a swollen left ear.

Amy had been previously arrested during the Causeway Bay clearance. She said that she joined the Shopping Revolutionaries on Xmas Eve. Chaos broke out around midnight when someone claimed to be "keeping guard over a bottle of milk" (Yes, that is what is printed in the newspaper!). At the time, she was standing on the sidewalk. Amy said that the police beating and threats were white terror. She called for more victims to come out.

(SCMP) Protester, 19, claims police officers beat her after arrest on Christmas Eve  December 28, 2014.

A 19-year-old pro-democracy activist has alleged plain-clothes officers slapped her in the head until she bled as she was driven to the Mong Kok police station just after midnight on Christmas Eve.

Amy But Wai-fan told her story to the media yesterday, saying she had decided not to report the case to the Complaints Against Police Office (Capo) - the force's internal investigation unit - as she had "no confidence" in it. Her ear was still red and there was a bruise on her left arm.

But said she was one of 500 people on a "shopping tour" protest - in which crowds walk slowly to disrupt commercial areas - on Shantung Street. She was taken to a police car by five plain-clothes officers after she failed to show her identity card. She alleges the officers assaulted her in the car on the way to the station. "They slapped me three or four times until my ear bled," she said. "When I asked for their officer numbers, they threatened to charge me with police assault and obstructing police work if I made a complaint."

Comment: The existence of the above YouTube video is not known to many people. Look at the video again and remember that the police van did not leave immediately and hundreds of people were still milling around when the woman was allegedly assaulted by 5 police officers in the police van for five to eight minutes. Also, you may wonder why it was an "unlawful assembly." As Amy But said, she and others were keeping guard over "a bottle of milk" on the road. Like dropping coins, this is a ploy to block vehicular traffic to achieve a mobile Occupy effect. The police will issue a warning (banner/megaphone) first, then run an ID check if the individuals refuse to move on.

Here are some more Amy But videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cNAaSABfTg February 9, 2014. Amy But sings a Beyond song. Really awful singing. Really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etxh0ZnIA_U On October 18, 2014, Ming Pao had a video featuring Amy But teaching people how to use thick iron wires to reinforce the wooden pallets used in street barricades.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw9ggo8Uzjg On November 24, 2014, Amy But was interviewed by radio channel DBC about what happens after the forthcoming Mong Kok clearance.
(Amy But) We are thinking ... If they come to clear the area, we will assist the bailiffs to carry out the court order. We will pack up our own stuff materials and move elsewhere. So we will not clash with the police. We will directly follow their directions. We will leave.
(Male reporter) On the day before yesterday, the Occupy Central trio announced that they may voluntarily leave after the beginning of December. How do you look at this?
(Amy But) Eh, if they leave, they leave. We, the power of the people, will not leave until we win the hearts and minds of the people. Eh, if we have this determination, it doesn't matter if they leave.
(Male reporter) Do you think that are splits within the Occupy Central trio, the Federation of Students and Scholarism?
(Amy But) Eh ... so it is. There are some splits. Because at the start, they led us to occupy areas. They announced class boycotts. Occupy areas. Until now. They have never come out to Mong Kok to see us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfMXdEnbmG8 On December 24, 2014, Love Hong Kong held a rally in Mei Foo. A number of counter-protestors showed up, including Amy But.
1:08 (Amy) Trash! Trash! Trash! No conscience!
1:18 (Amy) What are you filming? What the fart is this to you? Trash! Trash! Trash! Trash! I have freedom of speech. Trash! Trash! Trash! Trash!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMfumJKxZEw On February 9, 2015, a case of theft of a iPhone 4S in which Amy But is suspected by the police.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN1x-MSS2Yk On February 28, 2015, Amy But leads the slogan chanting by Shopping Revolutionaries on Sai Yeung Choi Street South, Mong Kok.

Fast forward:

From Occupy Mong Kok village mayor Amy:

Urgent clarification

I, Amy, did have contact with the Evil Police. But because I don't want people to misunderstand, I am no longer in contact with the Evil Police. I have deleted the telephone numbers of the relevant Evil Police. I admit that I had contact with the Evil Police earlier, but I did not provide any information about the demonstration and other matters to the Police.

Furthermore, someone said that I was associated with drug dealers and I introduced fellow warriors to them. I admit that, but I will no longer have contact with the drug dealers.

I promise here that if anything like this happens with me Amy again (having contact with the Evil Police and drug dealers, but not including the Police Public Relations Branch), I will automatically withdraw from the Umbrella Movement and the Shopping Revolutionary Group.

Respectfully, Amy.

P.S. I have met with my Yellow Ribbon lawyer and will go through the legal process to sue the Evil Police for misbehavior and criminal assault! In the Umbrella Movement, I am a victim. I will not communicate with or pass information to the Evil Police. This applies to those policemen that I got to know in the Occupy zone.

I have contact with the Police Public Relations Branch because I want to make applications in the future to hold peaceful demonstrations! Do not forget our original intentions! Let's fight for genuine universal suffrage.

Video: SocREC Rio Kwan https://www.facebook.com/socrec/videos/1124159597610970/, ( https://www.facebook.com/HKUmbrellaRevolutionGeneration/videos/545082775629939/?fref=nf )in which Amy But reads her statement but she is completely drowned out by demonstrators who yelled at her for being a police informer.

Internet comments:

- When the Shopping Revolution first started, I told people to be wary of this woman. At the time, the fellow revolutionaries thought that I was being paranoid ...

- "I promise here that if anything like this happens with me Amy again (having contact with the Evil Police and drug dealers, but not including the Police Public Relations Branch)." What's the difference?

- Here is the photographic evidence - Amy But speaking with the police pigs.

- This is not an "urgent clarification." This is a "confession."
- She funneled information to the police and she bought/used drugs. Therefore she is being booted out of the Shopping Revolution.
- She sold us out a long time ago.
- No, I am convinced that she is an undercover policewoman.
- It is one thing to rat us out to the police, but to connect us with drug dealers?
- I have seen her speaking to police officers right in front of us. Even the stupidest person would know not to divulge the relationship in public! She is just a fool. She is unlikely to be a police informer.
- Get lost! Fuck your mother, Miss But!

- She's a People Power supporter (see photo of her with Legislative Councilor and League of Social Democrats Leung Kwok-hung and People Power member Tam Tak-chi). Therefore, it is only expected that she would be a police informer.

- Not so. During the Occupy Mong Kok period, the organizations took pity on her, gave her supplies and let her speak. But she wanted to show off and she is a natural born traitor. So she betrayed every single organization. For example, she hung around the People Power tent but she also helped Civic Passion to dismantle the tent.

(Bastille Post) April 19, 2019.

A friend sent me a YouTube link: https://youtu.be/d2T51_g88Mo .

This is a video of a Lingnan University music concert with the title of "Blood & Sweat Attack - salute to the Hong Kong Police: Fuck The Police." The video covers 3:35 of a song whose lyrics are just swearing at the police. The phrases "Damned policeman, fuck your mother" and "Do you have special privileges? Are you fucking overbearing?" I was amazed with this video.

The comments section was a battle ground between Yellow Ribbons and Blue Ribbons. Nevertheless some people at least tried to comments with a little bit of detachment. For example, the commentator Jojo wrote: "People will have to grow up eventually. The worst fear is that when you do wake up a few years later, you find that you missed a lot that you couldn't catch up anymore. This is a standard way for the weak and vulnerable to show their discontent. But the problem is that what do you change as a result of this? Instead of staying weak and vulnerable, why don't you make yourself strong and powerful? Then you will have the ability to change society. Today, you are 20 or 30 years old and you have a dozen of so audience members listening to your song. By the time that you are 30 or 40 years old, nobody is going to listen anymore. Young men, you should treasure your time. You should strive and learn to become strong and powerful. When that time comes, you can change anything that you want. The students appreciate you now, because they know that you are not qualified to compete with them. Your competitiveness is pathetically poor. This cannot be your sole choice for existential value. You don't need to make a fool of yourself like this. You should strive harder."

Internet comments:

- Lyrics

Fuck the police. The police are running wild.
When I see them, I wish that they drop dead. May their entire family die.
The reputation of the Police was ruined by these damned policemen
You defecate you defecate. You drop on the ground and you blame it on the soil.
If you take a video, they will bark; if you shine a camera light, they will break your leg.
You ass-lickers, you are so pompous.
Many people want to uncover your background, invite your mother for a chat as to why she didn't use a condom when she fucked and you came about as a result.
She would be better off having a prostitute daughter instead instead of having your as a tortoise son.
Everybody can see that only hooligans join the police force.
Don't tell me. If you are in trouble, don't call the police.
It is the duty of the police to protect the citizens,
but the police beat up the citizens. The law enforces knowingly break the law.
Therefore these evil policemen should be executed immediately.
If they openly beat people up in a dark corner without suffering any consequences.
The Hong Kong Communists call this rule-of-man, the police lead the way to destroy rule-of-law.

Damned policemen, fuck your mother. (repeat 8 times)

Do you have special privileges? Are you fucking overbearing?

Damned police!

Damned policemen, fuck you mother. (repeat 8 times)

- Young people in Hong Kong are in despair because they know that they will never be able to buy an apartment given their salaries. Without an apartment, they will never be able to get married and have kids. However, singing a few more refrains of "Fuck the police!" isn't going to bridge the gap.

- These young wastrels think that they are so awesome. They contribute nothing to society except to write songs to curse out the police. If the police were to vanish for 24 hours, these young wastrels won't dare to walk the streets because angry citizens will thrash the hell out of them. The only reason why this hasn't happened is because of police protection. When they sing songs like these and get challenged by the Blue Ribbons, what do they do reflexively? They dial 999 to summon the police uncles to protect them. When the police take longer than 3 minutes to appear, they whine about slow police response time.
- You piece of Blue Ribbon shit! You should go back and keep working your tail off to pay off your mortgage.

- FUCK THE POLICE
FUCK HK GOVERNMENT
FUCK THE CCP
FUCK EVERY FUCKING CRAZY CHINESE
- You forgot: D7689 (=Fucking fuck CY Leung!)
- The Hong Kong police canines eat shit!!!
- Brothers unite! Let's fuck the police and their mothers together!

- What kind of university student music concert is this? If these people are the future pillars of society, we are all fucking screwed! We are better off with the elite education of the British colonial era than the more open education system today.

- Just rubbish. They think that they look swell, but their lyrics are just dreadful. They just want to release their steam on somebody else. Why do you want to pick on the policemen's mothers?

- Freedom of speech is at stake here. There is nothing wrong about saying FUCK  YOUR MOTHER! There is no law against that. Just go to any construction site, and the construction workers say that all the time.

- Yeah, I watched the video and I listened to the lyrics carefully. This song is just a stream of invectives. It is content-free. You know what the fuck I'm saying. Like you know. Yeah. You know.

- Someday these guys are going to have to leave school (even if they don't earn a degree) and find a job. Let's hope their prospective employer finds this video.

- For the academic year 2013/2014, the Hong Kong University Grants Committee gave a total of $15,386,500,000 to the eight universities. This money comes from the taxpayers of Hong Kong. It is lovely to to see that some of the money enables Lingnan University students to hold music concerts like this one.

- What is so big deal? Here is NWA's Fuck Tha Police. In America, they have freedom of speech to say Fuck Tha Police. So can Hongkongers.
- The American police shoot unarmed citizens (see, for example, South Carolina). Should the Hong Kong Police be allowed to do the same? You know, international standards.

(SCMP) University of Hong Kong plan to enforce student visits to mainland China sends ripples across campus. April 19, 2015.

A policy under which University of Hong Kong undergraduates will spend time on the mainland as part of their degree has sent ripples across the campus amid fears some students will lose out. The policy, to be introduced in phases until 2022 and which may be mandatory, was revealed by HKU vice-president Professor Ian Holliday at a dinner with the student union on Friday.

While some education figures backed the plan in principle, there were concerns about the impact on students unable to visit the mainland. Some of the 220 students at the dinner said Holliday told them all undergraduates would have a "mainland experience".

"I was shocked to hear about it," union president Billy Fung Jing-en said. "Our main concern is his wording. He said 'If you don't agree with the policy, then please don't come to HKU'." But education-sector lawmaker Ip Kin-yuen and HKU law Professor Simon Young Ngai-man were broadly in favour.

Holliday, a Briton who has been at HKU since 2006, was not available for interview. Through an HKU spokeswoman, he said he would "continue to meet with students for their opinion". "It is our aim that by 2022, 100 per cent of our students will have the opportunity and a rich choice to have learning experiences outside Hong Kong, at least once overseas and once in the mainland," the spokeswoman said.

The plan, backed by HKU's senate, is understood to have two parts - a "Greater China" stream covering the mainland and possibly Taiwan and Macau, and an international stream for the rest of the world. Activities may include classes, internships, field trips or professional training. "Whether it will eventually become mandatory will depend on further consultation and deliberation," the spokeswoman said.

On Friday, Holliday said students who may not be able to enter the mainland - such as those denied entry after participating in last year's Occupy protests - would be exempt.

Ip, a pan-democrat, backed the idea of HKU students spending time overseas, but he called for clarification of what a "mainland experience" would mean. "Whether it should be compulsory is debatable," he said. Young said the idea would help students understand "one country, two systems". "But there needs to be flexibility especially for students barred from entering the mainland," he said.

Marcus Lau Yee-ching, 19, a first-year journalism student, said: "I don't know if there's a hidden political agenda behind the programme.

"Not all students want to go to China; but if there are resources for every student to go overseas, that's a great thing as you can be immersed in a new culture."

(Oriental Daily) April 18, 2015.

... When a student stated that he was unwilling to engage in student exchange in mainland China, vice-president Ian Holliday said: "If you don't want to go to the mainland, don't come to HKU." This caused an immediate uproar.

(Hong Kong University) HKU Vice-President Professor Ian Holliday meets student representatives on matters related to widening students learning experience    April 20, 2015.

The following was Vice-President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning) Professor Ian Hollidays remarks made at the start of the meeting today (April 20) with students from Hong Kong University Students' Union and other student societies.

Id like to begin by expressing my sincere thanks to HKUSU and other students from across the campus for agreeing to meet with Albert (Dr Albert Chau, Dean of Student Affairs) and me this afternoon to continue the conversation we had at the High Table Dinner on Friday (April 17) evening. There are two key points I wish to make upfront:

First, I apologize unreservedly for my remark indicating that if students do not wish to go to China they should not come to HKU. This was clumsy and misleading. I now formally retract this statement.

My intention was to say something much more positive. On the one hand, we believe our students should be given opportunities to undertake a wide variety of learning opportunities outside Hong Kong we are strongly committed to enhancing international student mobility. On the other, we recognize that all students have choices, and we want the choices offered by HKU to be as widely known and transparent as possible. Our overall aim is for students to have a very clear sense of the learning pathways available to them here at HKU.

Second, on February 3, the University Senate endorsed an Academic Development Proposal (ADP) for 2016-19. It had already been discussed and endorsed by all 10 Faculty Boards. Our ADP sets out an ambitious vision for the future defined by three core commitments to internationalization, innovation, and impact.

Under the internationalization pillar, HKU undertakes by 2022 to provide 100% of undergraduate students with the opportunity to have both an overseas and a China learning experience. This is an overarching aim to which the University is committed. Id like to stress that the focus is on opening up a wealth of non-local learning experiences. Nothing in the ADP requires students to undertake an exchange programme either overseas or in China. Rather, were building a wide array of learning experiences: exchange, yes, but also experiential learning, service learning, internships, research attachments, and so on.

Driving this commitment is our belief that to be globally competitive all of our students should have the chance to develop a global mindset plus knowledge of China. The 100% commitment is for the University to open up quality learning opportunities overseas and in China for all of our undergraduate students. The ADP does not state that these learning experiences are mandatory for students. In working out the details of a concrete plan over the next 5-10 years, we are keen to work as closely as possible with students in all Faculties and Departments.

The students of the University have benefited from a wide variety of overseas experience over the years, gaining broader perspectives, new ideas, and heightened sensitivity to different cultures. For examples, some students worked on research projects in universities in the United States, led architectural projects in our HKUs Shanghai Study Centre, gained valuable experience as engineering interns in Shenzhens industries, taught English in Mynmars remote villages, built houses in rural Chile, and designed bridges and kindergartens in remote villages in Mainland China. In addition to the large-scale HKU Worldwide Scheme (which sends hundreds of students for overseas exchanges),  Faculties and Departments have already included internships and learning experience outside Hong Kong as part of their curricula, e.g. Chinese Medicines 1-year placement; Social Sciences "China Study" field trip; Education language and cultural immersion programmes; Earth Science field trips in Cyprus; and overseas field trips also for BBA(IBGM), Geography students and students in other disciplines. 

Therefore, the idea is to extend the scope of this learning experience to cover all students, to provide them with as much flexibility and alternative choices to suit their academic need and interest. They can have classes, internships, field trips, immersion or professional training programmes etc., overseas and in China.  HKU teachers will be involved in the design/teaching/supervising of most of these programmes. The University will continue to discuss with students on the design and arrangements of these programmes and seek their views.

Internet comments:

- I think young people of Hong Kong should never go to visit mainland China. They will be brainwashed the second that they step across the border. Our young people must be kept pure and uncontaminated. They must not be subjected to mental rape.
- Going to mainland China just once is worse than entering the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor?

- Recommended uniform for HKU students on their once-in-a-lifetime compulsory visit to mainland China.

- Harvard University, Yale University, Cambridge University, etc all have exchange programs with major mainland Chinese universities. How come Hong Kong University can't do that?

- Ian Holliday wants to help the HKU students to learn more about mainland China. Right now, China is heading towards becoming the top economic power in the world. If the HKU students want to elevate their own competitiveness, they need to understand mainland Chinese culture better. The exchange program is designed to achieve this. With mainland experience, HKU students will be better equipped than others. Of course, the students don't want to be competitive. When they grow up, they want to grow organic vegetables in northeast New Territories.

- Ian Holliday said: "If you don't want to go to the mainland, don't come to HKU." If Ian Holliday doesn't want to bend to the will of the students (as represented by HKU Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en who was elected by something like 20% of the students), he shouldn't come to HKU!
- It is high time that Holliday should go back to Great Britain for an extended holiday!
- They forced Vice-chancellor Tsui Lap-chee out before, and they can force Ian Holliday out now. All in the name of freedom and democracy, of course.
- Ian Holliday was not elected by one-student-one-vote. Therefore he must leave.

- Hong Kong University graduates expect to say at their job interviews: "I don't have a return home card. I don't intend to ever get one. I don't ever want to step foot on the mainland." When the job is growing organic vegetables in North East New Territories, mainland travel is not a requirement. But when the job is investment banking, you probably need to travel to your Shanghai headquarters once a week or more.

- A number of Hong Kong students have their "Return Home Cards" canceled, or are otherwise barred from entry into the mainland. Because this is so unfair to them, the university must also bar their entire student body from visiting the mainland in the interest of maintaining fairness and equality.

- At this time, the promotion of Professor Johannes MM Chan (former dean at the HKU Faculty of Law) to HKU vice-president is being considered. Professor Chan cannot even travel to Macau, much less than mainland China. So how is he going to conduct any "exchange"?

- How come it is alright to be an exchange student with any other country on earth, but making one visit to mainland China is like pushing you in front of a firing squad?

- Young people in Hong Kong should really go to mainland China. This way, they can see Hell On Earth in person. Otherwise it will just be an urban legend.

- Young people in Hong Kong should study overseas. Attending university in Hong Kong is too restrictive due to the proximity to mainland China. You need to go out and expand your vision.
- Study overseas? Can you afford it? Universities in Hong Kong are subsidized by the taxpayers.
- So what if you study overseas? When you come back to Hong Kong, you are most likely still required to go to mainland China for work-related reasons. Avoidance isn't going to solve the problem.

- You will learn nothing by going to mainland China, except defecating/urinating in public. These HKU students are better off going to Australia (or anywhere else) on exchange because it will be more relevant for their futures.

- So you go to Australia as an exchange student. You meet an Australian counterpart.
"Hello, where are you from?"
"I'm from Hong Kong."
"Where is that?"
"It is next to mainland China."
"Is it a country in its own right?"
"No, not really. At least not yet."
"Then which country does it belong to now?"
"China."
"Oh, in other words, you are Chinese. I am really interested in China. Tell me more."
"I don't know anything about China. I've never been there, and I don't ever want to go there."
"Oh, I am sorry to hear that ..."

- Some students don't want to visit the mainland, so they must be exempted from doing so. Some students don't want to pay back their student loans, so they must be exempted from doing so. Some students don't want to take exams, so they must be exempted from doing so. Some students don't want to pay for their purchases at Seven Eleven, so they must be exempted from doing so. Some students will eventually get a job but they don't like doing work, so they must be exempted from doing so ...

- Whom would you rather work for as an intern? Apple in Silicon Valley? Or Huawei in Shenzhen? The choice is obvious.
- So you go to Apple, and they want you to devise a marketing plan for China. But it turns out that you know absolutely nothing about the market structure or customer behavior there and you are even resistant to wanting to know anything. Do you have a future there?

- This is much ado about nothing. The plan will not be implemented until 2022. According to Occupy Central founder and Chinese University of Hong Kong Sociology Department professor Chan Kin-man, the Chinese Communist government will have collapsed by then and the nation now known as China will no longer exist. So the whole thing is just a fantasy, like the Third Runway at the Hong Kong International Airport.

- (Passion Times) HKU Campus TV conducted an online poll of 1,424 undergraduate students (98% Hongkongers, 2% non-resident students). With respect to exchange programs, 78.3% said that they don't want to go to mainland China. 96.7% said that they want to go to foreign countries (that is, anything except mainland China). Of the 33 mainland students, 25 said that they want to go to mainland for exchange purposes. When asked whether the university administration can mandate the destination of exchange programs, 96.84% opposed. 98.74% said that the university administration should consult the students for their opinion first. 99.3% said that the university administration has not given enough time for consultation this time.
- What kind of online survey is this? Did the students get an email saying: "If you want to oppose the mainland exchange program, then fill in this survey?"
- They don't want to go to mainland China to study. But they go there all the time right now as parallel traders selling their iPhone 6's to the Huaqiangbei dealers.
 -
劃地為牢,固步自封. This refers to someone who draws a line on the ground to designate a self-imposed prison. Or, the frog who builds a well to live in.
- (HKU) During the 2013-2014 academic year, there were 15,560 undergraduate students attending Hong Kong University. So this online poll has a response rate of 1,424 / 15,570 = 9%. There is no indication that this is a random sample that represents the full student body.
- This poll is almost as amusing as legislator Kenneth Leung's poll of his Accountancy functional constituency. He contacted the entire community of voters and got a 4% response rate. Then he said that because he contacted everybody, he now has a fully representative sample of voter opinion. You have to question whether he is a competent accountant because he knows nothing about audits (which are just like surveys).

Q1. Do you agree to advance constitutional reform in accordance to the Hong Kong Basic Law and the August 31st resolution of the National People's Congress Standing Committee?
62.25%: Agree
21.19%: Disagree
16.44%: No opinion

Q2. Should the Legislative Council pass the constitutional reform so that there is one-person-one-vote for the 2017 Chief Executive election?
70.68%: Yes
15.19%: No
14.13%: No opinion

Q3. If the majority public opinion wants to pass the constitutional reform, should the Legislative Councilors vote follow?
71.27%: Yes
13.58%: No
15.15%: No opinion

Q4. Do you agree with the opposition in boycotting the consultation rounds and tying down their votes even before seeing the details of the proposed constitutional reform are even known?
18.96%: Yes
63.20%: No
17.84%: No opinion

Q5. If the opposition vetoes the constitutional reform proposal, will you vote for them in the upcoming Legislative Council and District Council elections?
22.47%: Yes
53.49%: No
19.91%: It depends
4.13%: No opinion

(The Standard) Backing for package climbing, finds poll. April 20, 2015.

Support for lawmakers to pass the political reform package that adheres to Beijing's August 31 decision has been steadily rising, according to a survey by a pro-establishment group. The New Territories Association of Societies interviewed a total of 1,300 residents on three occasions between March 12 and April 17. Around 55 percent initially supported the package before the number rose to 58 percent and then 61 percent. Backing for a chief executive election that is in accordance with the Basic Law also rose from 66 percent to 67 percent and then to 72 percent, the survey found. The association's president, lawmaker Leung Che-cheung, said the trend shows people are more realistic about reform.

(RTHK) FTU survey says majority want reforms passed. April 19, 2015.

The pro-Beijing Federation of Trade Unions says nearly 80 percent of the public want the government's reform package to be passed by the Legislative Council. The group surveyed nearly 3,500 people of voting age, and also found that four out of five respondents opposed filibustering tactics employed by pan-democrats in the council. Lawmaker Alice Mak urged people to vote out legislators who don't act in their interests, and says her party will help people to register as voters.

(Wen Wi Po) April 21, 2015.

Hong Kong Island Federation of Associations interviewed 3,045 citizens by telephone between April 2 and 15.

Q1. Should the Chief Executive election follow the principles of the August 31 resolution of the National People's Congress Standing Committee?
66.5%: Agree
26.5%: Disagree
5%: Neither agree nor disagree
2%: No opinion

Q2. Do you want to see one-person-one-vote for the Chief Executive election?
90%: Yes
3%: No
5%: Neither agree nor disagree
2%: No opinion

Q3. If the majority of public opinion favors passing the proposal, what should the Legislative Council do?
68%: Vote for
22%: Vote against
8%: Neutral
2%: No opinon

Q4. If the constitutional reform is not passed so that there is no one-person-one-vote for the Chief Executive, should those who vetoed the legislation be held responsible?
60%: Yes
28%: No
10%: Neutral
2%: No opinion

Q5. If the opposition parties veto the legislation, when do you think the next chance will be?
43%: Not in the foreseeable future
30%: Within the next ten years
25%: Hard to say
2%: No opinion

(TIME) Jimmy Lai. The 100 Most Influential People. By Common. April 16, 2015.

A hero in Hong Kong

There are those who, when given the keys to wealth and the perks of the Establishment, choose not to rock the boat because of the backlash they might face. Jimmy Lai is not such a person.

Though he went from a child laborer in a garment factory to owning his own clothing line and media company, he rejected complacency and the status quo when he chose to criticize a powerful government and support a primarily student-led democracy movement in his beloved Hong Kong.

His courage in the face of the firebombing of his home, as well as his subsequent arrest for his role in challenging the ruling order, resonates around the world as an inspiration for those seeking self-determination. It was this kind of bravery that inspired me to mention the Hong Kong protests in my Oscar acceptance speech, and that reminds all of us to always strive to speak truth to power.

Internet comments:

- Stranger than fiction, indeed. First, Fortune chose Joshua Wong as one of the world's greatest leaders. Now TIME magazine has picked Jimmy Lai as one of the most influential people in the world. The world of the late great western media is going batshit crazy., but it is not reality-based.

- The TIME article is written by Common, who "is a hip-hop artist and Academy Award winner." With his qualifications, he is obviously an expert in Hong Kong affairs (see Glory). Therefore the rest of you Hongkongers should just STFU and just digest his pearls of wisdom.

- Is Common even aware that Jimmy Lai and his entire family hold British passports?
- Doesn't Common know that the firebombing was most likely a staged act?

- Jimmy Lai managed to bring about Occupy Central late last year. His American paymasters are very happy with his wonderful work. So they have just handed him a dog biscuit in the form of a TIME mention as reward. Good doggie! Sit! Jump!

- If the Localists have their way, the new Hong Kong City-State will have no room for 'locusts' such as Jimmy Lai. He was born in China, and that is an original sin that will automatically disqualify him from City-State citizenship.

- If Jimmy Lai is so influential, then why does his flagship newspaper have these paid circulation numbers (source: Hong Kong Audit Bureau of Circulations)?

July - December 2014: 162,824
January - June 2014: 182,731
July - December 2013: 188,534
January - June 2013: 210,961
July - December 2012: 223,116
January - June 2012: 243,890
July - December 2011: 251,246
January - June 2011: 279,990
July - December 2010: 285,675
January - June 2010: 294,569
July - December 2009: 297,474
January - June 2009: 306,124

And which newspapers are more influential than Apple Daily? Try these verified free distribution newspapers:

AM730, October - December 2014: 423,161
Headline Daily, October - December 2014: 848,861
Metro, October - December 2014: 382,665
Sky Post, October - December 2014: 498,675

Based upon these figures, isn't Charles Ho (owner of Headline Daily) much more influential than Jimmy Lai?

P.S. And as Jimmy Lai got more involved in the "student-led democracy movement in his beloved Hong Kong," his newspaper Apple Daily published more and more biased reports. As a result, circulation kept falling. Today, Apple Daily is associated with the saying, "If you believe in 10% of what is published in Apple Daily, both of your eyes will go blind." At Internet forums, you see a post with an eye-grabbing headline. You see the source is Apple Daily and you immediately switch away. There is no point in wasting your time. Apple Daily no longer employs reporters, they only have fiction writers on staff.

- Thanks to Jimmy Lai's brilliant management of Next Media (including Apple Daily/Next Magazine), a number of employees will be laid off in an austerity move. Lai came up with the idea of giving employees a 4% raise in salary while at the same time demanding each department to reduce expenses by 5%. This will be accomplished by laying off a number of employees while giving a raise to those who are retained. The department has the discretion to decide who gets laid off and who gets a raise. Localist self-determination and also easy as pie. But a number of departments decided to freeze their own salaries and save some jobs. Since they decided not to give themselves raises, they can't complain. The Next Media Union asked senior management to share the pain with 10% salary cuts, but there was no response. Now that's called brilliant management.

- Hong Kong libel laws lead to many Internet users to use nicknames for the subjects. Thus, they will say Direction News instead of Oriental Daily. For Apple Daily, the nickname is "Poisoned Fruit" which reflects the poisonous nature of its biased reporting. When such is your reputation, are you influential?

- Why is the Next Media group so successful? In the latest court case (see Oriental Daily), the magistrate describes the case file against Next Media as being "as thick as a book." There were 128 court rulings against Next Media (including Apple Daily, Next Magazine, Sudden Weekly, Face, Sharp Daily, etc) for violating the <Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance>. Unfortunately, the court has fined the group only between $1,000 to $50,000 on each occasion when the maximum fine could be as much as HK$ 800,000 plus one year in jail. Given the disparity between the amounts fined and the potential profits, Next Media will obviously keep rolling on. Next Media is also embroiled in a number of other court cases, such as reporting Bawang shampoo as carcinogenic so as to cause a dive in that company's stock prices, interviewing a double-murder suspect inside a detention center so as to prejudice any later court trial (the judge warned the jurors: "Don't read Apple Daily!"), etc.

- Jimmy Lai has a lot of influence ... on the share prices of his company Next Media.

Share prices for Next Media had been dropping steady until December 15, when Next Media announced that Jimmy Lai was resigning as Chairman/Chief Executive Office. Shares soared by 10.9% immediately, because people finally saw hope.

- Jimmy Lai is indeed influential because he has influenced many people (through his political donations). Money talks. In the history of Hong Kong politics, nobody has given more money to politicians than Jimmy Lai (HK$ 40 million in two years).

(SCMP) What's the fuss about Jimmy Lai giving out political donations to Hong Kong pan-democrats. July 23, 2014.

What's wrong with making massive donations to political parties and anti-government groups? Nothing! So I am puzzled by the media brouhaha over Apple Daily boss Jimmy Lai Chee-ying's alleged donations worth more than HK$40 million to his pals in the pan-democratic camp over a two-year period.

Readers of my column know I am no fan of Lai and Apple Daily. But really, this united front effort looks so, hmm, amateurish.

According to leaked files, Lai donated over HK$40 million to pan-democratic parties and politicians in the past two years. This included HK$10 million and HK$6 million to the Democratic Party and Civic Party respectively, and HK$3.5 million to Anson Chan Fang On-sang's group, Hong Kong 2020. Labour Party leader Lee Cheuk-yan and League of Social Democrats chairman "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung received HK$1.5 million and HK$1 million respectively, while Occupy Central co-organiser the Reverend Chu Yiu-ming was given HK$400,000.

So what? It sounds like Lai just keeps on giving to the same people. Back in 2011, private files were similarly leaked detailing Lai's multimillion dollar donations to pan-democratic figures, including Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun.

The fact is that in Hong Kong, we have very loose political donation laws which allow donors and recipients to avoid disclosing who gives what to whom. I am sure if we had a tougher law, we would find obscene amounts of donations from the who's who of the city's tycoons to the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong and other pro-Beijing groups.

The Lai story, unfortunately, doesn't deliver the real juice but only insinuates it - "foreign interference" through Lai to the pan-democrats. The only evidence was that Lai gave US$75,000 as a service fee to former US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz over business ventures in Myanmar and that Lai was in e-mail communication with former Democratic Progressive Party leader Shih Ming-teh in Taiwan. Stop the presses, an e-mail exchange!

If I were Lai, I would be handing out donation cheques on a soapbox in the middle of Victoria Park next time.

- (Oriental Daily) This just in! Today, former Next Media chairman Jimmy Lai and his wife had dinner with "Traitor Lee" Martin Lee, former Chief Secretary Anson Chan and Civic Party chief Audrey Eu and her husband. Afterwards, the party of five guests entered the chauffeur-driven car to leave. It is illegal to carry six passengers in a car with a capacity of five. Of course, the two senior barristers (Lee and Eu) wouldn't know anything about abiding by the law.

(SCMP) Hong Kong Federation of Students elects Nathan Law as secretary general. March 23, 2015.

Former Lingnan University student union chief Nathan Law Kwun-chung was last night elected as the new secretary general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students.

Law won with 37 votes from the 53 student representatives from seven tertiary institutions qualified to vote in the annual election. His only rival, Jason Szeto Tse-long, secured 14 votes. One voter abstained and there was one invalid vote. Founded in 1958, many of the federations leaders have been at the forefront of social movements. Some have become politicians and others liberal academics.

Law, who studies Cultural Studies at Lingnan University, was one of three student leaders at the heart of the Occupy Central protests who were banned from flying to Beijing in an attempt to press their demands for genuine universal suffrage in November last year.

(SCMP) Hong Kong student federation may quit pro-democracy alliance ahead of Tiananmen vigil. April 4, 2015.

The student body behind the Occupy movement is split on whether it should join the annual vigil to commemorate the Tiananmen crackdown and quit the pro-democracy alliance that organises it.

Nathan Law Kwun-chung, the new secretary general of the Federation of Students, told the South China Morning Post yesterday that his cabinet would make it a priority to decide whether it should remain in the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, as the vigil was only two months away.

While Law did not have a strong view on quitting the alliance, he said the new cabinet, formed by student-union heads of seven universities, was "squarely divided" on the issue. "We don't want to forget the June 4 crackdown, but there are views in the federation that the candlelight vigil has been reduced to a ritual in recent years, lacking a fighting spirit," Law said. "We want to remind people what the students in 1989 were fighting for, their dreams." He added that some of his colleagues had reservations about one of the alliance's slogans, "Build a democratic China".

The alliance was formed in 1989 to support the student pro-democracy movement in Beijing, which ended in a military crackdown. It has since held a vigil in Victoria Park every year. Last year, it said 180,000 people took part -the biggest crowd ever - while police put the number at 99,500.

The federation is a founding member of the alliance and its representatives have given speeches at past ceremonies. In the past few years, some Hongkongers were unhappy with the alliance's formality and staged ceremonies elsewhere. Law said the federation would plan its own remembrance events as in the past. Last year, members distributed copies of 1989 newspapers to train passengers as a reminder. The 57-year-old federation has re-emerged from Occupy as a major activist in social movements. It is expected to continue to play a key role in the fight for democracy.

Law, a third-year cultural studies student and one of the few Occupy leaders remaining in the federation's new leadership, said it was a hard choice to make in deciding to stay. "I was tired after Occupy and I know this post will bring me a lot of pressure," he said. "But I hope to contribute to the organisation with my experience and help the new leaders develop a working relationship with the civil society."

Law's predecessor Alex Chow Yong-kang said the sentiments against the alliance were understandable. "After Occupy, people are angry with Beijing's tough grip on Hong Kong's political reform. They feel lost about the city's relationship with China. It's hard for them to chant the alliance's slogan," Chow said. While the city's democratic future was tied to China, the alliance should review its role and activities, he added.

...

Other issues on the federations agenda include a campaign against the University Grants Councils funding policy that favours international over local research. Law said local research was vital to developing ideologies for social movements and a group of public intellectuals for the city.The federation will also draft a self-determination charter, with students and professors, on their vision for the citys political, economic and cultural issues. 

Law added that by self-determination, the federation did not mean to advocate for an independent Hong Kong, but for maintaining the citys high degree of autonomy in those areas. But the federation is an open platform for students to express their views. If some members want to discuss independence, we will allow them to do so. The government may not like this but we will not be scared, Law said.

(HKEJ) The Federation of Students does not exclude the possibility of occupying the Legislative Council. April 14, 2015.

Federation of Students secretary-general Nathan Law said that the pan-democrats should not vote for the constitutional reform proposal just because of some public opinion poll results. Instead, they must resolutely reject any proposal based upon the August 31 National People's Congress Standing Committee. If the pan-democrats should make anti-democracy move, the reaction would be worse than Occupy Central. He said that if the Legislative Council passes the constitutional reform, the Federation of Students will not exclude the possibility of occupying the Legislative Council building. Even if they smash the glass doors and destroy public property inside the building, the actions would be even more justified than those of Occupy Central.

On TVB yesterday, Nathan Law said that the Federation of Students will definitely take action if the Legislative Council passes the constitutional reform. The Federation will likely target the Legislative Council. There are not plans so far and violent resistance is not yet on the horizon. When asked to define violence, Nathan Law said that charging into the Legislative Council and damaging the glass doors or other public property do not constitute violence if nobody is hurt. "When the citizens have reason to be angry at the Legislative Council, these actions will be proper."

Nathan Law said that the pan-democrats realize that there cannot be genuine universal suffrage under the August 31 National People's Congress Standing Committee framework. Passing the constitutional reform is to abandon democratic principles and promises. After Occupy Central, many participants were dissatisfied with the Federation of Students and even the pan-democrats. Therefore, passing the constitutional reform would trigger even more explosive situations than Occupy Central.

(The Standard) Student chief eyes 'break-in'. April 15, 2015.

The new Hong Kong Federation of Students leader yesterday threatened to "break" the doors of the Legislative Council if the political reform package is passed. Secretary-general Nathan Law Kwun-chung said it would be "legitimate" and non-violent if the action was taken.

On TVB's Straight Talk program, Law told host Michael Chugani that the federation's Standing Committee has not discussed what action to take in future.

"For me, the target will definitely be the Legislative Council ... if there's any action later on if the proposal is passed, maybe breaking into the Legislative Council, like you may have to [break] ... some stuff like the glass in order to get into the Legislative Council."Law said some radical groups who broke into Legco during last year's Umbrella movement had "no legitimacy."

The Lingnan University student added: "The stance of the federation is very clear that we want all democrats to veto the proposal because we consider no possibility for genuine universal suffrage from the framework by the NPCSC [National People's Congress Standing Committee]. He also said it would give legitimacy to a falsely elected chief executive in 2017, who may decide to legislate Article 23.

"If the next chief executive is elected by a million people, he can say he is empowered by a million people. This empowerment will grant him more legitimate reason to push for anything that he wants to do," he said.

Law also said legislators who just listen to public opinion polls when they vote for the reform should not be in Legco. Opinion is divided over whether Hong Kong should pocket the reform proposal first, polls show. Along with public opinion, legislators should "have their own political judgment on such an issue that really affects the future of Hong Kong," Law said.

He said he is "bothered" by the nickname "Law37" after getting 37 out of 53 votes in the federation election last month, in a take on Leung Chun-ying's 689 Election Committee votes.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJrWkyZVAcc (Speakout HK)

Internet comments:

- They gave the Chief Executive CY Leung the nickname of '689', because he was elected by 689 electors in a 1,200-person election committee. This is a small circle election. Now Nathan Law is elected by 37 out of 53 'student representatives.' This is a small circle election. So Nathan Law will henceforth be known as "Law 37."

- We want 'genuine universal suffrage' for the election of the Federation of Students secretary-general. Instead, we get Nathan Law who had already been designated as the new incoming secretary-general a long time ago before the election process ever got started.

- The Federation of Students veterans refuse to have universal suffrage of the secretary-general on the grounds that it would make the winner more powerful than any student representative from any one university. For the same reason, the pan-democrats don't want one-person-one-vote for the Chief Executive because it would make the winner more powerful than any legislative councilor from any one district. And we can't have that, can we?

- The Federation of Students veterans say that the secretary-general does not have any decision-making power. Instead, it is the Executive Committee composed of student representatives which makes the decisions for the secretary-general to carry out. Furthermore, all decisions have to be unanimous from the eight universities. If one or more university dissents, the decision is tabled. I wonder if Nathan Law's impromptu TVB comments (e.g. damaging public property inside the Legislative Council) reflected the collective will of the student representatives who in turn consulted with the student bodies in their respective universities? Frankly I doubt it. This is just another small circle decision issued in the name of all university students.

- Democracy at the Federation of Students? Here is the simplest test -- go to the university campus plaza, intercept some students and ask them to name the members of the Executive Committee of the Federation of Students. There are eight of them. Let's see how many the average student can name. Remember, these eight representatives are the ones who make the unanimous decisions to be carried out the secretariat.

- (Wen Wei Po) According to a study conducted by students at CUHK School of Journalism and Communication, 74% of the students do not know how the Federation of Students make their decisions and 67% do not know how their representatives at the Federation of Students came about. With respect to the December 1 siege of Government Headquarters, 47.3% became more negative and 13.1% became positive towards the Federation. With respect to the attempted Beijing visit by Federation members, 29.6% became more negative and 24.5% more positive. With respect to the televised meeting with government officials, 10.3% became more negative and 55% more positive. With respect to their university withdrawing from the Federation, 20% supported and 21% opposed while 51% were neutral.

- To this date, there are some diehards who continue to insist that Occupy Central has been an overwhelming success. Something about the Awakening of the Democratic Souls. Whatever. Well, the true test has to be: Why does no one say "Let's Occupy Central again" before/after the Legco vote? If it worked so well last time, it must work again. Right?

- Occupy Central again? It will be summer soon, and just in time for a cool down from the simmering summer heat with the newly acquired police water cannons. P.S. As long as nobody is killed, it is not "police brutality" (following the logic of Nathan Law).
- I really want to see the water cannon in action. I am less interested in whether the water cannon will cause any physical injuries. I am more interested in seeing the water cannon soak and destroy the iPhone6's of the demonstrators! Then they won't be able to take selfie photos and post to Facebook. Quelle horreur! This is a worst fate than the Black Plague.

- Nathan Law comes in the same mould as Alex Chow in terms of incoherence and incomprehensibility. Law said that following public opinion polls to vote according to the preference of the majority of the people would be against democratic principles. Say what? Elsewhere he says that voting for one-person-one-vote is wrong because the pan-democrats know that it is against democratic principles. Instead, we must veto the legislation in order to make sure that the Chief Executive is elected by the 1,200-person election committee again. Say what?

- According to Nathan Law, democracy means not following majority opinion as reflected by public opinion polls. Then why does Albert Ho want to resign to trigger a de facto referendum based upon the by-election? Or perhaps the whole point is to figure out what the majority opinion is and then do the exact opposite in accordance with Law's principles of democracy?

- Nathan Law said that if the Legco does not vote according to his wishes (which he says are the wishes of the People, who do not recollect ever empowering him to represent them), then he will lead the students to break into the Legco building and smash glass doors and other public property. This is a threat, as in a triad gang member showing up a restaurant saying: "You better pay me $10,000 in friendship money or else I'll smash your glass window." (P.S. As long as nobody is injured, it'll be okay.)

- In Hong Kong, they never issue direct threats because that would be breaking the law. Thus, they don't say "We'll going to smash glass doors if you pass the law." They will only say, "We do not exclude the possibility that glass doors may be smashed if the law is passed." In like manner, the police do not say "We're are going to shoot any rioters on sight." (Correction from a reader: The Royal Hong Kong Police did say that in 1967.) But the police aren't even allowed to say, "We do not exclude the possibility that rioters may be shot."

- If we have reasonable anger at the Federation of Students, can we go to their offices, break through the glass door and destroy their property? Would that be proper? P.S. Of course, this is subject to the provision that nobody is hurt. But if the Federation of Students people try to stop us, we can defend ourselves in an appropriate matter and if they get hurt as a result, it'll be their fault.
- After listening to Nathan Law on TVB, I am reasonably angry. Can anyone tell me where he lives? I want to destroy some property.

- Let's start a betting pool on how many people will join Nathan Law in the valiant charge into the Legco building. On December 1 last year, the Federation of Students called for a siege of Government Headquarters and the peak attendance was several thousand participants (including many "civilian reporters"). This motley crew was routed by 200 Special Tactic Unit "blue smurfs" that night.
- Oh, wait, Alex Chow became forever linked with the saying: "
叫人衝,自己鬆" after the defeat on Lung Wo Road last December. That is, "he told others to charge while he left the scene." Will Nathan Law be leading the charge himself? Or will he continue in the grand tradition of sending orders via mobile telephone in the name of "division of labor" ("some people get bloodied while others take credit")?

- Why stop with Occupying the Legco building? Why not go ahead directly to Occupy all of Hong Kong immediately? Then when they grow up, the students will go and Occupy Beijing, then Occupy China, then Occupy Earth, then Occupy the Milky Way ...
- How is Nathan Law going to Occupy Beijing when he doesn't own a Return Home Card?

- I fully support the endless occupation of the Legislative Council building by the Federation of Students. While the Legislative Council is occupied, all legislators and their aides will be suspended without pay. And then the government can finally get on with its work without the never-ending filibustering.

- (Oriental Daily) Let it not be said that the Federation of Students does not do anything for the students. On this day, Federation of Students staged a protest against the recommendation that students who defaulted on their student loans should have that information passed along to credit rating agencies, because a bad credit record may be detrimental to the financial prospects of the said students. Instead, it is up to the government to recognize the flaws of the education system which forced students to default on their student loans and hence provide remedies (such as forgiving all the outstanding debts).

- (SCMP) The Hong Kong governments student loan scheme is open to exploitation, the Ombudsman said, highlighting 13,000 default cases recorded over the past three years involving HK$200 million in unpaid debts at its peak. The agency loaned out HK$1 billion to HK$1.3 billion annually over the past three years.
- On Facebook, the former CUHK representative Tommy Cheung Sau-yin to the Federation of Students explained that 14% default rate ($200 million out of $1.3 billion) is normal compared to the United States. Nothing to see here, he says. This is wrong. According to Breitbart, over 27% of student loans are in default. Therefore, Hong Kong students need to work harder and default twice as hard in order to meet international standards.
-  Tommy Cheung also said that banks face higher default rates than 14%. Well, the guy doesn't even known the simplest economics. Let us say that the default rate is 14%. The bank needs to make 4% to cover administrative expenses (rent, salaries, etc) plus some profit. Therefore, the bank needs to charge someone 18% in interest for a loan, or else it is going to lose money. Right now, the typical bank loan interest rate is more like 5%. If the average default rate is 14%, then the bank is losing an average of 9% on loans. Why are the banks not bankrupt already?

- (Sky Post) According to Cardiff Sixth Form College, they received 800 applications from Hongkongers this year compared to 250 last year. They only have 50 spaces for Hongkongers, so that means each space will have 16 Hongkongers competing for it.
So this is one of the immediate consequences of Occupy Central. Parents are sending their children overseas to study, less so because they are afraid that their children will become radicals but more so because a graduate from a Hong Kong university may have dimmer job prospects by association.
- This is so awful and selfish of Hongkongers to go and steal the resources of the British people. I used to think that they are better than the mainland locusts trying to steal the resources of the Hong Kong people but now I think they're all the same.

- (Passion Times)

At City University, a referendum is being held to decide whether to withdraw from the Federation of Students. So far, Hong Kong University students have voted to do so while Baptist University students have voted to remain. The photo shows the banner to call on students to vote. The white letters are: Plebiscite: The City University Student Union should leave the Federation of Students? The details (such as time and place) are provided in the text below. Unfortunately, the details are black letters written on black background! In other words, the election organizers have followed the letter of the law by spelling out the details except nobody can read a thing! What kind of international standards are these to have black letters on black background for election notices?
Also the voting takes places in a remote location that would require considerable navigation to reach.
- (Latest news) The City University Student  Union president has just declared that due to the controversy over the black-on-black banner, the referendum will be postponed until the next academic year. Yet another glorious victory for freedom and democracy by the City University students!!! NOT!!!

- (Oriental Daily) At Polytechnic University, the referendum on whether to withdraw from the Federation of Students was scheduled for yesterday. But the Student Union delayed the voting until the end of the semester. Of the seven voting days, five were scheduled to be self-study days during which students stay home to study for exams. Therefore, there were practically no voting. Nevertheless, there were 1,800 votes with the majority approving withdrawal from the Federation of Students.

- (Latest news) The City University Student  Union president has just declared that due to the controversy over the black-on-black banner, the referendum will be postponed until the next academic year. Yet another glorious victory for freedom and democracy by the City University students!!! NOT!!!

- (More late news) The City University Student Union editorial committee issued a public statement today about interference of editorial independence by the Student Union Executive Committee. On April 17, there was an extra edition titled "President puts the brakes on, referendum postponed indefinitely." The Executive Committee told the editorial committee that this was misleading the public and smearing themselves, and they demanded an explanation. A meeting was held, but the Executive Committee was not satisfied. They said that their position is "to oppose withdrawal" and "not to defend continual membership in the Federation of Students." The editorial committee responded that everything in the headline "President puts the brakes on, referendum postponed indefinitely" was correct and factual. They said that they will defend editorial independence and freedom of speech and press. They said that they refuse to become the mouthpiece of the Executive Committee or otherwise engage in self-censorship due to administrative pressure.

- You didn't think that Joshua Wong would let Nathan Law get all the media attention, did you? This just came in ...
(Oriental Daily) Scholarism convener Joshua Wong said that if any pan-democrat legislator should switch votes and lead to the passage of the constitutional reform, Scholarism will engage in resistance.
- Monkey see, monkey do.
- Not true. Joshua Wong also said that he supports Albert Ho's de facto referendum, whereupon the huge voting will force the government to restart the five-step constitutional reform process. Thus, Joshua Wong thinks democracy follows public opinion whereas Nathan Law does not.
- Not true, not true. It all depends on what the outcome of the referendum. If nobody came out to vote even if it is positioned as a referendum, or if the election is actually lost, then Joshua Wong and Nathan Law will both say that they don't respect the outcome. If the referendum comes out with a favorable outcome, both Wong and Law will support it. At present, both are being hedging their bets their own way as if they differ in their positions but they will share the same position in the end (namely, stop constitutional reform no matter what).

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5R23CZIx2o There is a long tradition in Hong Kong of using a video clip of Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Hitler with sub-titles that tell another story. The latest one is about how even Hitler couldn't stand the Federation of Students. Among other things, Hitler was foaming in the mouth over: "An organization which does not have genuine universal suffrage itself wants to fight for genuine universal suffrage. This is a piece of sarcasm."

- (Wen Wei Po) A street banner says: "Congratulations to Nathan Law for winning the election at the Federation of Students with a tally of 37 votes." This street banner has shown up near Hong Kong University, Baptist University and Lingnan University.

On Facebook, Nathan Law replied that he did not react negatively to these scornful remarks. He said that those people responsible for these banners are "fucking useless because nobody is afraid afterwards." As for the issue over the number of votes, he said that "it is necessary to first contemplate the power relationship between the Federation of Students and the individual student unions" and "not purely heaping scorn based upon the number of votes and turning this into a public relations issue."

(Sing Tao) December 23, 2014.

After a policeman made an arrest of a demonstrator, he and his 12-year-old daughter were quickly identified and their information published on social media. The little girl received multiple "terroristic" messages, including a 20-year-old man who issued an all-points bulletin with the claim that "the triads have offered $600,000 to cut off one arm and one leg of the policeman's daughter."

The Golden Forum user named Tong had just turned 20 years old when he was arrested. His Internet name is "FUCK wait for me to change my costume first." Early morning onf October 18, the police officer named Ng subdued a demonstrator along with a colleague.  He was said to have twisted the demonstrator's arm back. He was filmed by those present, and his photo was posted on the Internet with the accusation of torturing the arrestee. Because Ng's badge number was visible, Internet users formed a human flesh search team.

Some Internet user posted Ng's Facebook information onto the Internet, including his 12-year-old daughter who is studying in Form 1. The title of the post was "Ng XX has a lovely daughter" and the post contained the personal details, photos and mobile phone number of the girl. Many people left comments, including some that were provocative and obscene. Ng's daughter also resulted many Whatsapp messages from identified persons to assure her that she didn't have to be scared because the crimes of the father should not be carried onto the rest of the family. But the daughter was very scared and told her father about what was happening.

On the next day, Ng learned someone has publicly issued an all-points bulleting at the Golden Forum: "Roadside News Agency information: I learned that the triads have offered $600,000 to cut off one arm and one leg of Ng XXX." Ng's photo was posted for viewing: "This guy is cornered: He can leave town; or he can surrender himself; or his daughter will be missing an arm and a leg." In order to avoid legal liability, the post ended with: "The above is purely fictional." Ng and his daughter were worried.

The police's Technology Crime Division of the Commercial Crime Bureau got into the case, and made the arrest of 20-year-old Tong in Wanchai.

(Ming Pao) October 23, 2014.

A 20-year-old who is studying engineering at the Hong Kong University School of Professional and Continuing Education recently made a post to the Hong Kong Golden Forum:
"Roadside News Agency information: I learned that the triads have offered $600,000 to cut off one arm and one leg of Ng XXX. It seems that someone has offended people who should not be offended. Those who have the photos/videos of Ng XX should spread them around, so that he can't escape. He can leave town; or he can surrender himself; or his daughter will be missing an arm and a leg. Let me put on my helmet first: the above contents are purely fictional."

The police arrested 20-year-old Tong X-leung in an apartment on Hennessey Road, Wanchai. They also removed one desk computer, two laptop computers and one mobile phone. Tong was interrogated through the night. According to information, Tong said that he made up the information for fun. Further, he does not think he has committed any crime, and he does not know Ng.

(Oriental Daily) April 14, 2015.

Yesterday in Eastern District Court, the third-year HKU SPACE engineering student pled guilty to using a computer with criminal intent. The magistrate sentenced him to 180 hours of community time.

The defense lawyer pleaded that the defendant was diagnosed with autism and language barrier when he was three years old. At one point, he was not accepted by kindergartens. Therefore, the defendant did not experience much social relationship as he grew up, and did not know how to communicate with others. Instead, he immersed himself into the world of the Internet. During the Occupy Central period, he acquired dissatisfaction with the police through the Internet. With no one to communicate with him, he ended up doing something stupid. He is now rueful.

The defendant and his father both apologized to the police officer who was the target. His parents also made Tong see a psychologist/psychiatrist.

The magistrate said that an efficient Hong Kong Police is the bedrock of stability and prosperity in Hong Kong. Therefore, the court must protect police officers from threats and physical attacks by citizens. As such, the actions of the defendant Tong Wai-liang should led to jail time. The magistrate took into consideration that the psychological and mental problems were the main causes of the crime, so that the defendant needs more psychological/psychiatric help than punishment. Furthermore the case was a blessing in disguise because the parents are now more aware of the problems of their son. Therefore, the magistrate decided to sentence the defendant lightly to 180 hours of community service. The magistrate encourages the defendant to stop being an otaku and to become more involved with social activities and contacts.

Internet comments:

- The defendant's lawyer said that his client experienced anxiety, sleeplessness and mild suicidal tendencies after his arrest. Furthermore, he has pervasive developmental disorder such that he was unable to come up with a single comprehensible sentence at 3 years old. The psychiatrist said that his mental illness may be the cause of this crime.
This is jaw-dropping in two ways. Firstly, an expert witness testified with all sorts of wild tales and speculations. Secondly, a magistrate actually bought into this nonsense.

- I always knew this would happen. All Yellow Ribbons are mentally impaired, because why would a normal person sleep in the streets? Therefore, all Yellow Ribbons will eventually be released by the courts due to mental incapacity.

- The next time a triad gang members gets arrested for extortion ("You better pay me $50,000 a month or else I'll cut off one arm and one leg of your daughter"), the same defense can be used. It worked here, and it should also work elsewhere. Just hire an expert psychiatrist willing to make up a full clinical history for you.

- I listen to what the Umbrella Revolutionaries say and most of the time they are incomprehensible (see, for example, #101). That is to say, they talk like 3-year-olds.

- At 3 years old, he was unable to come up with a single comprehensible sentence. At 20 years old, he was able to talk about offering $600,000 to cut off one arm and one leg of a 12-year-old girl.

- This defendant received a sentence of 180 hours of community service. Meanwhile the Polytechnic University female student who allegedly fornicated in public is facing a maximum of 7 years in jail. Something is very wrong with this legal/judicial system.
- Oh, yeah, here is another case (Radio 881/903): 73-year-old used fake documents to procure a security guard job seven years ago and earned total income of HK$540,000. He was sentenced to 4 months in jail. The magistrate said that he cannot consider the age or health of the defendant in his sentencing, because a lenient sentence will encourage 80-year-olds/90-year-olds to do the same in the future.

Q1. Do you think that the Legislative Council should follow the opinion of the majority of the citizens in deciding whether to vote for one-person-one-vote for the 2017 Chief Executive election?
84.9%: Yes
9.4%: No
5.7%: Don't know/ no opinon

Q2. If the 2017 Chief Executive proposal is based on the August 31 framework set by the National People's Congress Standing Committee, do you think that the Legislative Council should (1) Pass the proposal so that there is one-person-one-vote for the 2017 Chief Executive election; or (2) Veto the proposal so that the 2017 Chief Executive election will be conducted according to the existing method?
60.9%: Pass
30.7%: Veto
8.3%: Don't know/no opinion

Q3. Some people think that we should pass the 2017 Chief Executive election reform plan first so that citizens can have one-person-one-vote, and then improve the method on a gradual basis. If so, do you think the Legislative Council should pass this proposal? (Base: Those who answered "Veto" in Q2.
5.0%: Pass
23.8%: Veto
1.5%: Don't know/no opinion

Q4. If the Legislative Council fails to pass the 2017 Chief Executive election proposal, what are your views on the prospects of having universal suffrage of Chief Executive after 2017?
28.7%: Optimistic
60.6%: Pessimistic
10.7%: Don't know/hard to say

(SCMP) Shenzhen imposes once-a-week limit on cross-border visits to Hong Kong by permanent residents. April 11, 2015.

Shenzhen's permanent residents are to be limited to just one visit a week to Hong Kong using their multiple-entry permits, a move that will slash the number of these visitors by about 30 per cent, according to sources familiar with the arrangement. A Hong Kong government source said the restriction would cut the number of visitors to the city by 4.6 million a year.

Shenzhen municipal government issued the ruling yesterday after a decision by the State Council to approve an "adjustment" in the number of trips that multiple-entry permit holders can make to Hong Kong, a notice circulating on the internet said. The notice set out details of the arrangement - restricting the number of trips by multiple-entry permit holders to one a week - although it did not say when the change would be implemented. The trips cannot be saved up; they must be used or they will be lost.

Shenzhen police and Hong Kong government sources confirmed the new arrangement to the Sunday Morning Post.

The Hong Kong government said last night that it had submitted a proposal to the central government to adjust the multiple-entry policy. "Any adjustment to the policy is pending the central government's announcement," it said in a statement. Only Shenzhen permanent residents can hold multiple-entry permits, which allow them to make as many trips as they want to Hong Kong. The Hong Kong government source said the restriction on that category of visitors would cut the number of arrivals by 4.6 million a year, or 30 per cent, which would help crack down on parallel traders, who buy products in Hong Kong to resell at a profit across the border. About 14.9 million of the 60.8 million visitors to the city last year were from Shenzhen, and held multiple-entry permits.

Brisk trading activities at border towns and the large number of mainland visitors flooding in have become a source of friction and triggered protests and clashes in the New Territories. Mainland visitors are blamed for buying up daily essentials such as infant formula and diapers, and putting pressure on public transport. But some Shenzhen residents said they did not believe restricting the number of visits would help resolve the problem of cross-border smugglers - 60 per cent of whom are believed to be Hongkongers.

One white-collar worker in Shenzhen who refused to give her name said: "I am disappointed with Hong Kong. The shopping atmosphere is no longer friendly." She said she had not crossed the border since the Lunar New Year holiday in February. And the boss of a trading company said she hoped the restriction could be limited to twice a week, as she frequently travelled to Hong Kong for business and to stock up on baby formula.

Tourism sector lawmaker Yiu Si-wing said the fact that no start date had been mentioned implied the policy may be gradually introduced.

Meanwhile, North District Parallel Imports Concern Group spokesman Leung Kam-shing doubted the move would be effective. "Parallel-trading syndicates would just employ different people to do the job," he said.

(Oriental Daily) April 12, 2015.

According to some analysis, if Shenzhen permanent residents can no longer make several trips a day as parallel traders, the slack will be taken up by more Hong Kong residents. According to a Facebook group with a money bill as the profile photo:
"Now hiring large numbers of parallel traders, sole requirement: adults
Daily salary HK$600, can work every day
Only several hours of work per day
If you are interested, please leave your name and telephone number in the Whatsapp group
Details will be provided in the group."

A large number of persons left their names and telephone numbers. Most of these telephone numbers are Hong Kong ones, but there were several mainland numbers (which could be Hongkongers having mainland phone cards). So even before the policy is official in place, the parallel traders are already on the move.

(The Standard) $600 a day offered for HK carriers. April 13, 2015.

What appears to be a man with an eye for a main chance claims to be recruiting Hong Kong residents to work as cross- border carriers of parallel traders' goods for pay of HK$600 a day.

Kit Wong created a Facebook public group that uses "recruitment bazaar" in its name to promise "fast money." Wong reckoned to have about 20 likely recruits by 7.30 last night. He would need "numerous" people for parallel trading, Wong said, and they would earn about HK$600 on average. "You have to work every day for several hours at a time," he told people. "Leave me your phone number and I will add you to the Whatsapp group and details will be announced."

While most people professing an interest left phone numbers as instructed, a Stefan Ho posted the message: "Wish your goods will be confiscated and you guys all sent to jail."

A Hong Kong resident who said he is a veteran of the parallel goods trading business - he claimed to have been in it for 10 years - said SAR traders will benefit under the new policy as mainlanders are going to be so limited. The "transportation fee" for carrying parallel goods must rise, he said. Some people had been scared by the anti-parallel goods protests, he said, so the carrying `fee' was raised from HK$25 to HK$30. "But it will increase to HK$60 gradually," he forecast. And for products such as the iPhone 6, he said. The fee will go from HK$120 to HK$160 for each one.

Under cross-border trading mechanisms that have worked until now, people carrying and dealing in daily goods have been able to make about HK$10,000 per month. But products such as iPhones or iPads can net from HK$20,000 to HK$30,000.

(Oriental Daily) April 12, 2015.

The news about the policy did not cause the wages of parallel traders to rise. According to one female merchandise receiver in Shenzhen, the prices for infant milk powder and cigarettes remain the same as before. She believes the prices will not rise, because her parallel traders are mostly Hongkongers. The reduction in mainland parallel traders has little impact on her supply source.

According to a male merchandise receiver named Brother Tao, the new policy will have zero impact on parallel traders. Instead, it will affect the non-parallel trader visitors who go to Hong Kong regularly for personal consumption. In the end, this will only hurt Hong Kong's economy.

(Oriental Daily) April 12, 2015.

60-year-old Mr. Yang and his wife are mainland parallel traders. They make one trip per day and carry mostly infant milk formula, biscuits and cosmetic products. They make more than HK$100 per trip. When the reporter told them about the new policy, they said that they were unhappy but they would abide by their government's rules.

Meanwhile Hongkonger parallel trader Ms. Cheng said that the new policy does not affect her at all. However, she won't make a few more trips because there will be fewer mainland parallel traders. At the present, she has a part-time job and lives in Kowloon. Therefore, she is going to maintain her current workload.

(SCMP) Decision to cut visits by Shenzhen residents 'won't end parallel trading'. April 12, 2015.

Retailers and residents in districts frequented by Shenzhen visitors are bracing for an expected cutback in cross-border traffic, although some believe the move would only have a limited impact on parallel-goods trading.

Yesterday, New People's Party vice-chairman Michael Tien Puk-sun said sources in both the Hong Kong and mainland governments had told him that the announcement to cap visits by Shenzhen permanent residents to the city to one a week would be made today and take effect immediately.

The current multiple-entry scheme was introduced in April 2009, drawing 1.4 million visitors from April to December that year. It rose to 4.1 million in 2010, and climbed to 14.9 million last year. The new policy could slash the number of these visitors by as much as 30 per cent, or 4.6 million, per year.

But few people contacted yesterday said they expected any new limit to eliminate the problems of parallel-goods trading as there was high demand for daily staples such as milk powder, which can be resold for profit across the border.

"Instead of hiring one person to conduct the trade three times a day, they will probably hire three people to do it once a day," said student Dicky Chung, a North District resident.

One employee at the Jun Hin Medicine dispensary in Sheung Shui said the move would be another blow to the pharmacy business after heavy lay-offs since the Lunar New Year. He said that the change would likely be the "nail in the coffin" of many businesses in the trade who would bear the "unnecessary" brunt of the new policy. He added that it was possible that parallel trading ringleaders would simply recruit Hongkongers to transport products. "We're talking about a HK$200 profit margin per day or about HK$5,000 to HK$6,000 a month," he said. "Who wouldn't do it?"

Salesman Rain Lee of Fok Fai Jewellery in Sha Tin said two-thirds of its business came from mainland visitors and the new rule would hit them hard. "They will still buy gold as it is a store of value. But overall we're already seeing fewer mainland tourists because of the tarnished reputation," Lee said.

Wholesale and retail sector lawmaker Vincent Fang Kang said yesterday that the policy would "definitely affect" the retail sector but the impact was difficult to estimate. Tien believed the ceiling would help tackle parallel trading without harming tourism. "I don't see how anyone would need to come to Hong Kong more than once a week to buy jewellery and clothing," he said.

This was echoed by some mainland tourists who spoke to the Post yesterday.

"I only come about once every two to three months for shopping. I don't care," one visitor at Sha Tin's upscale New Town Plaza said . She added that she was more concerned about the possibility of being attacked by anti-parallel trading protesters.

Some residents had a different view. Jackie Kwok, who has lived in Sha Tin for 30 years, welcomed the policy. "It will have some effect in reducing the number of people in Sha Tin. Usually it's a sea of suitcases here [at Sha Tin Centre]," Kwok said. "This area used to be full of small shops selling fish balls and snacks. Now it's all pharmacies and electronics stores."

But Sheung Shui resident MK Cheng complained that even with fewer tourists, the district would never be the same again. "Many who originally owned shops and family-run businesses have leased them out instead as they can make more from rental payments. The whole economy has changed fundamentally," she said.

(SCMP) CY Leung issues parallel trading warning as new controls on Shenzhen residents launched. April 13, 2015.

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying issued a strong warning against parallel traders in Hong Kong this morning, as Shenzhen authorities formally announced a limit on cross-border trips by the citys residents in a bid to curb the number of parallel traders visiting Hong Kong.

Leung vowed that local and mainland Chinese authorities would step up a crackdown on parallel trading, such as raiding warehouses unlawfully used to store daily staples for the trade.

Speaking 45 minutes after Xinhua formally announced that the multiple visit permit will be replaced by a new one-visit-per-week permit, Leung also revealed that the new permit was proposed by his government in June last year, but it took so long because anti-parallel-trading protests had been counter-productive.

It is now nearly a year since we put forward the proposal, the reason why it [took] nearly a year is partly because it is a major move, secondly there is preparatory work to be done, but thirdly and this is an important issue too, the unruly protest increased the difficulty in our discussion with the mainland authorities, and it hurt the feelings between the people of Hong Kong and the mainland, he said.

Leung reiterated that the commerce bureau and tourism authorities will launch a series of promotional campaigns to spread the message that the city still welcomes tourists from all places.

Leungs remarks echoed that of a spokesman of the State Councils Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, who told Xinhua that the central government will continue to support the [Hong Kong] governments effort in developing tourism, and firmly oppose the behaviour of the small minority of Hong Kong people, which hurt the feeling between the people of [Hong Kong and the mainland]. The central government encourages closer interaction between the people of the two places.

The spokesman also added that by improving the multiple visit permit policy at an appropriate timing and in accordance to the situation, it shows the central governments concern about Hong Kong peoples lives. It is also a measure to support the Hong Kong governments effort in actively responding to the peoples demand. It is beneficial for more stable exchanges between the people in the two places.

Xinhua reported at 9:02am that Shenzhen residents will be issued one-visit-per-week permits starting from today, but, as expected, the already-issued multiple visit permit is still valid.

A spokesman for the mainland public security authority told Xinhua that the multiple visit permit pilot scheme was launched at the Hong Kong governments request, and played an important role in Hong Kongs economic development, expanding employment and fostering the peoples exchanges.

The multiple visit permit was launched in 2009.

Without mentioning the parallel trading problem, the spokesman added that As there are more and more mainland tourists going to Hong Kong, the pressure for mainland and Hong Kong border facilities has increased, and the problems concerning the number of travellers and Hong Kongs capacity are becoming more apparent ... and the central government made a decision to improve the tourism policy for Shenzhen residents.

Speaking after attending an RTHK radio programme, New Peoples Party vice-chairman Michael Tien Puk-sun expected the new policy to cool down anti-parallel trading sentiment in Hong Kong.

But he also said that since the multiple visit permits issued to Shenzhen residents will still be valid for up to a year, it could take about six to nine months for Hong Kong people to feel the effect of the new policy.

Residents will feel the difference if incoming travellers decrease by 4.5 million but I also think that when the sentiment is being cooled down, we should [ask] for more mainland cities to be allowed to visit Hong Kong on the individual travellers scheme, Tien suggested.

Currently, residents of 49 mainland cities can visit Hong Kong at least once a year without joining a tour group. From 2009 to yesterday, Shenzhen residents were the only group which could travel to Hong Kong as many times as they like.

Speaking on an RTHK programme with Tien, North District Parallel Imports Concern Group spokesman Ronald Leung Kam-shing disagreed with the NPP lawmaker and said the Shenzhen residents privilege should be scrapped altogether because it is unfair to other mainland residents.

It is understood that the Hong Kong government expects the new cap of 52 visits a year on the multiple-entry permit to have limited impact on mainland visitors travelling pattern to the city, as each permit holder crossed the border only 9.1 times on average last year. 

In a report released by the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Research, the firm expected that the new policy will result in a 2.3 per cent hit to Hong Kong retail sales growth this year, and therefore it is slashing its retail sales forecast further to minus 5.8 per cent year on year, from the original minus 3.5 per cent forecast.

But a spokesman also added that We note that the actual hit may be less, since these visitors can raise their spending per visit to partly compensate for a lower number of visits.

Also the potential drop may be offset by stronger local domestic demand, as the wealth effect of recent stock market rallies slowly gain traction in the economy, he added.

Internet comments:

- (Passion Times) According to Basic Law committee member Lau Nai-keung, even if Shenzhen permanent residents are limited to one trip per week, parallel trading will not disappear because the activity will be taken over by Hongkongers. "Parallel trading will not cease. I am telling you. Do not kid yourselves. We have a tradition of parallel trading that goes back for more than a century. The parallel trading genes are ingrained in the blood of the people of Hong Kong. The genes are buried inside there." Lau also said that equal treatment would mean that Hongkongers should be restricted to one trip per week to mainland China.

- Many Hongkongers will be hurt if they too are restricted to one trip per week. For example, I have a friend who is a restaurant manager. For cost reasons, he rents an apartment in Shenzhen at $3,000 per month. A comparable apartment in Hong Kong would cost more than $12,000 per month. Every day, he commutes between Shenzhen and Hong Kong for work. It is easy on the MTR. If he is restricted to one trip per week, he will have to live in Hong Kong again. What can he rent at $3,000 per month? A room partition with no kitchen/toilet with just enough room for a bed?

- This whole thing is dumber than a dumbbell. On one hand, imposing limits on Shenzhen permanent residents means that the slack will be taken over by Hongkonger parallel traders. Therefore this will do nothing towards relieving the problems that groups like North District Parallel Imports Concern Group were alleging to exist. On the other hand, the new policy would encourage the radical demonstrators that their tactics were an overwhelming success because the Hong Kong/central governments have yielded. Will they stop? No. Next step will be more demonstrations to force one visit per month, then one visit per year, then one trip per decade, then the ultimate goal of the central government abandoning Hong Kong to independence.

- Those with unlimited annual permits will be grandfathered. That is, if you apply next week,  you will receive the one-trip-per-week permit.  But if you were approved last week for unlimited visits over the next year, you can continue to do so. One year later, when you apply for renewal, you will receive the one-trip-per-week permit instead. So the transition will take one full year to complete. In the meantime, the changes will be fairly gradual. In the absence of any apparent developments, there will be more demonstrations.

- It is said that many workers in the retail trade will be affected. Some will lose working hours, others will lose their jobs altogether. What is there to fear, really? They can all go to work as parallel traders! HK$600 per day for several hours of work each day. That's $600 x 30 = $18,000 per month, better than the $10,000 per month for a store sales clerk. And since these are Hongkongers, their pay will be spent locally too. Therefore, the net effect will be a boost to the Hong Kong economy.
P.S. Don't forget that parallel traders are paid in cash and therefore not required to pay taxes. By contrast, sales clerks are paid on the books and therefore reported to the Inland Revenue Department for taxation purposes. Mandatory Provident Fund contributions are also withheld.

- In Hong Kong, a dishwasher makes $55 an hour for 10 hours of work per day. That is only $550 per day. Why not work several hours a day only for $600 a day? And no need to pay taxes. By the way, you can also continue to accept your welfare payments.

- It is wrong to think that Hongkongers will take over the parallel traders. At $600 per day, they make only $18,000 per month without any days off. There are plenty of jobs on demand in Hong Kong paying a lot more. For example, I heard that a construction company was offering $20,000 per day for a skilled bar-bender. The only reason why people whine about low wages is that they lack the will and vision to improve themselves.

- According to the estimates, that would make 4.5 million fewer trips by Shenzhen permanent residents. If the average expenditure per trip is $1,000, then the total is 4.5 million x $1,000 = $4,500,000,000 or $4.5 billion. But the problem is that the publicity from the demonstrators is impacting the confidence/desire of the traditional mainland as well as overseas tourists. How do you reverse the image of Hong Kong as the suitcase-kicking capital of the world?

- (Oriental Daily) Hong Kong used to known as the Shopping Paradise and Gourmet Heaven,. Recently Yahoo Travel interviewed 2,005 travels to rank the most unfriendly cities in the world. The top ten most unfriendly cities in the world are: New York; Los Angeles; Paris; Hong Kong; Sao Paulo; Tokyo; San Francisco; London; Rome; Sydney.

- Some people are celebrating the Recovery/Reclamation of Sheung Shui/Tuen Mun/Yuen Long/Tai Po/Sha Tin. Well, the work isn't done because parallel trading will continue to be done by Hongkongers. The hard part is how to position the next series of demonstrations. While the goal is clear (stop parallel trading), the targets are less clear. Back then, it was easy to simplify things by demonizing the parallel traders as mainlanders who tow luggage cases that roll over toenails and who won't apologize. Now that the parallel traders are Hongkongers, what do you say? These are Hongkongers indistinguishable from other Hongkongers except they have luggage cases and handcarts. Should you go out every week to one town and beat up all those with handcarts and luggage cases?

- Various persons have praised the victory achieved by the demonstrators, because:

- Fewer mainlander trips to Hong Kong will taken place (4.5 million a year, or 12,000 a day).
- Fewer mainlander purchases will be made, especially in restaurants, pharmacies/dispensaries, cosmetic stores, grocery stores, discount stores (such as PrizeMart), jewelry/watch stores, fashion stores, etc.
- I will be able to walk the streets more freely and the air will be cleaner.
- Many of these establishments will go out of business because they won't make enough to pay their rents.
- Many workers at these establishments will lose their jobs or have their work hours cut down, but I am not one of them.
- With many vacant stores, rents will come down.
- Many landlords will lose a lot of money, but I am not one of them.
- With much lower commercial rents, the stores (such as used book stores) that I like can come back into being.
- I am very very happy about all this.
- Restrictions on Hongkongers going to the mainland. I don't care either, because I don't even have a Home Visit Permit.
- If commercial rents tumble, so too will housing prices. Then I will be able to finally afford to buy an apartment.

This is the epitome of selfishness: I want something to satisfy myself, I am happy that I am going to get it and I don't care how many people gets hurt along the way. If people lose their business or jobs, then they can eat cake. Of course, this is the feature of Occupy Central/Umbrella Revolution.

- Let me back and think a bit about fairness and equality.
(1) The anti-parallel trader demonstrators used violence to intimidate outsiders. What if this happens to a Hongkonger traveling overseas?
(2) The anti-parallel trader demonstrators used violence to intimidate those that think are mainland parallel traders. What about the Hongkonger parallel traders? They account for more than half of all parallel traders. How come nobody bothers them?
(3) Hongkongers travel to the mainland and elsewhere to enjoy the services (massages, spas, baths), eat/drink and shop. They caused congestion all over the world, but they expect to be welcomed. Conversely when foreigners from all over the world come to Hong Kong, the Hongkongers welcome them. However, when mainlanders come to Hong Kong, they are treated as locusts.
In thinking about these unfair and unequal treatments, I have to say that I don't support these demonstrators.

- Apart from the Shenzhen multiple-visit permits and the Individual Visit Scheme for residents in 49 Chinese cities, mainlanders can also come to Hong Kong through a business visa making as many trips as they like. The cost of the visa is more than RMB 10,000. But if you divide this by 365 days, it is only around $30 per day. So this is easily covered by the income for a parallel trader.

- The confusing part is about just who are the undesirables and the desirables. There are different positions about this, and anyone who wishes to enter the discussion should state their positions first.

Position 1: The undesirables are the mainland parallel traders. The reasons include: they clog up the sidewalk when they pick up and pack their cargo; they take up sidewalk space on their way to the train/bus station; they cause injuries to others (such as rolling over toetails with their handcarts); they create long waiting lines at the border crossings; they cause store rents to rise; they led to many more pharmacies/dispensaries/grocery stores/cosmetic stores than local residents need; they displace the traditional boutiques and food stalls; etc.

Position 2: The undesirables are the mainland visitors (parallel traders, tourists, business people). The reasons include: they clog up the sidewalks; they cause waiting lines at Chanel, Herms, Ocean Park, Disneyland, Wong Tai Sin, etc; they can't speak Cantonese; they urinate/defecate/spit in public; they talk loud in the MTR; they led to many more jewelry/watch stores, pharmacies/dispensaries, hotels, restaurants, tourist buses than local residents need; they buy up the luxury apartments and cause housing price to rise; they have the wrong political ideology; etc.

Position 3: The undesirables are all persons the mainlanders who are not Hong Kong permanent residents (parallel traders, tourists, business people, new immigrants). For the new immigrants, their problem is that they can't speak Cantonese well, they urinate/defecate/spit in public; they go on the public dole and steal resources that belong to the people of Hong Kong; they multiply like rabbits; they have the wrong political ideology; they think that they are Chinese first, Hongkonger second (if at all); etc.

Position 4: The undesirables are all the outsiders (from the mainland, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, India, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States, South America, Africa, Europe, Middle East, Russia, etc). The reasons include: they clog up the sidewalks; they cause waiting lines at stores and restaurants; they don't speak Cantonese; they try to be friendly by talking to you in English; they led to many more jewelry/watch stores, clothing stores, hotels, restaurants, tourist buses than local residents need; they never think that they are Hongkongers; they are patronizing; they are condescending; etc.

Position 5: The undesirables are all those who were not born in Hong Kong. The reason is that as long as you were born locally, you are always suspected of being disloyal. That is the same reason why the President of the United States has to be born an American, and not an immigrant.

Position 6: The undesirables are all those except the Valiant Warriors of the Hong Kong City-State and their loyal supporters. All others are foreigners, mainlanders or Hong Kong pigs.

- Some people say that the Valiant Warriors of the Hong Kong City-State forced the Hong Kong SAR/Central governments to make concessions. What? 100 or so demonstrators went on rampages to harass citizens (women, children, senior citizens), and the governments yield? But when 1.2 million demonstrators took part in the Umbrella Revolution, the governments stood firm for 79 days before finally clearing the Occupy sites. This is disproportionate.

- (BBC) Shenzhen residents' reactions:

- It's alright if we can't go to Hong Kong. But we demand the Shenzhen authorities to seriously curtail Hongkonger parallel traders. We will not let our reputations be sullied while they benefit.

- Hongkongers should also be limited to one visit per week. They come over here and buy apartments, causing housing prices here to soar. Why can't we have an opinion too?

- Friends, let us unite once more. Except for reasons of work and study, we will not go to Hong Kong for shopping. We will turn Hong Kong back to 2007. We the mainland citizens will not be treated as second-class citizens.

- Let the Hongkongers go ahead. As more and more tax-free zones open up, overseas travel become easier, Shanghai Disneyland opens, who is going to Hong Kong to shop? With less employment opportunities there, we will then restrict Hongkongers from coming to the mainland to steal our resources.

- Hongkongers should be allowed only one visit per year. Let the Hong Kong fools suffer!


Hong Kong demonstrator holding sign: "Go back to the mainland, get out of Hong Kong."

Flashback:

(Oriental Daily) March 9, 2015.


73-year-old Lee Wai-kuen passed by the demonstration site with a handcart. He was surrounded and kicked to the ground by the young demonstrators. Yesterday he was interviewed by our reporter in Tuen Mun City Park.

Lee said that he lives in Tuen Mun. He spends several days a week playing music with fellow hobbyists in Tuen Mun City Park. Last night, he encountered the demonstrators on his way home. "I had to go past that section to go home. I don't know why they would kick me? What didn't the police enforce the law?" He said that demonstrators demanded to know if he was a parallel trader. He did not think that it was necessary to reply. He said with reason: "They are not the police. They don't have the authority to interrogate me."

Videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu4gIlSoKsw (SocREC) Demonstrators harass the 73-year-old man back from playing music in the park.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-u6qlYIfCA (Camman Wong) Assaults on the bald-headed senior citizen and on the senior citizen park music player.

Fast forward:

(Oriental Daily) April 10, 2015.

On March 8, 73-year-old Hong Kong-born Tuen Mun resident Lee Wai-kuen was besieged and shoved to the ground by demonstrators. To seek justice, Grandpa Kuen has filed a civil lawsuit in small claim court against the masked demonstrators for $1 in damages.

Grandpa told our reporter that he is obviously not doing this for the money. Rather, he felt that justice has not been served from Occupy Central to the more recent anti-parallel trader protests. Therefore, he is coming out to seek justice. "The $1 has only symbolic significance. Ultimately I want the persons who pushed me down to the ground to turn themselves in to the police and apologize to me. I am 70 something years old. I have nothing left to fear."

"Who can you complain to about the hurt feelings inside yourself?" Grandpa Kuen said that his audio-visual equipment was damaged during the March 8th "riot." But more importantly, he lost his dignity. So far the police has given him no updates since taking down his statement that day. He fears that the perpetrators will go scot-free. Therefore he is filing that lawsuit. "It has been one month since that incident. I am afraid that the whole thing will just die off."

Grandpa Kuen was born, raised and lived in Hong Kong. He plays the Chinese instrument erhu and the saxophone. On recalled that on the evening of March 8, he had just finished singing in Tuen Mun Park and was going home with his audio-visual equipment in a handcart. He was mistaken as a parallel trader, surrounded and pushed around. Grandpa Kuen condemned the demonstrators for disrupting law and order. He said, "I have to go past that road to get home. I don't know why they kicked me."

Internet comments:

- Nice try, grandpa, but the anti-parallel demonstrators don't have any money, not even $1. So you should have spared yourself.

- Those demonstrators said that justice was not served because the mainland parallel traders were disrupting the lives of Tuen Mun residents. Therefore they took to the streets. They beat up a 73-year-old native Hongkonger. If they did not know that they did wrong at the time, they knew later from the news coverage. But none of them offered a word of apology, never mind paying $1 in compensation. This is their idea of justice being served.

- So simple and naive is this Grandpa Kuen. If those guys were wearing surgical masks, they obviously have no intention of turning themselves in to the police.
- Well, there was that guy in the brown jacket. He did not wear a surgical mask. He wore a black cap and dark sunglasses (even though it was nighttime already).

- Grandpa Kuen won't get any apologies. On Labor Day, the demonstrators are threatening to come back again. If they spot Grandpa Kuen again, they will give administer another beating for making them look bad in the press.

- What kind of lawsuit is this when the plaintiff does not even know the names of the defendants? This is just a publicity stunt.
- But we have the videos and we can run a 'human flesh search' on the perpetrators, and then their names, home/work addresses, telephone numbers and those of their relatives will be known to all. When all that is published, Grandpa Kuen can decide to proceed with the named individuals for the lawsuit.

- Look at the video. Grandpa Kuen was pushed to the ground by the demonstrators. Yes, he could not identify the masked individuals who committed the act due to the lighting and confusion. But does the inability to identify them or produce eyewitness imply that justice will never be served? Look, robbers wear surgical masks when they rob banks, but sometimes they get arrested and convicted. The difference is that the judges have different standards required when the defendant is a pro-democracy activist.

- The true criminals in the videos are the photojournalists. A group of thugs are harassing an old man, and all they see is a sensationalistic news report. They tried to move their cameras into the best positions. They never thought about stopping the violence being a civil duty.

- In defense of the demonstrators, Wong Yeung-tat (Civic Passion) said that what he saw on the videos was that Grandpa Kuen attacked the dozens of demonstrators with a stick. Therefore, the demonstrators were forced to defend themselves in an appropriate manner. Whose eyes do you trust? Yours or his?

- A different case is the one today between Sheung Shui Rural Affairs Committee Hau Chi-keung and 85-year-old Grandma Lau. (SCMP) "The pair began to quarrel and Hau called police after accusing Lau of pointing a finger in his face during their heated exchange. Police arrested Lau for investigation last night." For the video, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHqloHnqNyk at 0:30.

In this case, many people stood firmly behind Grandma Lau, who was said to be bullied by Hau Chi-keung. They made fun of sunglass-wearing Hau's claim that Grandma Lau poked his eyes with her finger. What do your eyes tell you?

(Ta Kung Pao) April 8, 2015.

The disciples of Hong Kong independence instigator Wan Chin were accused of registering the Hong Kong Independence Party in the United Kingdom. In light of the strong reactions, Wan Chin is trying to separate himself from the HKIP.

According to the United Kingdom Election Committee registration data, the Hong Kong Independence Party was officially approved for registration at the end of February this year. The party chief is Kin Chung Wong; the secretary is Daniel Ma; the trustee is Tat Hang Lau. The registered address is 4th floor, 86-90 Paul Street, London, EC2A 4NE United Kingdom.

According to our investigation, Wong Kin-Chung and Lau Tat-hang are Hongkongers who went to study and work in the United Kingdom. These two are not the driving force of the HKIP. Instead, the core member is the officer/secretary Daniel Ma.

22-year-old Daniel Ma dropped out of school last year during Occupy Central in order to devote himself completely to politics. He is a member of Civic Passion, which is actively pushing Hong Kong independence. Daniel Ma is closely connected to Wan Chin, who calls Ma his "beloved disciple." They are like father-and-son. Wan Chin has given Ma the title of "Prince Ching Yuan."

During Occupy Central, Wan Chin authorized Daniel Ma to instigate the farce known as Occupy British Consulate to demand the United Kingdom to re-take Hong Kong and sanction China. Daniel Ma's actions drew attention in the United Kingdom. The UK Parliament's House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee issued a formal invitation to Daniel Ma to testify before them. Ma was unable to attend because his passport had just expired. In the end, Wan Chin sent two other disciples to the United Kingdom, and those two made absurd assertions such as "England should reinstate the Treaty of Nanking."

According to those informed about matters within the Hong Kong City-State circle, Daniel Ma was instructed by Wan Chin after Occupy Central was over to go secretly to England to solicit donations. During that period, Daniel Ma applied to register the Hong Kong Independence Party at the United Kingdom Election Committee. The application was approved in February this year. Daniel Ma has told others that the next step according to Wan China is to issue a petition to the European Parliament to get concerned about Hong Kong and apply pressure on China. Daniel Ma met with United Kingdom Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Sir Richard Ottoway in England. Afterwards, Daniel Ma claimed that the British told him: "You should be squatting outside the British embassy in China. It is useless to squat outside the British Consulate in Hong Kong."

Wan Chin has heaped praises upon the efforts of Daniel Ma. He said, "Hong Kong-United Kingdom-United States-China. All four parties are linked. The young people of Hong Kong are learning how to enter international politicking. My disciple "Prince Ching Yuan" Daniel Ma is leading these actions with the poise of a general."

Ironically, as soon as the Hong Kong Independence Party became known, everyone involved in party stopped taking phone calls. Outsiders cannot contact them anymore. Daniel Ma has deleted all contents on his Facebook, leaving not a single word behind. Wan Chin is issuing denials of any connections to the Hong Kong Independence Party. Yet, the facts prove that the core party members such as Daniel Ma are all closely connected to Wan Chin. Our reporter has called Wan Chin many times at his Lingnan University office, but nobody picked up the phone.

Yesterday the Hong Kong Independence Party posted publicly the criteria for membership: they are only receiving persons who carry the British National (Overseas) passports) or are citizens of the European Union countries, the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom and Switzerland. They demand that each applicant must send in photocopies of their passports to them. After the party has thoroughly checked the applicant, the applicant can pay the 25 annual fee in order to become a member.

(Oriental Daily) April 9, 2015.

There is no explanation as to what the 25 annual fee will be used for ...

The Hong Kong Independence Party said that only those applicants who are approved for membership will receive an email reply. Those who are not approved will not receive any acknowledgement. Furthermore, the application information provided by those are not approved will be destroyed automatically without further notice.

Internet comments:

- I know what the annual fee is being used for.

(Oriental Daily) April 4, 2015.

Citizen Mr. Mak got on the New World First City Number 694 bus with serial number 3039 this from Siu Sai Wan to Tiu Keng Leng at 9am this morning, and found a sticker on the bus. The sticker says: "Leave China: oust the People's Liberation Army; detoxification, purge the Communist spies; return to Britain first and then detoxification, then Hong Kong independence. UK RECLAIMS HK."Mr. Mak first thought that the sticker was an advertisement on the body of the bus. Upon carefully reading the message, he realized that these were words that advocate Hong Kong independence. He suspected that someone was causing trouble. "This is going too far."

25 would buy hundreds of these stickers that can be posted everywhere in Hong Kong on everything (not just subways, ferries, buses and trams, but also trucks, taxis, cars, police vehicles, fire engines, airplanes, public restroom toilet seats, etc).

- They are trying to replicate Sun Yat-sen, the father of modern China. Sun was terrible at making the revolution happen, but he was really good at raising money from the overseas Chinese business community (see Dr. Sun Yat-sen Hawaii Foundation). Sun Yat-sen was given the nickname "Big Cannon Sun" because he was all talk and no action. So the Hong Kong Independence Party now has an overseas fundraising operation in place. But who is going to make the revolution happen?

- This is getting strange. Membership requirements for the Hong Kong Independence Party: holders of BN(O) passports or European Union/USA/Switzerland/Japan citizens only.
- Even stranger -- passport information must be submitted first and no response will be given if the applicant is not approved for membership. Are you sure that this isn't a data collection program run by the Chinese Communists? That is, if you send in your passport information, you will never be allowed inside China again.

- The bad news is that if the Hong Kong Independence Party revolutionaries succeed, Hong Kong will be run by a bunch of Americans, Europeans, Japanese and Swiss (they are not European Union citizens). The good news is that there won't be any Aussies or Kiwis.

(Ming Pao) No fear of decreased mainland visitors, Sun Hung Kay malls did more than $400 million in business. April 7, 2015.

Although the Hong Kong government data showed that the number of visitors in March fell by 8.7% year-to-year and the Tourism Bureau said that the number of registered mainland tour groups fell to a daily average of 320 in March, compared to the daily average of 470 in March last year. As a result, the retail industry was going to be affected.

But Sun Hung Kai Properties rentals agency general manager Chung Sau-lin said that their shopping malls were turning to attracting local customers in order to increase traffic. For their nine shopping malls (including Mikiki in San Po Kong; WTC More in Causeway Bay; Landmark North in Sheung Shui North; East Point City in Tseung Kwan O; Chelsea Heights Plaza in Tuen Mun) as illustration for the five-day Easter/Ching Ming holiday on April 3-7, there were 6.9 million visits (15% more than the same period last year) and the turnover was $402 million (21% more than the same period last year).

Comment:

This news report seems straightforward enough since it depends on the data provided by Sun Hung Kay Properties. But it contains many problems.

First of all, let's us look at the spatial dimension. According to the Sun Hung Kai Properties website, they have 20 shopping malls:

The Ming Pao report refers to data from 9 of those 20 shopping malls. There is no explanation of why 9 were selected but not the other 11. Of the 9 that were selected, only five were named :

Mikiki in San Po Kong
WTC More in Causeway Bay
Landmark North in Sheung Shui
East Point City in Tseung Kwan O
Chelsea Heights Plaza in Tuen Mun

There is no explanation why the other 4 were not named.

If we look at the list of 20 shopping malls, which are the best known ones?

- IFC Mall (Hong Kong Island)
- APM (Kwun Tong)
- Moko (Mong Kok)
- New Town Plaza (Shatin)
- Tai Po Mega Mall (Tai Po)
- Tsuen Wan Plaza (Tsuen Wan)

None were on the list of 5 named.

Another angle is to look at the towns that had anti-parallel trader demonstrations. These were presumably the ones that had the most parallel traders and/or mainland tourists and therefore most likely affected by any repercussions.

- Sha Tin: The list of 5 has neither New Town Plaza nor HomeSquare.

- Tai Po: The list of 5 has neither Tai Po Mega Mall nor Uptown Plaza.

- Tsuen Wan: The list of 5 did not have Tsuen Wan Plaza.

- Yuen Long: The list of 5 has neither Sun Yuen Long Centre nor Yuen Long Plaza.

- Tuen Mun: The list of 5 has Chelsea Heights Plaza which is on the other side of the Tuen Mun River from the Tuen Mun town center and therefore visited neither by mainland parallel traders nor tourists nor demonstrators. The list of 5 did not name V City which was invaded by demonstrators because it is frequented by mainland tourists/day shoppers.

- Sheung Shui: The list of 5 has Landmark North. But Sheung Shui is not a tourist town. The perceived problem there is with the parallel traders who work from the distribution centers based inside industrial buildings.

In summary, out of 20 Sun Hung Kai Properties malls, 10 are located in towns in which anti-parallel traders/mainland tourists demonstrations took place. The list of five did not have 8 of those malls. Of the two named, one was a fringe mall in Tuen Mun and another one was irrelevant in Sheung Shui.

In the list of 5 named, Mikiki from San Po Kong is out of the way for mainland visitors (and even Hongkongers), as the district is a former industrial zone now being slowly converted into a mixed commercial/residential zone. Nobody goes there to visit because there is nothing unavailable elsewhere. East Point City in Tseung Kwan O is a second-tier mall compared to Park Central in Tseung Kwan O, which is not on the list of 5 named. It is also far away from the beaten path for parallel traders/tourists. Why would anyone travel to the end of the MTR line to visit a mall that looks exactly the same as elsewhere but smaller?

In summary, the choice of the five out of the nine and the choice of nine out of the twenty are both highly problematic. A better approach to this story would be to look at the data for those malls in the affected areas, or for all twenty malls together. As it stands, the choice is just fishy.

Next we want to look at the problem in the time dimension.

The "current reference period" is the five-day Easter/Ching Ming Festival holiday in 2015.

In 2015, we have a five-day holiday in Hong Kong (see Gov.hk):

Friday April 3: Good Friday
Saturday April 4: The day following Good Friday
Sunday April 5: Regular holiday
Monday April 6: The day following Ching Ming Festival (to make up for the April 5th Ching Ming Festival falling on a Sunday)
Tuesday April 7: The day following Easter Monday (to to make up for the Monday lost to the Ching Ming Festival lost to Sunday)

In mainland China, the official Qing Ming Festival (Tomb Sweeping Day) holidays run from April 5-6 (see China Briefing). They do not celebrate Easter.

In 2014, we have these corresponding holidays in Hong Kong (see Gov.hk):

Saturday April 5 (Ching Ming Festival)

Friday April 18: Good Friday
Saturday April 19: The day following Good Friday
Sunday April 20: Regular holiday
Monday April 21: Easter Monday (to make up for Easter Sunday lost to Sunday)

In mainland China, the official Qing Ming Festival (Tomb Sweeping Day) holidays run from April 5-7 (see China Briefing). They do not celebrate Easter.

When that Ming Pao report referred to "the same period last year", what could they possibly mean? The most likely choice is by matching Easter as well as Friday-Tuesday:

April 3-7 (Friday-Tuesday) 2015 versus April 18-22 (Friday-Tuesday) 2014

Just remember that mainlanders celebrate Ching Ming Festival (Qing Ming Festival) but not Easter. The number of mainland visitors on April 3 and April 7 2015 should clearly be much higher than April 18 and April 22 2014 which are Friday and Tuesday in an ordinary work week.

They could have done some other things, such as April 3-7 (Friday-Tuesday) 2015 versus [April 5 2014 plus April 18-21 2014]. But that would be most odd.

In summary, the difference in when Ching Ming Festival and Easter fall each year confounds any comparison. We don't know how Ming Pao and/or Sun Hung Kai Properties choose the data.

Of course, this is the not the first time that calendar differences have confounded comparisons. For example, it was reported (see Censtad) that retail sales decreased by 14.5% in January 2015 compared to January 2014. Horror! Shock! Then it was reported that retail sales increased by 14.9% in February 2015 compared to February 2014. Why? Spending normally attains a high immediately before the Lunar New Year. The Lunar New Year fell on January 31 in 2014 but February 19 in 2015. That's why it is better to look at the first two months taken together. When taken together, retail sales for the first two months in 2015 decreased by 2% compared to the first two months in 2014.

Apart from the space and time problems with the Ming Pao report, you may also be interested in how the numbers are collected.

When Sun Hung Kai Properties report on the number of visitors per day, they do not actually have sensors installed at all entrances for recording purposes. They use human counters to work a small number of hours a day per entrance and multiple up to estimate the total. For example, they count 400 persons in one hour coming through a certain entrance. Since the mall is opened from 5am to 12m, they estimate that 400 x 19 = 7,600 persons came through that entrance over the course of the day. If there are 10 entrances, they estimate that 7,600 x 10 = 76,000 persons came into the mall that day.

This methodology is unbiased if the supervisor is arranging the schedule with suitable randomization and spending enough to cover different hours and entrances. But if the supervisor arranges the schedule according to convenience (e.g. all counting takes place between 9am and 5pm), then the sample results cannot be extrapolated accurately (e.g. to 11pm-12m).

When Sun Hung Kai Properties reported on the total turnover in their malls, they are not receiving detailed electronic reports from their renters. Instead each night, a Sun Hung Kai employee goes around the mall asking the individual store managers what their proceeds were for the day. The number is imprecise. That is, the Sun Hung Kai worker has to cover every store before they close. So she may start with some stores earlier long before they close. Or the store manager will give rounded numbers ("Oh, around $50,000") because they don't know what the actual amount will be (for example, the bill for a wedding banquet cannot be determined until the number of bottles of liquor consumed is counted at the end of the day).

Sun Hung Kai Properties said that their 9 malls had 6.9 million visitor times during April 3-7 2015. On the average, the daily number of visitors per mall is 6,900,000 / (9 x 5) = 153,333. This number is a lot bigger than most pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong. But if the mall is opened 6am-12m, this is 153,333 / 18 = 8,518 per hour on the average, or 8,518 / 60 = 142 per minute on the average. That's not a lot when there are many entrances to the mall.

Besides the number of visitors is misleading. For example, in the Moko mall, most of the 'visitors' come through the pedestrian overpass in Mong Kok to take the East Rail MTR. That is, most of them enter the mall entrance, they walk through the lobby and they enter the MTR without doing a thing inside the mall. But they are counted all the same as mall traffic.

Sun Hung Kai Properties said their tenants grossed HK$402 million during April 3-7 2015. On the average, the daily gross sales per mall is $402,000,000 / (9 x 5) = $8,933,333. If the mall has 300 tenants, then they grossed $8,933,333 / 300 = $29,779 on the average. That's great for a boutique but an unmitigated disaster for a wedding caterer with 100 employees. So you really need to look at what is happening at the shop level. But Sun Hung Kai Properties is not going to tell you what has happened with the pharmacies/dispensaries in the New Town Plaza in Sha Tin district.

P.S. Oh, with reports like this one, there was a reason why Ming Pao lost its claim to Number One In Public Trust that it held for so many years that the claim became a part of its logo but which has to be removed now. What reporter can write such rubbish, and what gate-keeping editor could let his pass through?

Addendum:


Apple Daily has this chart:
CY Leung says that anti-parallel trader protests have caused the number of visitors to Hong Kong to fall
Immigration Department: Number of tourists rise 9.5% during the Ching Ming Festival holidays
Data:
2015 (April 4-6) 1.56 million total visitors, 359,000 mainland visitors
2014 (April 5-7) 1.43 million total visitors, 418,000 mainland visitors
Therefore, total visitors were up by 9.5%, mainland visitors were down by 14%

(Apple Daily) After Apple Daily published the chart, the Immigration Department clarified. The 1.56 million total visitors are actually all those who crossed the border into Hong Kong, including Hong Kong residents who were away plus outside visitors from the mainland and elsewhere. The data that Apple Daily wanted to talk about was:

2015 (April 4-6) 468,000 total visitors, which is 12.4% lower than the 534,300 during April 5-7 2014.

Within total visitors, mainland visitors went from 418,100 to 359,500 for a 14% loss, while non-mainland visitors went from 116,200 to 108,500 for a 6.6% loss.

Unfortunately, these data would not fit the theme of the story, namely CY Leung is a liar.

Apple Daily should have known that they got their interpretation wrong. It is well-known that mainland visitors account for about 70%-80% of all visitors to Hong Kong. So how can there be 418,000 mainland visitors out of 1.43 million visitors in 2014? That's only 29%. If those 418,000 mainland visitors were allegedly enough to seriously disrupt the lives of Hong Kong citizens, then how would 1,012,000 non-mainland visitors do? Where would they stay? There are only 71,998 hotel rooms in all of Hong Kong!  This would have been a bigger story with the headline "American, European and Japanese tourists forced to sleep under the highway!" or "Foreign tourists get a taste of Occupy Central-style sleeping in the streets."

(Wikipedia) A fractal is a natural phenomenon or a mathematical set that exhibits a repeating pattern that displays at every scale. If the replication is exactly the same at every scale, it is called a self-similar pattern.

(Wikipedia) Cheung Chau is a small island 10 km southwest of Hong Kong Island. It has been inhabited for longer than most other places in the territory of Hong Kong, with a  population of about 23,000. New World Ferry operates ferry serves between Central pier and Cheung Chau approximately every 30 minutes.

(Oriental Daily) April 6, 2015.

New World First Ferry announced that as of 9pm this evening, 50,000 passenger trips were made between Cheung Chau Island and Central pier on Hong Kong Island. Half of these trips were from Central pier to Cheung Chau, and the other half back. Yesterday, 60,000 passenger trips were made. By noon yesterday, the line at Central Pier was about 2,000 persons long. The police came to set up barricades and traffic cones to control the human flow. In the evening, almost 1,000 citizens lined up at the Cheung Chau to make the return trip. Certain Cheung Chau residents set up a booth to collect signatures in support of the "Reclaim Cheung Chau, give us back our ferry" campaign. These citizens want the Transport Department and New World Ferry to deal with the problem.


Cheung Chau ferry at Central Pier

(Oriental Daily) April 7, 2015.

By around noon yesterday, about 2,000 people were waiting at the Central Pier to go to the outer islands. At Pier Number 5 (destination Cheung Chau), the line stretched from Pier 5 to Pier 6 and then wrapped back around in a U-shape to Pier 5. By 3pm, there were already 20,000 passenger trips to Cheung Chau. In the evening, another line appeared for the ferry service from Cheung Chau to Central, with as many as 1,000 persons in line. By the Cheung Chau pier, all the garbage cans were filled with nobody emptying them.

According to Cheung Chau resident Mr. Chan, he wanted to go to Central for work around noon. But he did not expect to run into so many citizens who had spent the night in Cheung Chau and are now heading back home. The ferry service told him that the waiting line was 3 hours. As a result, Mr. Chan lost about $1,000 in wages today. He criticized the ferry service for poor arrangements.

(Apple Daily video) April 7, 2015.

Internet comments:

- The people of Cheung Chau can't live anymore! The ferry seats are occupied by tourists (from Hong Kong Island/Kowloon), their homes are being used by tourists as vacation homes, food prices are soaring (because most food is imported), there are no jobs (unless as waiters/waitresses/cooks/hotel receptionists/janitors) and they are always at risk of being run over by reckless tourists on bicycles.

- My family lives in Kowloon, and it has been years since we visited Cheung Chau. I read in the news that the lives of the Cheung Chau people were disrupted yesterday by the horde of visitors from the mainland (=Hong Kong/Kowloon/New Territories), leading to a lot of grumbling. I apologize here. I want to remind those whining Cheung Chau residents that you shouldn't do unto others what you wouldn't want others to do to you. Therefore, Cheung Chau residents, please don't ever come to Hong Kong/Kowloon/New Territories and use up our resources. Thanks! May you have a happy holiday!

- We the people of Hong Kong/Kowloon have sometimes deemed to patronize Cheung Chau. We don't have to do it. If they give us lip, we'll boycott them. Their economy will be destroyed and they will beg us to come back. We'll think about it then.

- I live in Kowloon, and the neighborhood ramen noodle shop always has a long line of people outside. These diners are not local residents for they come from all over Hong Kong. As a result, my street is always crowded, it is always noisy and the prices of noodles are kept high at $144 per bowl (because they can). As a local resident, I should be able to buy a bowl of roast pork ramen noodle soup for HK$10. These people from other districts are seriously disrupting the lifestyle that I want to lead.

- Why do the people of Cheung Chau think that their island belongs to them? We are not invading their private homes. We are just walking/bicycling around public streets, sitting in public spaces and dining in commercial establishments. Those people who want to monopolize the resources of Cheung Chau are just so selfish!

- If people from other districts are not allowed to come here, everything will be cheaper (housing, food, etc). Life would be so idyllic. But that won't happen immediately. It will happen if and only if we get civil nomination for the Chief Executive election.

- It is a matter of comparison. Just take a look at the photos coming from the scenic sites in China during the May 1st or October 1st Golden Week holidays. Now that is truly living hell. So my advice to the people of Cheung Chau is: Suck on it!  You ain't seen nothing yet!

Great Wall, Beijing


Qingdao beach

- Question: "Hey boss, why are you blocking the entrance into your restaurant?"
- Answer: "We give priority to Cheung Chau indigenous people."

- Just think about the physics. How do  you squeeze 20,000 people into that tiny Cheung Po Tsai cave? We the people of Cheung Chau don't necessarily object to the mainlanders (that is, residents of Hong Kong, Kowloon and New Territories). Some of our best friends are mainlanders. We have even been known to inter-marry. But there is just too many of those people coming in right now. Our place is overrun by Hong Kong/Kowloon tourists on holidays and weekends. This has to stop NOW, or else we'll be forced to find ways to defend our homeland. And if the signature campaign leads nowhere, we'll be forced to find more powerful ways. So if you're smart, don't come to Cheung Chau! We don't want you here!

- There was a time when nobody wanted to go the Cheung Chau due to the spate of stories about people renting vacation homes in order to commit suicide by carbon-monoxide poisoning from indoor charcoal stoves. The Cheung CHau economy was in dead water. Now that business is booming through the efforts of the government and the local community, they want to go back?

- 25,000 persons crammed into an island with a total population of 23,000 residents! This has to be compared to several tens of thousands of mainland tourists each day in Hong Kong with a total population of 7 million. Which is worse?

- This is the replication of the so-called China-Hong Kong conflict. This time, it is Hongkongers against Hongkongers. The people of Cheung Chau are starting a Reclaim movement. Will they be valiant enough to kick, push and curse out the mainlanders (from Hong Kong/Kowloon/New Territories)?

- I have a friend who is a new immigrant from a rural village in Zhaoqing (Guangdong province). Her father grew bananas for a living to make several thousand yuan a year. His children helped with the farming chores. I was telling her about the best sightseeing sites in Hong Kong (Victoria Peak, Stanley, Repulse Bay, etc). I also mentioned Cheung Chau which I described in some detail. Did she want to go there? She said: "No way. This sounds exactly like the rural village where I came from. I hated that place. There is nothing there. Why would I go there after I get to Hong Kong?" Well, what is for sure is that the 25,000 people who went to Cheung Chau are not from mainland China, because they've already seen it all. It's only the city hicks from Hong Kong Island/Kowloon who want to have a little bit of that rural feel.

- How many of the Cheung Chau visitors are mainland parallel traders? Well, it costs HK$44.50 to take the MTR from Lo Wu station to Central station. It costs another $25.80 to take the New World Ferry from Central to Cheung Chau. Total round trip cost = ($44.50 + $25.80) x 2 = $140.60). This compares to the $44.8 roundtrip between Lo Wu and Sheung Shui. That's another $100 and many hours that the parallel trader could have kept for himself.

- This is just poor planning by New World Ferry. Based upon historical data, they should have assigned more ferries on this day. Instead of one ferry every 30 minutes, they should have been assigning three times as many ferries at one every 10 minutes.
- Eh, do you think New World Ferry would have three times that many ferries sitting in the dock and three times that many qualified sailors hired through the year just for these special days?  Who is going to pay for the over-capacity?
- Stupid! New World Ferry can charge three times the current prices in order to keep three times the capacity. That's all.
- If $25.80 x 3 = $77.40 too much for a 30-minute ferry ride?  Well, it costs $100 for the 20-minute Ferris Wheel ride in Central. And it costs $100 for the elevator ride to the observation deck Sky 100 in the International Commerce Centre. So $77.40 is cheap!

- What have the Cheung Chau people got to complain about? I live in Chai Wan, far away from any tourist sightseeing sites. But there was a long line of people trying to get into the Chai Wan MTR station today! Those were the people just back from sweeping their ancestors' tombs in Chai Wan cemetery. I wish I could tell those people to never come here again. Of course, I can't. But I think that it is time for the government to respond to the Chai Wan residents' complaints and impose limits on the number of visits (for example, you can only go to the Chai Wan cemetery every other year based upon whether the last digit of your Hong Kong ID is odd or even). We, the people of Chai Wan, can't take this anymore! Our human rights are being violated. This is worse than being raped!

- The effective way to control traffic is to open the ferry for everyone on the weekday, and then restrict it to only residents during the weekends and holidays. Any exceptions can be requested by written application to some local committee which meets on an irregular basis. This is the only way to preserve the Cheung Chau way of living.

- Oh, wait, those news photos show a lot of Caucasians whom we can't afford to ostracize because they may complain to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. That would be a terrible loss of face. A compromise would be to hang out a sign that says: "No Chinamen or dogs allowed" at the ferry ticket office. A mainlander is Chinese, of course, but so is a Hongkonger. Are the Cheung Chau residents Chinese? Of course not. They have completely different histories, cultures, economies, etc from the mainland Chinamen and the Hong Kong Island/Kowloon pigs.
- What happens if a Cheung Chau resident marries an outsider? He/she loses Cheung Chau citizenship automatically! And the children too!

- Alternately, there is a way to make money off this (there always is, if you put your mind to it). New World First Ferry will offer free rides to registered Cheung Chau permanent residents (that is, those who ancestors have been living there for three or more generations). During the work week, New World First Ferry will charge $40 for all others (compared to $13.20 that they charge everyone right now for the ordinary service). On weekends and holidays, New World First Ferry will charge $100 per trip for all others (compared to the $19.40 that they charge everyone right now for the ordinary service). This is a highly effective way of screening out all the cheapskates to make sure that there is maximum spending by a minimum number of suckers, and it will buy off the local protestors with free rides too.

- Even if New World First Ferry won't impose differential rates (which they already do because they offer lower prices to students, seniors and physically handicapped persons), the Cheung Chau District Council can impose an entry fee upon landing (free for local residents upon producing a Cheung Chau ID).

- Well, during the Easter/Ching Ming holidays, I have been to Elements (West Kowloon), K11 (TST), International Square (TST) and Moko (Mong Kok) malls. Traffic and sales were pathetic, because all the Hongkongers with the fat wallets have gone to South Korea, Japan etc to take advantage of the falling foreign currency exchange rates and the mainlanders are not coming to Hong Kong anymore because they feel unwelcome. So the whole thing is that certain dislocations will occur during unusual times. The only question is whether the Cheung Chau residents are willing to put up with these periodic dislocations.
How do we know what the Cheung Chau people think? It is time to commission the Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme to conduct yet another referendum! Like their previous efforts, the results will not be binding but will stimulate further conversations that will result in ... yet another referendum!

- Here is what is destroying Cheung Chau life today -- a 759 store! I don't care if you say that 759 is a pro-democracy convenience store  because their big boss suppors Occupy Central. The fact is that it has no place in Cheung Chau.

- Thanks to the logic that is preached by the Reclaim XXX people, the people of Hong Kong are divided by district. Soon, you won't be allowed to even cross the street because that you are invading someone's else turf. Thanks a lot to the Hong Kong independence warriors for showing the path to salvation!

- A large number of Cheung Chau establishments cater to outside visitors. They include the daily-rate vacation home rentals, the Warwick Hotel, bicycle rental shops, souvenir shops and rip-off seafood restaurants. Keeping the visitors out will devastate the local economy. They can't all convert to selling curry fish balls, can they?

- Where are Ray Wong and the rest of the Hong Kong Indigenous people when they are needed most? Cheung Chau is one of the indigenous settlements, and therefore its residents are more authentically indigenous than most other Hongkongers. We are not talking about those pro-Hong Kong independence students who tried to go to the mainland to sweep their ancestors' tombs. We are talking about people who have lived in Cheung Chau for many generations. Why won't Hong Kong Indigenous come out to defend their indigenous homeland?

- Look what happened during the Easter/Ching Ming holidays -- the number of mainland visitors has dropped precipitously. This shows the actions taken by Civic Passion/Hong Kong Indigenous/North District Parallel Imports Concern Group worked to perfect effect. They went out and randomly beat up a few parallel traders, tourists, visitors, children and senior citizens, and have struck fear in the rest of the mainland population. All it takes to stop the invasion of Cheung Chau is for Civic Passion to randomly beat up a few individuals (and they don't even have to be non-indigenous persons) and everybody will stop coming. Then Cheung Chau can go back to being a peaceful fishing village.

- The demographic problem with Cheung Chau goes far beyond weekend/holiday locusts from Hong Kong. The fact is that non-residents are allowed to purchase/rent homes in Cheung Chau, thus diluting the native bloodline. That has got to be stopped immediately. All the vermin from the outside must be cleansed.

- There is plenty of unoccupied space in Siberia. Why don't we all move there and get along?

- Cheung Chau is not ready for independence. It does not have the food/water supply, it does not have an economic base, it has no cars (repeat: privately owned cars are not allowed but they do have some ambulances and fire engines), it does not have any public housing estates, it does not have an army, it does not have international acceptance (because most of the world has never heard of it). But it has one hospital, it has a crematorium, it has a cemetery, it has many non-Cantonese speakers (Hakka, Chiu Chau and Yue Ca), it has four primary schools and two secondary schools, it has plenty of bicycles and tricycles.

- Next up is the Cheung Chau Bun Festival on the eighth day of the fourth month of the year. "The annual Cheung Chau Bun Festival is a festival which includes a parade of floats, most famously including young children dressed as famous characters doing impossible balancing acts. It last three to four days and attracts tens of thousands of visitors to the island." Will it take a sea disaster with an overloaded ferry to finally get the public's attention?

Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45

The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government.

The method for selecting the Chief Executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.

The specific method for selecting the Chief Executive is prescribed in Annex I: "Method for the Selection of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region".

(Alliance for True Democracy) January 8, 2014.

ATDs Election Plan includes three channels for nomination: civil nomination, political party nomination, and nomination by the nominating committee. Civil nomination demands a candidate to secure the signed endorsement of 1% of the registered voters; political party nomination requires a political party receiving 5% or more of the total valid votes in the last Legislative Council direct election. The nominating committee shall not refuse to endorse any civil and political party nominees who meet the legal requirements, such as not less than 40 years old, has no right of abode in any foreign country; political conditions such as love China, love Hong Kong and no confrontations with Beijing are not acceptable. ATD also demands the abolition of the existing stipulation which disallows the Chief Executive belonging to a political party membership.

ATD believes that civil nomination and political party nomination are within the scope of democratic procedures. It believes that its proposed plan satisfies the provisions of Article 45 of the Basic Law, and demands the SAR Government to place this election plan in its next round of consultation.

Put aside whether you think ATD's proposals are within the scope of Article 45 of the Basic Law.

(Post852) April 4, 2015.

Executive Council member and Stanford University masters degree holder Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee said today that civil nomination is not an international standard. Of the five proposals advanced during the discussions about the Chief Executive election in the Basic Law, none advocated civil nomination. She also said that the many nations in the world do not have civil nomination. Therefore civil nomination is a false issue.

Ip Lau's assertion is nothing new. Last July, DAB vice-chairwoman Chiang Lai-wan had said at the City Forum that only five nations in the world uses civil nomination to determine the candidates for their leaders, while advanced nations such as the United Kingdom do not have civil nomination. Even National People's Congress chairman Zhang Dejiang has said something similar.

The question is, Are there really so few nations in the world with civil nomination? Of course not!

Chinese University of Hong Kong Political and Administrative Sciences associate professor Ma Ngok has compiled a list of the nations in the world that have civil nomination. The detailed information is listed on Pages 68-69 of the Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme's Occupy Central with Love and Peace Deliberation page.

According to Ma Ngok's tabulations, at least 32 nations which have either presidential or quasi-presidential systems use civil nomination for their presidential candidates. Many of these are developed countries. For example, South Korea, Iceland, Portual and Taiwan have civil nomination. Some of these countries have fairly low thresholds, as low as 0.2% of the population. We want to ask Ip Lau, who has the masters degree, whether 32 nations is a small number?

Internet comments:

- According to the infoplease, there are 196 countries in the world today (unless you don't count Taiwan). 192 countries are UN members. Should we let 32 out of 196 countries dictate what the rest must do? Please look carefully the list and see if you can find: the United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France, Germany, Brazil, South Africa, etc.

- What kind of 'international' standards are followed by 32 out of 196 countries and not by the remaining (196-32) = 164 countries? Enquiring minds need to know!

- I don't have a problem with Hong Kong following the 'international standards' of civil nomination of its leader. But I would like to see the whole international community (especially the hypocrites such as United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada) do likewise. They wouldn't be excluded from the international community, would they?

- According to Ma Ngok's document, there are 9 countries using civil nomination for their presidents, with his annotated notes:

--- Guinea-Bissau (5,000 voter signatures with at least 50 votes per province out of a population of 1.7 million)
--- South Korea (at least 5,000 voter signatures but not more than 7,000 voters, from at least 5 provinces with not less than 500 signatures per province, out of a population of 49 million)
--- Chile (at least 0.5% of the number of registered voters)
--- Malawi (at least 10 voters each from 28 districts, out of a population of 16.4 million)
--- Sierra Leone (political party nomination) (in other words, not civil nomination!)
--- Ghana (at least 2 voters each from 216 districts, out of a population of 24.2 million)
--- Angola (at least 5,000 but not more than 10,000 nominations out of a population of 18.5 million)
--- Tajikistan (nominated by political parties and then submitted for civil nomination by at least 5% of the citizens) in other words, not civil nomination)
--- Zambia (at least 200 voter signatures out of a population of 14.3 million)

There are 23 more countries which have quasi-presidential systems:

--- Austria (at least 6,000 nominations out of a population of 8.2 million)
--- Bulgaria (at least 15,000 nominations out of a population of 7 million)
--- Cape Verde (at least 1,000 voter signatures but not more than 4,000 out of a population of 500,000.
--- Croatia (at least 10,000 voter signatures out of a population of 4.5 million)
--- Finland (at least 20,000 voter signatures out of a population of 5.3 million)
--- France (at least 500 signatures from 30 departments from members of the French Parliament/European Parliament) (not more than 50 from any single department) (in other words, not civil nomination of President/Prime Minister)
--- Georgia (50,000 voter signatures out of a population of 4.6 million)
--- Iceland (at least 1,500 voter signatures but not more than 3,000 out of a population of 300,000)
--- Ireland (at least 30 parliamentarians) (in other words, not civil nomination)
--- Lithuania (20,000 voter signatures out of a population of 3.5 million)
--- Macedonia (10,000 voter signatures out of a population of 2 million)
--- Mali (10 national parliamentarians or 5 local parliamentarians from each local district) (in other words, not civil nomination)
--- Mongolia (nomination by political parties holding parliamentary seats) (in other words, not civil nomination)
--- Montenegro (signatures from 1.5% of the voters)
--- Namibia (300 voters from at least 10 different provinces out of a population of 2.2 million)
--- Peru (nomination by political parties registered with the national election committee)
--- Poland (100,000 voter signatures out of a population of 38.4 million)
--- Portugal (at least 7,500 and at most 15,000 voter signatures out of a population of 10.8 million)
--- Romania (at least 200,000 voter signatures out of a population of 21.8 million)
--- Senegal (at least 10,000 voter signatures from at least 6 provinces with at least 500 per province out of a population of 7.2 million)
--- Slovakia (at least 15,000 voter signatures)
--- Slovenia (at least 5,000 voter signatures out of a population of 2 million)
--- Taiwan (signatures from at least 1.5% of the voters)
--- East Timor (5,000 voter signatures out of a population of 1.2 million)
--- Turkey (nomination by political parties with at least 10% of the votes in the prior parliamentary election) (in other words, not civil nomination)
--- Russia (at least 2,000,000 voter signatures out of a population of 425 million)
--- Czech Republic (at least 50,000 voter signatures out of a population of 10.2 millino)
--- Kazakhstan (1% of voters even spread across at least 2/3 of the provinces)
--- Kyrgyzstan (10,000 voters out of a population of 24 million)

So who are you going to go with?

On one side, you have Chile, Angola, Zambia, Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Finland, Georgia, Iceland, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Taiwan, East Timor, Russia, Czech Republic, Kazahkstan and Kyrgyzstan.

On the other side, you have the rest of the world with the likes of the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Japan, Indonesia, India, South Africa, etc.

My point is less so about who has the greater clout. The point I want to make is that the system adopted by each nation necessarily reflects local conditions (history, internal/international politics, demographics, economics, etc). It is wrong to pull out a dataset from somewhere without considering local conditions and say "32 countries in the world do it, so we must follow them."

Additional homework exercise: What do (196 - 32) = 164 nations not have civil nomination for their leaders? Start with the United Kingdom.

- This meme should have been dead a long time ago. But zombies never die. They won't even fade away.

(Wikipedia) The Qingming Festival is Tomb-Sweeping Day in China, and falls on April 4 or 5. On this day, Chinese people visit the graves of their ancestors to remember and honor them. Young and old pray before the ancestors, sweep the tombs and offer food, tea, wine, chopsticks, joss paper accessories, and/or libations to the ancestors.

(InMediaHK)

1. What happened this morning

During the Umbrella Movement, Eason Chung, Alex Chow and other Federation of Students members attempted to go to Beijing. They were unsuccessful and had their Home Return Permits canceled. I did not imagine that this could happen to be. I didn't think that I did much during the Umbrella Movement, I did not receive much attention and therefore I should not have been noted by the authorities. People tell me that other members of the university student union and the Federation of Students could return to China. So I thought I would be okay too ...

So I agreed to go with my family to the mainland hometown to sweep the graves. I have not gone back to the mainland for a while. I miss my hometown relatives. I arranged to meet my family at Luohu around 11am on April 4 2015 to go together. I exited the Hong Kong side easily. At the mainland entry point, I was "randomly selected" for inspection and brought into a room.

I had arranged with my family that they should go ahead if I get held up. But they waited outside the whole time until I was told that I couldn't enter the mainland. I am grateful to my family, even though we have had heated quarrels over the Umbrella Movement.

I sat in the room for almost one hour. I asked to place my phone, my Octopus card and other things into my backpack. That is, I could not have anything in my pockets. When I entered the room, they took my Home Return Permit and my Hong Kong ID. They opened my backpack and inspected it. Then I waited. Four other individuals were also "randomly selected" and brought into the room. They were allowed to leave after a quick inspection of their documents. I did not bring anything with me. I thought that the reason why I was kept waiting was obvious, even though nobody stated it.

I was surprised by the reception. I am just a frail young man. One or two public security officers were posted near the door (which probably scared the other people who were brought into the room). They kept a watch on me. The public security officers carefully examined my documents. Other officials walked by, looked at me with curiosity and whispered to exchange information. I felt bad, not because of the treatment but because there was an unbridgeable chasm between me and them: we are incapable of understanding each other.

I was taken out of the room to have photos taken. Then I was brought back into the room to wait. My family was anxious, but there was nothing that I could do. Finally the officials came back in with my documents and announced: I was involved in law-breaking activities in Hong Kong which may endanger national security. Therefore I was not allowed to enter mainland China. I would be sent back immediately to Hong Kong. It was around noon. I told my family not to worry. I was then taken back to Hong Kong.

2. What I did before

I am really curious about just what I did to deserve such grand treatment. Let me recall what I did. I was an obedient child. I attended a "patriotic" elementary school in Macau. After I came to Hong Kong, I have a clean record. The so-called "law-breaking activities" could only be those protest activities.

I wondered about myself. To my mind, I am just a small potato that did not deserve so much attention from them. At the Chinese University of Hong Kong, I am a vice-president of the Student Union. I was not bold, I did attend the activities, but I don't even dare to speak to the media. The other executive members are much bolder than I am. Indeed, the president and the two vice-president of the CUHK Student Union are also Federation of Students standing committee members. I was not a dutiful committee member. I have only attended the standing committee meetings once or twice. In today's standards, I should have been dismissed because of dereliction of duty.

I was even more scared during the Umbrella Movement. I could face up to this experience. During the run-up to Occupy Central, I attended the first two days of the deliberation as a representative of the CUHK SU. That was all. During the June 22 referendum and the July 25 meeting, I was in Taiwan and couldn't do anything. During the student strike, I kept guard at the Federation of Students tents.

Between the September 26 charge into Civic Plaza and September 28, I did even less. On September 28, I witnessed the tear gas near the School of Performance Art and I saw the riot police charged into Locke Road. At the time, I went back to CUHK to attend the student strike meeting. I was too scared to do anything. I began to show up more regularly in the Occupy area in mid-October.

I cursed myself for being cowardly, but I am more surprised by the Communist regime's fear of the cowardice of students. I was an unknown student far away from the limelight. I have never even had my Hong Kong ID recorded for any reason (therefore, I don't think the black list was provided by the Hong Kong Police to the mainland authorities). I never imagined that the state apparatus would handle the matter in such a manner. At a time when the authorities kept saying that Hong Kong will have to depend on China, this is very risible.

(Ming Pao) April 5, 2015.

Two former members of the Chinese University of Hong Kong Student Union were refused entry into mainland China when they went back with their families for the Qingming Festival. The reason was that the two engaged in law-breaking activities which may endanger national security ... Kwan said: "I can't imagine why the rising Grand Nation would be scared to death of a lightly regarded student." He thought that he is unlikely to be allowed to go to mainland China for at least the next two to three years. He is about to graduate soon, but he does not think that he can take on any job that involves going to mainland China.

Yesterday afternoon, another CUHK member Fung Sai-kit went back with his family to his Guangdong ancestral home. Fung said that he was taken into a room where the officials interrogated him about his occupation and background. Fung responded with factual information. After waiting for half an hour, the official said that he was not allowed to enter. Fung said that the mainland officials were reasonably cordial. One of them told him: "Sorry, but I don't even know what the people up there are up to."

Fung said that, to a certain degree, he thinks that Hongkongers are Chinese too. But this rejection of entry has weakened his national identity. He is angry that he was not allowed to return to his hometown to sweep the graves and visit relatives. He wants to try again in the summer.

Internet comments:

- As Stephen Chow said to Andy Lau in a movie: "Apart from Congratulations, I can't think of anything else to say to you."

- This is nothing new, but on a slow news day, this story is gathering hundreds of comments. Compared to the previous experiences of Alex Chow, Eason Chung, Tiffany Chin, etc, this story carries more emotion due to the anti-parallel trader protests. Those protests were originally directed against parallel traders, but they ended up being directed against all mainlanders (be they parallel traders, tourists, businessmen or new immigrants). That is why a lot of the comments were along the line of: Hey, you localists think that Hongkongers are a race of non-Chinese people, then how come your ancestors are buried in some Guangdong rural village? Why are they not buried in Happy Valley, Aberdeen, Cheung Sha Wan, Fan Ling or Tseung Kwun O?

- What does Fung have in mind when he said: "To a certain degree, Hongkongers are Chinese too." What is that certain degree? According to standard Yellow Ribbon logic, it means that whenever it suits him. So if you are demonstrating in Tuen Mun, you say that you are a Hongkongers and not Chinese. But if you want to go to mainland, you suddenly become Chinese Hongkonger. That's very convenient, isn't it?

- The Yellow Ribbons want unlimited access by Hongkongers to mainland China, and they want zero access by mainlanders (parallel traders, tourists and immigrants) to Hong Kong. That's very convenient, isn't it?

- The fairness or reciprocity principle says that either (A) Hongkongers and mainlanders have unlimited access to each other; (B) Hongkongers and mainlanders have zero access to each other; or (C) Hongkongers and mainlanders have the identical limits on access to each other. If the Democratic Party wants the number of visits by mainlanders to Hong Kong to be capped at 8 times a year, then the number of visits by Hongkongers to mainland should be capped at 8 times a year too. I don't have a problem with that, but many Hongkongers who travel regularly to the mainland will have a huge problem with that. Of course, they are being selfish here ... tsk tsk ...

- You don't have to be a People's Republic of China citizen in order to go back to your ancestral home to sweep the tombs of your ancestors. For example, Thaksin Shinawatra is Thai, but he has gone back to Chaozhou to trace his origins. Thaksin can do that, because he did not engage in any law-breaking activities that may endanger Chinese national security.

- It means that Kwan and Fung are locusts PERIOD END OF DISCUSSION
- Some locusts are demonstrating against other locusts. Why do they hate themselves?
- You do not choose your parents. But you can choose to severe relationships with your reactionary parents, as Cheng Chung-tai (Civic Passion) advocates. If your parents do not support the Umbrella Revolution, you just don't see or talk to them again. EVER. P.S. No SMS!
- As for the Hong Kong Independence Party people who wave the British colonial flag, they should go to England to sweep their ancestors' tombs.

- Kwan and Fung probably want to go to China to get their share of their ancestors' land possessions. It looks as if they might lose out because they can't be present to contest the claims of their cousins.

- At the anti-parallel trader demonstrations, they want the 150-a-day One Way Permits for new mainland immigrants to stop immediately. Well, those people are coming to Hong Kong for family reunification. If not for that, Kwan would still be studying in a "patriotic" university in Macau.

- Kwan said that he had heated quarrels with other family members about the Umbrella Movement (which he does not call Umbrella Revolution). If they throw him out into the streets, there is always a tent on Tim Mei Road in Admiralty for him. They desperately need bodies to sleep in the otherwise unoccupied tents.

- (Oriental Daily) October 7, 2014. About a dozen Chinese University of Hong Kong students gathered outside the University Station MTR exit. They knelt down in a row with the banner: "We are forced to disrupt people's livelihood because the people can't make a living anyway."

Is Kwan or Fung one of these people here?

 - You guys are demonstrate in Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Sha Tin, Sheung Shui and Tai Po to stop all mainlanders coming to Hong Kong, whether they are parallel traders, tourists or immigrants. So what is wrong with mainland China stopping Hongkongers from entering?
- P.S. Besides, Hongkongers don't want to go to mainland China. Those rude mainlanders may kick your suitcases around and curse you out, you know.

- So what if these two CUHK students can't sweep their ancestors' tombs? In mainland China, everything is possible. There are professional grave-sweepers that they can hire over the Internet to provide weed-cleaning services, cater offerings ( such as BBQ baby pig, soy sauce chicken, Chinese white wine) and even professional mourners who can wail loud and long.

-  Kwan says that he is concerned about his economic prospects. When he was Occupying Hong Kong, did he give a rat's ass about the economic prospects of those affected businesses and workers? What comes around come around.

- Kwan and Fung can seek political asylum at the Canadian consulate. They are being politically persecuted, aren't they?

- Here is a conundrum: The Chinese Communists are the biggest obstacle to Hong Kong independence. Therefore, the valiant Localist warriors say that the Chinese Communist regime must be overthrown first. However, two Yellow Ribbons could not even cross the border to enter mainland China. How are they going to overthrow the Chinese Communist regime? Oh, yes, they are valiant keyboard warriors, every one of them!

- Kwan tried to soft=pedal by saying that he was involved in the Umbrella Movement, not the Umbrella Revolution. Now that the Umbrella Revolution is over, the Yellow Ribbons are beginning to revise history to say that it was a Movement and not a Revolution. Well, why don't you click on the link to http://umbrella.appledaily.com/? They should still have this logo there:

Did you protest against the designation before?

- The courageous students of the Umbrella Revolution were not afraid of dying for their cause. So why would they be afraid of not being allowed to enter mainland China?
- If the students don't even think they are Chinese, why would they be afraid of not being allowed to enter mainland China?
- The loss is not to the students. The loss is to China.

- When Kwan went ahead and did those things, he knew that he was going to have to pay for it. Oh, I don't mean whatever he did during the Umbrella Revolution. I mean his student loan.

- There are lots of Singaporeans whose ancestors come from China. They say that they are Singaporeans and not Chinese. In like manner, there are lots of Hongkongers who say that they are not Chinese. What's wrong with that?
- Ahem, have you ever heard a Singaporean say that they want to overthrow the Chinese Communist government?
- That's only because the Chinese Communists haven't started oppressing the Singaporeans like they are oppressing the Hongkongers now.

- No big loss really. Just ask pan-democrats Albert Ho, Emily Lau, Martin Lee, Lee Cheuk-yan, etc. They haven't been to mainland China for a long time (if ever), but they are still media experts on everything that happens in China. All the television stations, radio stations and newspapers ask them for opinions about when the Chinese Communist regime will collapse.

- Where do these two students get the idea that this suspension will last only two to three years (or maybe even just as far as summer)? That's just wishful thinking.
- Were they asked by the mainland officials: "Do you know that you did something bad?" Whether they were asked or not, I still want to know how they answer this question.

- Some jobs do not require mainland travel.
--- Welfare recipient (pays as much as university graduates)
--- Dishwasher (pays higher than university graduates)
--- Security guard (but no convictions from Occupy Central activities)
--- Sales clerk (but some day if you get promoted to Hong Kong district manager, you may have to travel to mainland China to attend region meetings held at Asia headquarters in Beijing/Shangai)
--- Computer repair technician (order the computer spare parts via Taobao)
--- Interior decorator (order your materials through Hong Kong agents after paying a premium)
--- Pan-democrat Legislator Councilor assistant (full-time Occupy occupation until your boss loses the election or is caught in a scandal)

- The important thing during the job application/interview is to be forthright about your support of the Umbrella Revolution and all associated activities (such as Reclaim Tuen Mun/Yuen Long/Sheung Shui/Sha Tin/Tai Po, the Shopping Revolution, etc). You speak honestly so that the employer can make a decision based upon full information. It only gets worse if you try to hide information from them (such as deleting your Facebook).

- (Headline News weibo) We ran an online poll on the question: "Two pro-Occupy Central students from Hong Kong were refused entry into mainland China to sweep their ancestors' tombs. What do you think?" Within one hour, there were 13,689 voters, of which 81.99% supported the decision to refuse entry; 12.47% did not support; 5.53% can't decide.
(As of 5:32pm on April 6, 2015, there were 98,234 votes with 84.1% in support, 12.3% ooposing and 3.6% undecided.)

- Supporting comments:
--- Prevention is good. Detect the danger before it happens. All those who pose a threat to the nation are enemies. Citizens in every country would think the same way.
--- They may not be pro-independence elements but their actions had disrupted the order of the daily lives of the people of Hong Kong. They also started some other irrational protests (such as the Shopping Revolution and the Reclaim actions). Therefore, I think that these Occupy people have to be punished some way! Otherwise, people will think that they can start these disruptive actions again without any punishment. The world would be in chaos.
--- They are paying for their stupid acts.

- Opposing comments:
--- Magnifying a trivial matter. The Chinese have no class.
--- They should be magnanimously allowed to go home. Hongkongers are Chinese too. "Dangerous elements" can be monitored by the Public Security Bureau. Not being allowed to enter mainland will antagonize these young people even further. Do not allow a fleeting moment of glee to destroy the long-range goals.

(SCMP) 'I'd have joined Occupy if it could work', says Exco member Arthur Li. September 11, 2014.

Executive Council member and former education minister Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung said he would have joined the Occupy Central campaign if it could actually force Beijing to allow open elections in the 2017 chief executive race. Although he urged young people not to boycott classes in protest against the strict new election framework, and called on Hongkongers to accept Beijing's decisions, his remarks yesterday contrasted with the government's position that Occupy's plan to block streets was illegal. "If the protests, Occupy Central movement or class boycotts could change Beijing's view and its stance, I would have joined it," he said. "However we have to think whether we can achieve what we want by participating."

(SCMP) 'Quit school if you really want to make a sacrifice for democracy', Arthur Li tells students. September 15, 2015.

Students should quit their studies - rather than boycotting classes for a week - if they want to demonstrate the spirit of sacrifice in their quest for democracy, an Executive Council member says. In an RTHK interview yesterday, Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung cast doubts on students' determination to achieve genuine universal suffrage.

University students plan a one-week class boycott from September 22 to oppose Beijing's restrictive framework for Hong Kong's 2017 chief executive election. Secondary-school pupils will stage a one-day boycott on September 26.

Li, a former education minister, said: "Is it such a big sacrifice for students not to attend classes for a week? If they really want to demonstrate the spirit of sacrifice, they should just withdraw from school. If they do so, at least they can spare some vacancies for others and benefit those studying for associate degrees. If they're not willing to quit school, then the class boycotts are all just for show."

Li said last week that he would have taken part in protests if he thought they could force a rethink, and he reiterated yesterday that Beijing would not bow to pressure. Drastic actions elsewhere had failed to sway Beijing, Li added. "The self-immolation by some Tibetans did not force Beijing to change its Tibetan policy."

He expressed concern that students could be manipulated like those at the vanguard of one of the nation's most notorious periods of upheaval. "I don't want to see any political fighting in secondary schools. It would be like generating a new batch of Red Guards as seen in the Cultural Revolution," he said. "If students want to stage a revolution, please go to Shenzhen or Beijing. Please don't do that in Hong Kong."

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX_IzlwvlAQ

(SCMP) Student boycott - who cares? Arthur Li fires another salvo at Occupy Central movement. September 18, 2014.

Executive Council member Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung followed up his call for prodemocracy students to quit their studies by accusing a co-founder of Occupy Central of "crazy" and "paradoxical" behaviour. The former education minister caused anger on Monday by urging students planning a week-long class boycott to make a bigger "sacrifice" - by giving up their education altogether. He also compared them to the Cultural Revolution's Red Guards.

Li yesterday said boycotts were not a constructive way to fight for democracy, and questioned the motives behind the Occupy plan to block roads in the heart of the city in opposition to Beijing's restrictive framework for elections in Hong Kong.

"You say the rule of law in Hong Kong is important, but you are now, as a professor of law, advocating that people break the law," Li said, without naming anyone. "It is completely paradoxical. It is crazy." His comments were taken as a reference to Benny Tai Yiu-ting, an Occupy co-founder and associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong. Had he still been teaching, Li said, he would be "very happy to get a day off" for a student boycott, adding: "Basically you [students] are saying 'I am not going to class.' But who cares?"

The student union at Chinese University issued an open letter earlier this week, telling Li: "We are fortunate that you are not our vice chancellor now." He led the institution for six years before becoming education chief in 2002. Li dubbed the letter an emotional reaction and, despite saying he would not "argue with kids", he pointed out what he said were several errors in the letter. The students should not address him as "Mr", Li said, because he was an emeritus professor. They were also wrong to criticise him over Exco's decision to deny a free-to-air licence to Hong Kong Television Network last year as he was not involved.

(The Standard) HKU law faculty falls short in research field. January 27, 2015.

The University of Hong Kong's prestigious law faculty's academic research department has performed poorly compared with Chinese University, according to leaked information from a University Grants Committee report to be released today.

A report said the Research Assessment Exercise was conducted by a panel of experts who found that only 37 percent of the academic research by HKU's law faculty widely regarded as the best in Hong Kong had achieved a three-star rating, or "internationally excellent" by international standards. This compared with 49 percent at Chinese University's law faculty.

Former HKU law dean Johannes Chan Man-mun, who is a core member of political think- tank Hong Kong 2020, was criticized for the faculty's poor performance. The local report said it was due to Chan being actively engaged in politics and neglecting research.

(The Standard) Rumbles on King Arthur's campus. March 23, 2015.

Executive Council member Arthur Li Kwok-cheung was appointed to the University of Hong Kong council on Friday, succeeding member Lester Garson Huang with immediate effect. The news caused a stir within local academic circles as well as without.

For Li, nicknamed "King Arthur," has been a controversial figure due to his strong, if not abrasive, character. It is believed Li will replace Leong Che-hung as council chairman after his term expires in November.

It's normal for one to step down after serving in a public position for six years. However, it isn't unprecedented as well for one to stay beyond the limit, if so wished by the chief executive.

In the present case, it's hard to imagine Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying agreeing to keep Leong at the helm after seeing so many students take part in protests against then vice premier Li Keqiang during his visit to the university in 2011 as well as in the Occupy Central sit-ins last year.

Vice chancellor Peter Mathieson may have jumped the gun in saying King Arthur will be a suitable successor as his appointment has yet to be formally announced. But even Mathieson admits Li is a man of "strong opinions." To be more accurate, Li is like a heavy machine gun.

It's apparent Leung is striving to "restore order" in universities where students are increasingly forming the backbone of an opposition that is trying to make his administration a lame-duck one. Earlier this month, Leung broke a long-standing tradition at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology by "parachuting" Exco member Andrew Liao Cheung-sing to become its council chairman, ignoring the standing practice of promoting the vice chairman instead.

Furthermore despite government denials, there are persistent rumors Exco member Cheung Chi-kong, Leung's most trusted follower, will be appointed to the council of the Chinese University. However, it's also said Cheung, currently a member of the University Grants Committee, will be given the more important task of leading the UGC, which is pivotal in its role of overseeing funding for universities.

Nonetheless, the appointment of King Arthur surely catches the eye more than the rest. Although HKU has dropped in international rankings, it is still Hong Kong's top university.

The immediate effect of Li's appointment is that the strongman will be able to attend the HKU council's meetings this week to review an audit report on donations received by pro- democracy law academic Benny Tai Yiu-ting, who was central to the Occupy Central protests. It is probable the report may also make reference to Tai's former supervisor Johannes Chan Man-mun, a top contender for the post of pro-vice chancellor at HKU who has been the target of fierce attacks by the local pro-Beijing media.

Will Li go into the meeting all guns blazing? It is unlikely he will be so gung ho. For it won't be long before November comes, when he will officially ascend to be council chairman.

(Apple Daily) March 31, 2015.

The HKU University Affairs Committee held a meeting today. The HKU Student Union issued an open letter to "King Arthur" that he must immediately withdraw his comments about how some HKU teachers not concentrating on their specialties to the point that HKU's international standing is dropping. They also demanded Li's immediate resignation. When Arthur Li arrived at the meeting, he said "Thank you", took the letter and entered the conference room.

HKUSU president Fung Jing-en said that Arthur had just taken the letter and then entered the conference room without further exchange. "To a certain degree, this was disrespectful." "We waited so long because he hoped that he would listen to our demands."

After the meeting, Arthur Li was asked about the HKUSU accusation about being disrespectful. Arthur Li repolied: "Really. Oh." When asked about whether he would resign, Arthur Li said as the elevator door closed: "What did I do wrong?"

(Ming Pao) April 3, 2015.

Hong Kong University Professional Teachers Union chairman Cheung Sing-wai sent an email on March 26 to the recently appointed Hong Kong University University Affairs Committee member Arthur Li Kwok-cheung to demand the latter retract his statement about "Hong Kong University failing to dedicate themselves to their specialty and thus causing the standing of the university to drop" as well as apologize to the Hong Kong University professors. Arthur Li declined to do so. Yesterday during an interview, Cheung said that he wants to sue Li for defamation if the union members agree.

Cheung said that Li was obviously insulting the reputations of the university and its professional teachers. He said that he worked until midnight every day, but now Li says that he is not dedicating himself. He says that he is conducting a poll of union members, and many people say that they have no confidence in Arthur Li as a University Affairs Committee member.

Internet comments:

- (SCMP) According to the latest QS World University Rankings, HKU fell two places to 28th this year.
- (SCMP) University of Hong Kong falls out of world's top 50 list in reputation survey
- Research Assessment Exercise 2014 (rating the quality of published research papers)

- Law
--- CUHK: 15% 4 stars and 49% 3 stars (founded in 2004)
--- HKU: 9% 4 stars and 37% 3 stars (founded in 1960)

- Electrical engineering
--- PolyU: 4% 4 stars and 27% 3 stars
--- HKU: no submissions for assessment

- Health sciences
--- CUHK: 10% 4 stars and 35% 3 stars
--- HKU: 13% 4 stars and 34% 3 stars

- The students think that if they don't like someone, that person needs to disappear. If that person doesn't cooperate, then that is disrespectful.
- That should work well when the students graduate and get a job. If they don't like a certain manager, they can tell the guy to resign. If the guy won't resign, that is being disrespectful.
- The students forgot to bring yellow umbrellas and wear yellow t-shirts when they handed over their letter of demand. They should be docked half-pay for the error. Don't they know that there are hundreds of media reporters there?

- R.E.S.P.E.C.T.? What if Arthur Li told the student demonstrators to quit school? If they demur, they would be disrespectful?

- Most professors are now scared of the students because they want to avoid trouble. Only Arthur Li takes pleasure in seeing them hopping up and down in frustration. In his position today, Arthur Li no longer fears denial of tenure, loss of income, etc.

- That dickhead HKUSU president Fung Jing-en:

He is the one who waffled on the withdrawal of HKU from the Federation of Students. His position is this: He respects his fellow students for wanting to withdraw from the Federation, but he does not think that withdrawal means severance of relationship. FUCK ME DEAD! Please explain what the referendum on withdrawal means. If he can't give a satisfactory explanation, then he doesn't know what the demand for Arthur Li to resign is either.
- His name "Fung Jin-en" is weird enough. Fung is Cantonese for Feng, but Jing-en is pinyin. Please make up your mind, huh!
- He said that he waited a long time just to get Arthur Li to listen to a little bit of their demands. Does it mean that they have to commit seppuku if they want Arthur Li to listen to a lot of their demands?
- Fung's toolkit consists of just the usual ones:
一哭二鬧三上屌四絕食... [(1) cry (2) tantrum (3) pretend to commit suicide (4) hunger strike]. Nothing innovative.

- Retracting your words?
Here are the facts: Arthur Li exercised his freedom of speech and spoke what was on his mind. The students didn't like to hear that and demand his resignation. That is wrong. Freedom of expression is a core value in Hong Kong. Arthur Li should be allowed to say whatever he wants.
Now, are you going to retract your demand for Arthur Li to resign? Or do you want to suppress freedom of expression?
- Eh, that's a waste of time to make this sort of logical argument, because the Yellow Ribbon Zombies will move the goal posts around. They will surely say: Freedom of expression exists only for ordinary citizens; those in positions of power are not entitled to this freedom. And they get to decide who is in a position of power and therefore not entitled to freedom of expression. In short, you should STFU! All because of FREEDOM LIBERTY FREEDOM DEMOCRACY HUMAN-RIGHT RULE-OF-LAW.

- This is hilarious. When Cheng Yiu-chung served as HKU vice-chancellor once upon a time, the students thought that he was awful and wished that they could have the CUHK vice-chancellor instead. Well, that other man's name is Arthur Li Kwok-cheung. With no institutional memory, the HKU students of this generation now want Arthur Li gone.

- This is hilarious in another way, as it goes straight to the quality of Hong Kong University professors.
First of all, is it factual that the standing of Hong Kong University has dropped in several global university evaluations studies? Let us stipulate that this is true.
Secondly, is Arthur Li referring to all Hong Kong University professors, or just some of the Hong Kong University professors? He was talking about 'some'. If one or more of them was sidetracked into other areas, or if one or more of them failed to meet certain teaching/research standards, then is this defamation?
Notice that Cheung also stated that many university colleagues toiled silently, but did not say all Hong Kong University professors work very hard on their specialties all the time. Li and Cheung are consistent with each other, semantically speaking.

- Arthur Li is not the only university leader in the news. Recently, Baptist University vice-chancellor Chan Sun-chi told NOW TV that the National People's Congress Standing Committee is unlikely to rescind its August 31st decision, and so the students' struggle will not achieve anything. Therefore, the students should recognize what they are up against. The Baptist University Student Union demanded that Chan retract his words and apologize to the Hong Kong citizens. On April 2nd, they demanded that Chan accept their open letter. But Chan declined. Chan only said through the Student Affairs Office that he felt disrespected and therefore he refused to accept the letter because he felt that the students lacked manners. The Baptist University Student Union thought that Chan's response was regrettable. Therefore they planned to send a letter of condemnation to be posted outside the vice-chancellor's office. They deplored him for negating the students and evading their demands.

- When Electrical Engineering professor Cheung Sing-wai wants to file a defamation lawsuit against another scholar for exercising freedom of speech, this becomes the perfect example of a Hong Kong University professor meddling outside of their specialty.
- May his whole family die if Cheung does not file the defamation lawsuit.

- As the chairman of the professional teachers union, Cheung should be investigating why HKU is losing its standing and not quarreling with Arthur Li over the airwaves.

- Methinks that Arthur Li was talking about this Hong Kong University law professor Benny Tai as an example of a professor running politics as his full-time work. In https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZykVytneBg, Benny Tai is ecstatically declaring the official commencement of Occupy Central. He was so happy that everything was working to his grand scheme as described in his newspaper articles (which were not research-quality papers in refereed journals). Of course, he has not published any post-mortem analyses (either in newspapers or refereed journals) on why nothing worked according to his grand scheme.

- Elsewhere Cheung also challenged Li on the number of published articles. He said that he has published more than 200 articles, but does Li have four times as many (based upon his age and positions)? The reason why HKU is dropping in standing is not the number of published articles by its professors, it is the drop in the number of world-class or exceptional quality (4 stars/3 stars) articles. Ask Benny Tai how many world-class or exceptional quality articles he has written. Cheung also said that Arthur Li would be outmatched by former HKU vice-chancellor Tsui Lap-chee in terms of the number of published articles. If Tsui Lap-chee was so awesome, why did the students chase him out of HKU?
By the way, this is not a useful tactic to attack the messenger instead of dissecting the message.

- There are twenty-four positions on the HKU University Affairs Committee. How come nobody gives a damn about the other twenty-three individuals? But when Arthur Li shows up, the pro-democracy activists among the students, teachers and staff suddenly freak out? Li holds only 1 out of 24 votes.

- Prominent on the University Affairs Committee meeting agenda was the matter of the "black gold" donations made to Benny Tai. Everybody suspects that CY Leung appointed Arthur Li to the University Affairs Committee to crack down. Surprise, surprise, surprise. Arthur Li did not utter a single word on this matter during the meeting, on the grounds that he was newly appointed and therefore not familiar with all the details that have gone on before. But already the students want his head on a stick. What gives? The only answer is that the students are afraid what he might do. Let's hope that he does it.

- I remember that legend about Mark Twain. Supposedly he once said  at a banquet, "There is a Congressman -- I mean a son of a bitch -- But why do I repeat myself?" When a congressman threatened to sue for defamation, Mark Twain issued an immediate apology: "I am sorry that I said that some congressmen are sons of bitches. That is wrong. I meant to say that some congressmen are not sons of bitches. My bad." Something like that.
So Arthur Li should not say that some of the HKU professors are not doing their work. He should say that some of the HKU professors are doing their work. Professor Cheung should be happy to hear that Li agrees with him.

- The current Hong Kong University vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson comes from the School of Medicine at University of Bristol in England. Arthur Li founded a School of Medicine at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, which has reached the same level as the formerly illustrious HKU School of Medicine (now renamed Li Ka-shing School of Medicine). Think about that.

- I completely support the right of the HKU students to speak their minds. But I completely object to them saying that they represent the people of Hong Kong. You are you, and I am me. Please allow me to have my own voice.

- When I read in the news report: "After the meeting, Arthur Li was asked about the HKUSU accusation about being disrespectful. Arthur Li replied: "Really. Oh." When asked about whether he would resign, Arthur Li said as the elevator door closed: "What did I do wrong?"
I was totally overwhelmed by laughter. That is what I would like to see and hear from government officials.

- Of course, the next step is to call for a criticism/struggle session in which Arthur Li will be made to confess his crimes in front of the masses.

(Ta Kung Pao) April 2, 2015.

According to Bauhinia magazine, disciples of Lingnan University assistant professor Wan Chin have registered the Hong Kong Independence Party in England on February 27, 2015. This will enable them to collect donations and send the money back to Hong Kong.

According to the information, the party chief of the Hong Kong Independence Party is Kin Chung Wong; the secretary is Daniel Ma; the trustee is Tat Hang Lau." The registered address is 4th floor, 86-90 Paul Street, Londdon, EC2A 4NE UK.

This is similar to the way in which the Tibet Independence works When Dalai Lama first promoted Tibet independence, nobody cared. So Dalai Lama established European and American branch offices which collected political donations and increased their influence. The next step for the Hong Kong Independence Party is to register in America later this year. Any political party that is legally registered is allowed to legally solicit and receive political donations, and hence to transfer money back to the relevant organizations or companies in Hong Kong (note: there is no political party regulations in Hong Kong, so political parties usually register as limited companies).

(Oriental Daily) April 2, 2015.

On April 2, Wan Chin forwarded the relevant news reports about the Hong Kong Independence Party. He did not disavow the contents of those reports. Our reporter called him up for confirmation. When he learned the identity of our reporter, he immediately disconnected the call. He did not pick up the phone when called again.

Internet comments:

- (SCMP) Flag-wavers have right to be ridiculous. By Alex Lo. November 2, 2012.

What should be done with people who tried to provoke the government and Beijing by waving the British colonial flag during protests? Absolutely nothing. Lawmaker "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung has a closet full of Che Guevara T-shirts. No one would waste time trying to tell him to wear something else. At least the British are for free trade and an open economy, not murderous Marxists like the revolutionary.

People do all sorts of idiotic and offensive things and the worst you can do is to provoke them further by making them feel important instead of ridiculous.

But Lu Ping, a former mainland official in charge of Hong Kong and Macau affairs, took the bait and denounced the young protesters. He said they should leave the city if they disliked it so much. Now Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying has appealed to people not to wave the colonial flag. Perhaps officials have a bigger concern. The flag-waving is part of a nascent movement that is either calling for independence or full autonomy for Hong Kong - its members can't seem to make up their minds what they really want.

"These guys who advocate for Hong Kong independence are sheer morons," Lu said. "Deprived of support from the mainland, Hong Kong would be a dead city." His former deputy, Chen Zuoer, earlier called for firm action from the authorities. "The rise of a pro-independence force in Hong Kong is spreading like a virus," he said. Didn't Confucius say silence is golden? If there were ever such a time for retired old men to be silent, this is it. There is no sign the movement is anything but the asinine rumblings of a few malcontents and juveniles.

As a Chinese citizen, I too find the flag-waving absurd, offensive and stupid. Those who think tiny Hong Kong could lead the rest of China into the land of milk and honey understand neither its own insignificance nor the nation's millennial history and civilisation.

But let me do a Voltaire routine here, not that I am comparing my puny intellect to this great man of letters. Let us defend their right to be ridiculous. Most sensible people in Hong Kong realise their absurdity and treat them as a joke. But as the saying goes, "it takes a whole village" to convince them of their idiocy, not complaints from a few retired officials.

- (SCMP) Colonial flags a symbol of resentment, not a call for Hong Kong independence. November 19, 2015.

The display of colonial-era flags in recent protests is more about an anti-mainland feeling than a substantial movement for independence, most of this weeks SCMP Debate participants say.

The question arose when Global Times, a mainland newspaper run by the Communist Party, joined two former mainland officials in charge of Hong Kong affairs to warn of growing pro-independence voices in the former British colony.

Lu Ping, former director of the State Councils Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, said in a letter to the South China Morning Post last month that advocates for Hong Kong independence were sheer morons.

Lus former deputy, Chen Zuoer, said the pro-independence force which was spreading like a virus should be handled firmly.

But Kennedy Wong Ying-ho, a Hong Kong delegate to the Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference and a director of the China Law Society, said much fuss was being made of people using freedom of demonstration to vent nostalgic sentiment.

Ray Yep Kin-man, a politics professor at the City University, says it would be an exaggeration to equate flying the flags with the rise of a pro-independence movement.

Alan Hoo SC, chairman of the Basic Law Institute, said protesters should instead be brandishing copies of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which set out the terms under which Hong Kong would be governed after its return to Chinese sovereignty.

Dr Horace Chin Wan-kan whose keynote publication last year advocating Hong Kong becoming a city-state has inspired thousands of online followers says his campaign focused on local identity, just like those states, city-states and dependencies that keep their historical coat of arms after joining a republic.

A group calling itself Were Hongkongians, not Chinese on social network site Facebook says that the colonial flag carries global recognition and legitimacy.

The groups founder, Dickson Cheung, said there was a spirit of social-contract upheld by many locals in which all kinds of interference by Beijing in local affairs was regarded as inappropriate. He says all exchanges with the mainland should be cut off.

Allison Wang, from Anhui province and now a City University student, said exchanges between mainlanders and locals were necessary despite the latters resentment against mainlanders like herself.

- How did the three individuals fill out their identity information? With the ID/passport issued by the People's Republic of China's Hong Kong Special Administration Region government? Or with their British National (Overseas) second-class citizen passports? Or have they as the founding fathers of the Hong Kong City-State issued new passports to themselves?

- The people who found the Hong Kong Independence Party now are about as brain-dead as those who joined the Kuomintang Party in 1949. That is to say, they are completely oblivious to where the wheel of history is rolling towards.

- I don't know if these guys are Communist moles whose true purpose is to enable the enactment of National Security Law Article 23 in Hong Kong. They have registered their presence so far. Next thing they need is a few strategically placed bombs around Hong Kong to strike terror in the population. For example, setting the Hong Kong Legislative Council building on fire just like the 1933 Reichstag fire. Then the people will rush to support Article 23.

- On the Facebook of the Hong Kong Independence Party:

The independence of Hong Kong and its return to the fold of the British Commonwealth and to chase all Communist bandits and Hong Kong traitors back to the north of the Shenzhen River should be the joint enterprise of all genuine Hongkongers, not the sole purview of the HKIP.
As to whether HKIP is the "students" or "disciples" of the so-called celebrity professor Wan Chin, I see that I have been blocked by Wan Chin a long time ago. I have no interest in his theories. You can decided whether I am his "student"/"disciple".
HKIP welcomes all authentic Hongkongers who support or are prepared to fight for Hong Kong independence. Hong Kong independence is your only way out.
Hong Kong independence does not require lots of actions. It is simply historical inevitability. It is where the trend is heading. Chasing away the Chinamen colonizers is the basic duty of every person who is a member of the Hong Kong race.
Finally, if you even believe in 10% of what shows up in Communist bandit newspapers, you will go blind in both eyes.

- I agree that we must have Hong Kong independence. But I don't agree that we should go back into the British Commonwealth. We should be joining the European Union. Of course, an even better deal is to become the 52nd of the United States of America.

- I just checked the map. Hong Kong is located in South East Asia and the European Union is located in ... eh ... Europe. However, Hong Kong was part of the British Commonwealth, wherein some members (such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Falkland Islands) are located in far-flung places away from the British Isles. Hong Kong can easily re-acquire a status similar to the Falkland Islands. The sovereignty of Hong Kong will be militarily guaranteed by the new HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carriers.  The British will cave in to our demands if we Occupy the British consulate in Hong Kong.

- Why Hong Kong independence? Here is an incomplete list of reasons

Oh, it would be so wonderful! We're going to grow cabbages in northeast New Territories again!

- The geographical location of Hong Kong is going to be a big problem, because it is right next to Communist China. But the Communists have a fatal flaw in that they are on an unsustainable path of development. They will collapse under their own weight within ten years or less. The Hong Kong University scholars/students have said so. When that moment arrives, Hong Kong will seize the opportunity to become an independent City-State. In the interregnum, we will prepare ourselves for that moment by hot pot/karaoke parties at the Tim Mei Road tent city.

- Actually, I think that it will be a lot easier if we overthrow the Communists. If we focus only on independence, we will be finished if the Communists imposes an embargo on Hong Kong. No food, no water, no electricity. Besides we can't just sit around to wait for them to die.
How do we overthrow the Communists? We know that they are corrupt and weak. We'll just send our valiant warriors of Tuen Mun/Sha Tin/Yuen Long/Sheung Shui/Tai Po and they will defeat the People's Liberation Army in the field.

- A big step towards Hong Kong independence is to get the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to set up its headquarters in Hong Kong. Of course, the Chinese Communists want Beijing. But with so many European countries enlisting, they could exert pressure on the Chinese Communists. If the AIIB is based in Hong Kong, it will be an affirmation of Hong Kong independence.  Then full independence will be just moments away.

- Look, the whole point of the exercise is to raise money from fools. For many years, "Vindicate June 4th 1989" has been the cause. With the rise of Localism, "I want genuine universal suffrage" is the latest craze to get people to part with their money. The "Hong Kong Independence Party" will be the standard-bearer of the Hong Kong City-State. Please make sure that you protect your wallet.

- What does the Hong Kong Independence Party need money for? The short answer is that you need money in order to raise even more money. So it never stops. This is categorically true as witnessed by all pyramid schemes as well as political party solicitations in all western countries. The long answer is that the Hong Kong City-State will need to have an army to fend off the hostile forces (especially the ones who appeared at 6:44 into the video because these are the only ones who make our valiant Localist warriors weak in the knees).

- (Ming Pao Canada) When Global Times reporters visited the London address of the Hong Kong Independence Party, they were told that this was a virtual company. That is, the company there deals with the business affairs of other organizations, such as providing a registered address and forwarding mail. Otherwise the company knows nothing about the Hong Kong Independence Party.

This is a great start for the Revolution for Hong Kong Independence, because the Commies don't know where to find them.

- The secretary of the Hong Kong Independence Party is Daniel Ma, who is the leader of the now defunct Occupy British Consulate movement. Occupy British Consulate lasted 178 days compared to Occupy Central's 79 days. Therefore, Daniel Ma already has a track record of great success. It is time for you to send him some money to help him build the Hong Kong Independence Party.
- What are you talking about? One group of people worked for 79 days and ended up with nothing. Another group worked for 179 days and ended up with nothing. Both are abject/abysmal failures.

(AFP) Hong Kong protestors plan to occupy British consulate. November 12, 2014.

Hong Kong students plan to occupy roads surrounding the city's British consulate in anger at a lack of support from London for their pro-democracy movement, as authorities ramp up pressure on protesters to go home.

Activists say they want to show their anger at Britain for not standing up to China over "breaches" of the agreement the two countries made before Hong Kong was handed back to China by Britain in 1997, designed to protect Hong Kong's social systems and way of life.

"We are angry at the way that the British government has for many years denied that China has actually breached the declaration by interfering with Hong Kong politics," Anna-Kate Choi, the coordinator for the Occupy British Consulate group told AFP. "They have the responsibility to make sure that the joint declaration has been implemented properly and that democracy and the high degree of autonomy of Hong Kong has been protected," Choi said. She said she hopes for a turnout of hundreds and "maybe even thousands".

The group is a new offshoot of the protest movement, Choi added, with around 10 organisers from all walks of life including a secondary school student.  Protesters in Hong Kong are demanding fully free leadership elections for the semi-autonomous city in 2017. But Beijing has refused to back down on its insistence that candidates must be vetted by a loyalist committee. Bailiffs are expected to start a clearout operation in the next few days, with thousands of officers put on standby over the weekend, according to local media.

But seemingly undaunted, activists have put up large posters around the protest areas announcing the consulate occupation on November 21 and a Facebook page for the event has more than 700 likes.

The British consulate said they had no comment.

(Local Press) Occupy British Consulate-General's Statement to the British MPs. December 3, 2014.

We appeal to the United Kingdom to honour its commitment to Hongkongers under the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Chinas current ban on the British Parliamentary Members visit to Hong Kong to look into the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration in Hong Kong has wantonly violated the Joint Declaration.

Ever since the handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, China has repeatedly and extensively violated the Sino-British Joint Declaration. For instance, in the last 17 years, China has time and again intervened into District Council elections, Legislative Council elections and Chief Executive elections in Hong Kong. And Chinas recent White Paper on implementation of One Country, Two systems Policy in Hong Kong states that the autonomous power of the HKSAR solely comes from the Central Governments authorisation, that residual power is out of the question.

Moreover, in March this year, Zhang Dejiang, Chairman of Standing Committee, National Peoples Congress urged Hong Kong to practice democracy with China characteristics. In addition, many anti-Occupy Central forces, like the Blue Ribbon and the Green Ribbon, are sent by the State Council of China (according to Mingpao Daily).

The Joint Declaration is a constitutional document that guarantees Hong Kongs autonomy and de facto sovereignty. Under this document, the UK has moral, constitutional and administrative responsibilities to Hongkongers. The UK is supposed to make sure that the 3.5 millions holders of British National (Overseas) Passport enjoy basic human rights and universal and equal suffrage.

In a word, we urge the UK to fulfill its responsibilities to Hongkongers, to defend the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and to denounce China for violating it. We support British MPs visit to Hong Kong.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxPolfcALUU

(Facebook) March 29, 2015.

At this time, I, Daniel Ma, as the founder of the Occupy British Consulate movement, announce that the action will terminate on March 29, 2015. We shall remove all tents and other miscellaneous items in the Occupy area.

When I first started the action on October 3, 2014, my principal goals were these: to draw international attention to the Umbrella Revolution that broke out on September 28; to let the international community know that the Chinese Communists did not adhere to the Joint Declaration and let Hong Kong have One Country Two Systems and a high degree of autonomy. Since Great Britain is the other signer of the Joint Declaration, it has the constitutional duty to supervise China in implementing the Joint Declaration. More concretely, we wanted to visit the British Parliament to present our petition in front of the Cenotaph.

In reviewing the 178 days of Occupy British Consulate, we obtained bountiful results. First of all, we were invited by the British Parliament to address testify in front of the British Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee about the status of the implementation of the Joint Declaration. Although I could not go due to problems with my personal travel documents, two representatives went to testify on December 17 and spoke on behalf of the Hong Kong people living under the tyranny of the Chinese Communists! Secondly, the British Parliament heard our testimony and issued a white paper on March 5 2015 to condemn the Chinese Communists for not keeping the promise to provide a high degree of autonomy to Hong Kong. Specifically, the August 31st decision of the National People's Congress Standing Committee did not provide a "genuine choice" for the people of Hong Kong! They recommended that the UK government apply diplomatic pressure on the Beijing government to implement the Joint Declaration.

In comparative terms, the British government has responded to the democratic demands of the people of Hong Kong whereas the Chinese/Hong Kong governments have totally ignored the strong demands expressed by the Umbrella Revolution! It is very clear that the Umbrella Revolution has totally failed with nothing having been achieved. The continuing Occupy movement on Tim Mei Road only gives the thug CY Leung the appearance of being tolerant! We cannot tolerate any more of these meaningless occupy movements that are designed only to capture the limelight!

After March 5, the British parliamentary folks are turning to their own May 7 elections. During this period, our international supporters will continue to inform us about the political situation in the United Kingdom. Unfortunately for us, as the politicking picks up there, they become less concerned about Hong Kong. After careful observation and consideration, we believe that the present Occupy British Consulate movement can on longer apply pressure on the United Kingdom. Therefore, I have decided to stop the movement for the moment ...

(Coconuts Hong Kong) April 2, 2015.

As Occupy Central descended upon Hong Kong and was dismantled 79 days later, a less visible protest held on for dear life while the city resumed normal activity. Pro-democracy protesters have been camping outside the British Consulate in Admiralty for almost six months, but finally decided to end their campaign on March 29.

The organiser, Daniel Ma, announced that he no longer believes the occupation serves a purpose, since protesters have already spoken to the British Parliament and British MPs are currently busy with their upcoming elections. Ma added that he also wants to concentrate on studying for his exams, which of course, are also very important.

Internet comments:


- "We are panic - China is invading." Well, don't worry. Panic is over now and China hasn't invaded.


- Occupy British Consulate was not the most exciting of events. During the 178 days, there was nobody there most of the time.

- Here is how the British Consulate staff treated Hong Kong pro-democracy demonstrators:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i-tSOVCuGQ. If the Hong Kong Police did that, Civil Human Rights Front/Hong Kong Journalist Association would be screaming.
- Also at Local Press is a conversation between British consul-general Caroline Elizabeth Wilson and Occupy British Consulate founder Daniel Ma:
Wilson: Daniel, why are you still here?! You ought to leave!
Ma: Our aim is not to have a coffee with Wilson.
Wilson: The coffee is a meeting!
Ma: Non-open conversation can't achieve anything.
Wilson: Ok, off the deal.

- What was the purpose of the movement? The instigator Daniel Ma was cited by Local Press as saying: "Occupy British Consulate is a battle for sovereignty and de-colonization." The United Kingdom is not claiming sovereignty over Hong Kong, so why are you fighting them over sovereignty? The United Kingdom does not have Hong Kong as a colony, so why are you fighting them over de-colonization? If you oppose Chinese sovereignty and colonization, please take it up with the Chinese government. Their address is Zhongnanhai, Beijing.

- Nobody cares about these nut jobs. At Hong Kong Golden Forum, the most pertinent post is titled: "How come nobody here talks about Occupy British Consulate? Are you guys afraid of the Brits?"
There were just a few responses:
- Occupy the British Consulate, and they will grant you political asylum at the Castle Peak Psychiatric Hospital.
- They want to make the Brits pay a price and generate international attention for the Umbrella Revolution to show how stupid those umbrella-toting revolutionaries are.
- Someone is going to say soon at this discussion forum that the United Kingdom will be the first to sell out on Hong Kong, and that Hongkongers must count on themselves to fight for anything.
- The effect of Occupy British Consulate is about the same as Occupy High Island Reservoir (do you even know where that is?). That is to say, nobody will care.
- This movement is obviously an attempt to embarrass the Localists. They want self-determination, but Occupy British Consulate wants British intervention. What if Occupy British Consulate succeeds where the valiant Localist warriors fail?

- Why do Hongkongers want to listen to westerners?  That's because Hongkongers like to wallow in self-pity and inferiority.

Consider the following table:
When a westerner man grows a beard, he is manly. When a Hongkonger man grows a beard, he is uncouth.
When a westerner man shaves all his hair, he is tidy. When a Hongkonger man shaves all his hair, he is perverted.
When a westerner man grows long hair, he looks cool. When a Hongkonger man grows long hair, he is a beggar.
In summary, a westerner can do no wrong no matter what. But if a Hongkonger does the exact same thing, it is always wrong.
For example, when a westerner says "I want genuine universal suffrage," he is George Washington. When a Hongkonger says "I want genuine universal suffrage," he is a Yellow Ribbon zombie.

- Really? Here is the 2015 Lunar New Year Message from the British Consul General Caroline Elizabeth Wilson to Hong Kong. In her Cantonese message, she expressed optimism about universal suffrage in Hong Kong. Take that, Hongkongers (who are not Chinese)!

- What is so good about the Brits? The way their police manhandled their own student protestors (see Phoenix TV).

- Occupy British Consulate? The Brits are more concerned about Occupy Britain, in which their homeland is being invaded by hundreds of thousands of Chinese tourists who buy up everything in their stores (see YouTube).

- What do you expect the Brits to do while under the pressure of one or two persons sitting in a tent outside the British Consulate in Hong Kong? Do you expect them to send in the gun ships? The aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth is scheduled to be commissioned in 2017, after the Chief Executive election in Hong Kong. In the meantime, the Royal Navy can't even fly helicopters for rescue missions.

- (Eastweek, volume 607, April 15 2015)

According to City-State insiders, Daniel Ma comes from a single parent family. When he was in Primary 5, his mother took him back to their hometown of Xian. He lived and attended school there until he returned to Hong King in Secondary 5. Then he joined the Passion Youth group.

In March 2014, former governor Chris Patten was in Hong Kong to attend the opening of the Hong Kong Maritime Museum. Daniel Ma showed up early to queue up in order to get a photo taken with Chris Patten while draped in a British colonial flag and holding a banning. The very savvy Chris Patten thought that this would to too sensitive and told him to remove the flag/banner first. This became an embarrassing scene. Later Daniel Ma told Chris Patten: "I really miss you. I admire you and your three daughters. Chris Patten responded coolly to Daniel Ma: "How old are you, kid? Did you know me? How old were you? Haha ... you recognized me? You were a little baby when I left."

Internet comments:

- Daniel Ma, yet another locust who hates himself.

- The handover of Hong Kong from Great Britain to China took place on June 30, 1997. That is 18 years ago. Daniel Ma is 22-year-old years now. So he was 4 years old in 1997, but he remembers every moment of that sad moment when Hong Kong lost its freedom.

Leticia Lee leads the Justice Alliance, Hong Kong Parents Association and Hong Kong Youth Alliance. She is continuing to go after the Civic Passion political party. On this morning, she went with about 20 persons down to the Office for Film, Newspaper and Article Administration to continue to denounce the publications <Passion Teens> and <Party Girls> published by Civic Passion.

Leticia Lee said that she has read all of these publications. She believes that the target audience of <Passion Teens> is teenagers. "They are deliberately showing off ... they don't necessarily show the nipples but they exaggerate the chests. Every single woman in the publication is revealing her underpants and ... to put it not so nicely ... thrusting up her buttocks. Also they use foul language." She also said that the publications smears all women involved in politics for being ruthless. She said that the publications smear the police as being "evil" every one of them.

In response, Wong Yeung-tat of Civic Passion said that the Justice Alliance is applying pressure on their publishing activities. He insists that they will continue to publish. He said that <Party Girls> uses the same style as Japanese manga. They merely turn the political parties into girls and therefore they are even making the characters prettier than in real life.

(Wen Wei Po) March 31, 2015.

Recently our reporter visited a number of newsstands in Hong Kong. <Passion Teenager> has practically zero circulation. One vendor said: "If you didn't ask me, I wouldn't know that I am selling this" and "Less than one copy sold per week." He asked the reporter what was in the publication. When told, he said: "That's not acceptable. It will corrupt young people."

Previously, Wong Yeung-tat of Civic Passion had said that the publication had a print run of 3,000 to 4,000 copies per issue. Since the circulation was obviously poor, he said: "It will be closed down after five issues if sales don't improve."

Leticia Lee is suspicious about the funding of the magazines. To print and distribute 3,000 to 4,000 copies per week would probably cost "six figures." So how could the publication keep being printed and distributed in spite of lousy sales?

(The Standard) ATV sold to Ricky Wong. March 31, 2014.

Asian Television shareholder Wong Ben-koon and major investor Wong Ching have told the free-to-air broadcaster that they will sell their stake in the station to Hong Kong Television chairman Ricky Wong Wai-kay, ATV reported.
Most of the ATV's debt will be exempted from the deal, it said.

The transaction must be approved by the court, Deloitte, which was earlier appointed by the court as the agent for the free-to-air TV broadcaster, and the Communication Authority.

(SCMP) Shock as HKTV boss Ricky Wong agrees to buy beleaguered rival ATV. March 31, 2015.

Struggling free-to-air broadcaster ATV dropped a bombshell yesterday, announcing that major investor and de facto boss Wong Ching had agreed to sell his controlling stake to HKTVs maverick chief, Ricky Wong Wai-kay. The stunning announcement came during ATV's Chinese-language newscast at 6pm, and was repeated after the commercial break for added impact. HKTV offered no comment and made no announcement to the stock market yesterday.

According to the report, Wong Ching and his relative, Wong Ben-koon, who holds the 52.4 per cent stake on paper, had accepted Ricky Wong's offer for the stake. HKTV would take over the broadcaster while the outgoing owners would take care of its debts. The station was waiting for approval by the High Court and accounting firm Deloitte, which was appointed to sell a 10.75 per cent stake to a "white knight". The Communications Authority would also have to approve.

ATV's announcement stunned industry insiders, especially after Ricky Wong repeatedly and categorically denied he would do any such deal with the station he once ran for 12 days. They described it as a slap in the face for Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who was evasive when asked about ATV yesterday morning, Leung would only say ATV's licence was being handled according to established procedures and the law.

They noted that the Executive Council had already delayed a decision on renewing ATV's licence for four months while waiting for a white knight. That was despite the fact the Communications Authority's predecessor, the Broadcasting Authority, recommend not renewing the licence, which expires late this year. Exco today holds a special meeting on ATV, arranged before yesterday's news.

Analysts and political commentators said Wong Ching had put the chief executive between a rock and a hard place. It's widely understood that the government does not want to let Ricky Wong run a free-to-air station, especially after controversially rejecting the outspoken telecoms veteran's application for a licence in 2013. But rejecting the deal would deny ATV a lifeline.

"[The government] would rather renew ATV's licence than let it die," said James Sung Lap-kung, a political scientist at City University. He said the government had no grounds to reject it. Ricky Wong could not be reached for comment. He was understood to be out of town.

After making his name by building City Telecom, Ricky Wong spent 12 days as CEO of ATV in 2009. A year later, he applied for a licence for HKTV and began filming dramas at HK$1 million per episode. The government instead granted licences to two pay-television players. HKTV's books show HK$819 million in cash on hand and assets of more than HK$3 billion, despite losses of HK$237 million.

ATV is running out of cash and has been taken to court for failing to pay staff. Wong Ching said last week that the station had no hope without a "miracle" by the end of March - yesterday.

(The Standard) Exco to seal ATV license fate. April 1, 2015.

The Executive Council will hold a special meeting this afternoon to discuss troubled ATV's license renewal after a surprise announcement yesterday that its "white knight" is media-savvy Hong Kong Television Network chairman Ricky Wong Wai-kay.

ATV announced that its majority shareholders Wong Ching and Wong Ben-koon have agreed to sell their 52 percent stake to HKTV's Wong, whose company was refused a free-to-air TV license in 2013. The deal has not been confirmed by Ricky Wong.

Sources said the Exco meeting will begin at 3pm.

Despite the ATV announcement, up until last night Wong Ching had not submitted to the government any restructuring plan for the cash-strapped broadcaster.

The government had given ATV an ultimatum by yesterday that it had to submit a proposal on restructuring the station for license renewal.

But it is understood neither Wong Ching nor ATV had given any concrete proposal on the deal announced last night.

The Exco meeting will decide what the government will do when the ATV license comes up for renewal or, indeed, whether to withdraw its license, sources said.

The sale of ATV shares gives Ricky Wong the license that he has desperately sought as the development means ATV will hand control of the television channel to him.

The two shareholders have notified ATV's management that they accepted an offer from Ricky Wong to buy the controlling stake in the broadcaster, according to an evening news bulletin on ATV.

Under the deal, Wong Ben-koon and Wong Ching will take "haircuts" on most of the debts they are owed by ATV, the report suggested.

The report did not disclose details of the deal ,which will require approval from the courts, the firm's trustees DeLoitte and the Communications Authority .

ATV last night released a statement, saying it was informed by the two shareholders that they had decided to accept Ricky Wong's condition to transact ATV's shares to HKTV and to waive most of the debts the broadcaster had accumulated.

Referring to former executive director James Shing Pan-yu, the report said: "ATV expressed understanding of the decision, and also thanks Shing's family's unconditional contribution to ATV for five years and six months."

A spokesman for the Communications Authority said it did not receive any application from ATV regarding the transaction.

A spokesman for Deloitte said it had no comment on the issue.

The announcement came hours after Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said before yesterday's regular Exco meeting that procedural fairness must be used to handle licensing issues for ATV.

(Bastille Post) April 1, 2015.

HKTV has issued a statement through the Hong Kong Stock Exchange that its chairman Ricky Wong has not reached any agreement with ATV, either as an individual or through his company. In its evening news report, ATV unilaterally announced that the major shareholders had decided to sell controlling interests to HKTV chairman Ricky Wong while accepting his conditions.

(SCMP) HKTV denies agreement to take over rival ATV hours after shock announcement. April 1, 2015.

Hong Kong Television Network has not reached any agreement with the beleaguered free-to-air broadcaster Asia Television on buying its shares, the company said on Wednesday morning, in another twist to events. In an announcement made on the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearings website, HKTV admitted its chairman Ricky Wong Wai-kay met ATV major investor Wong Ching on March 26.

It said however: "No agreement or agreement in principle has been reached by Mr Ricky Wong, whether or not on behalf of the company with anyone with regard to the possible transaction. The company has not entered into any discussions with the joint and several managers of ATV appointed by the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region," the statement from HKTV added.

The denial came just hours after an announcement was made during ATVs Chinese-language newscast that de facto boss Wong Ching had agreed to sell his controlling stake to HKTVs maverick chief Ricky Wong. According to the report, Wong Ching and Wong Ben-koon, who holds a total 52.4 per cent stake in ATV on paper, had accepted Ricky Wongs offer for the stake.

ATV vice-president Lau Lan-cheong said on Wednesday that the announcement on Tuesday was "accurate" in that it reflected the stations own decision. "Our news yesterday accurately reported on our companys decision. This is because ATV decided to sell shares to Ricky Wong but whether Wong will accept the offer was another news item to be followed," Lau said at the stations headquarters in Tai Po. He said that ATV made the decision on Tuesday and the shareholders hoped to announce the news in time. He said he was not worried that the image and credibility of ATV news would be tarnished.

Accountants from Deloitte were earlier appointed by the court as ATV managers to sell a 10.75 per cent stake from major shareholder Wong Ben-koon, a relative of mainland investor Wong Ching. 

HKTV said in the notice that the March 26 meeting was to exchange and discuss preliminary ideas on how assistance may be provided to assist in ATVs operations and a renewal of its domestic free television programme service licence.

Former secretary for commerce and economic development Frederick Ma Si-hang said ATV could have possibly breached laws by issuing false information relating to sale of its shares. Ma said he believed the Securities and Futures Commission, the market watchdog, would launch an insider trading probe over the matter. Ma said ATVs announcement on Tuesday which he described as shocking led HKTVs stock prices to rise. "So should anyone have benefited from the information ... I think the SFC would take the initiative to investigate," he told Commercial Radio.

(SCMP)  Curtains for ATV as Exco pulls the plug on ailing broadcaster. April 1, 2015.

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and his cabinet finally pulled the plug on struggling broadcaster ATV yesterday, deciding not to renew its free-to-air licence which expires in November.

On an April Fool's Day filled with real-life drama that created a bigger sensation than any programme the cash-strapped station has produced in recent years, the Executive Council spent four hours to decide that ATV did not deserve the lifeline it's been desperately seeking.

Commerce and Economic Development Secretary Gregory So Kam-leung, the minister in charge of broadcasting, held a full-scale press conference to explain that ATV had been given ample time to submit a sustainable business plan to carry on, but had failed to deliver. "It's the first time in Hong Kong's history that the government has refused a television licence," he said.

The station will be allowed to operate until April 1, 2016, as the government is required to give it a full year's notice. If ATV continues to breach broadcasting laws in the interim, its licence could be revoked altogether.

In a significant move, the government is formally giving a free-to-air licence to Hong Kong Television Entertainment, run by Richard Li's PCCW, which already operates Now TV. The new station, whose licence was approved in principle in 2013, could begin operating a Chinese-language channel within a year, followed by an English channel a year later.

Yesterday's Executive Council decision followed a surprise announcement in the morning by Deloitte, the accounting firm tasked by the High Court to find a "white knight" to save the station.

Derek Lai, Deloitte's court-appointed manager for ATV, confirmed that the broadcaster's de facto boss, Wong Ching, had agreed to sell his 52.4 per cent controlling stake, officially held by his relative Wong Ben-koon, to an unnamed buyer, believed to be AID Partners Capital, the firm that saved HMV from liquidation in Hong Kong last year.

That was just after HKTV's maverick boss, Ricky Wong Wai-kay, categorically denied Wong Ching's stunning claim the previous day that the telecom veteran would be the white knight. The non-existent deal was reported in the station's evening news broadcast, sparking a surge in HKTV shares.

Reflecting public concerns that ATV had misled the markets with false information, former commerce minister Frederick Ma called it an "irresponsible" move and suggested the Securities and Futures Commission would launch an insider-trading investigation over the matter.

The broadcaster is already being prosecuted by the government for repeatedly failing to pay staff wages on time.

But even before the government announced ATV's fate yesterday, the station issued an angry statement promising to fight on and suggesting it might take the case to court.

There were tears in ATV's newsroom in Tai Po yesterday as long-serving staff received the devastating news. Many blamed Wong Ching for all their troubles, accusing him of single-handedly destroying the company.

"Why should 700 be damned for one man's sin?" asked veteran actor Frankie Choi Kwok-wai.

As for the man at the centre of the storm, Wong Ching, it was time to wax eloquent yesterday. "Today is the darkest day for Hong Kong, but I am not surprised by this outcome," he said. "This is an inevitable outcome of a series of scheming and conspiracy circulating around the sale of ATV over the past two years ... this is the price [we have to] pay as a media of conscience."


ATV expresses its surprise and anger at the Chief Executive and the Executive Council refusing to renew the license for ATV after an investor had made a confirmation. ATV will continue to fight and does not exclude the possibility of taking legal action. Asia Television Limited, April 1 2015.

Videos:

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CBtfy0W1gA (INT News Channel)
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNscNqcrMvA (Speakout HK)
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-jSQ-js9_I (ATV)

If this is the second coming, then there must have been a first coming. Here are some fond memories:

(South China Morning Post)  Ricky Wong denies resigning ATV post.  Ng Kang-chung.  December 16, 2008.

At his inaugural press conference after becoming chief executive, Mr Wong said that as a Hong Kong person he only knew how to run ATV as a local station, and he would not run it like the mainland's state-run China Central Television (CCTV). This reportedly prompted some mainland advertisers to pull their commercials.

At a staff meeting last week, a video-recording of which was posted on YouTube, Mr Cheung said ATV's news treatment should not be like that of Beijing-backed newspapers such as Wen Wei Po and Ta Kung Pao.

Mr Wong also reportedly planned to reform the way the station would handle news, making it more colourful and sensational, a move some news staff at the station described as being "demoralising".

A senior source from ATV said last night Mr Cheung's remarks about the Beijing-friendly newspapers' credibility drew an angry response from the mainland authorities, who demanded an apology. The source said this had sparked a row between the two men. ATV's board would deal with the situation in the next few days. During separate internal meetings, Mr Wong was also said to have told staff that ATV's digital platform should drop CCTV's international Chinese channel.

(Ming Pao) December 15, 2008.

Linus Cheung's public statement was that there were big differences in opinion with Ricky Wong.  Since Cheung did not elaborate on what the differences were, many speculations arose.  A top broadcasting figure said that Cheung ousted Wong for saying on his first day at work that he does not want ATV to become a CCTV.  Those words offended the mainland powers, which applied political and economic pressures.  The other reason was that Wong took a look at the account books and felt discouraged at the terrible shape ATV is in.

But persons familiar with Beijing politics denied the theory about "pressure."  This informed source said that the pro-China camp was unhappy about Wong's public call for "the people of Hong Kong to oppose the mainland."  But so far they are still at the observation stage and there was no move to apply pressure immediately to get ATV shareholder Payson Cha to do anything.

A Hong Kong government official said privately that he received no clue beforehand and only learned about the storm from watching television.  He said that everybody was astonished by what happened.  The gossip was that the officials are most concerned whether the story will be presented as the powers being unhappy with Wong's CCTV statement and therefore had him purged.

Actually, there is another version going around yesterday, and it involves a case of sexual harassment.  Last Friday, Ricky Wong met with the Miss Asia winners.  It was reported that Wong asked the fourth place finisher Bonnie Yuen if her tits were real or fake 「你個波真定假」?  As a result, he was criticized inside and outside the company for sexual harassment.  Since sexual harassment is a crime in Hong Kong, there may be further consequences.

(East Week) December 16, 2008.

In 12 days at ATV, Ricky Wong committed four misdeeds.

(1) Ricky Wong went around the Human Resources Department and sent email notices to the employees for three "Table for Ten" meetings to hold direct dialogues.  He wrote in the email: "I sincerely want to use a direct approach to understand the problems at ATV  I encourage ATV employees to speak directly to me.  Please register with my assistant Jelly.  According to one ATV employee, "He said that he wanted to break bureaucratic practice and hold direct dialogue with the employees.  But he clearly wants people from different departments to stab each other in the back.  How many people will tell him what they really think?  Everybody is scared that they won't be able to destroy others but instead they will destroy themselves!"

The meetings with the workers were later posted on the Internet.  According to an ATV source, "Ricky Wong said that he wanted to make sure that those who did not attend can watch the meetings too.  So he ordered the video of the second meeting be posted on the Internet.  Someone reminded him that this was an internal meeting and that Linus Cheung might have said something that borders on libel.  As such, this could have been released on the company intranet.  However, Ricky Wong was adamant."

In the video, Linus Cheung began by saying that ATV is losing HKD 1 million a day, or more than HKD 300 million per year.  Therefore ATV must reform.

"If we don't reform, we will lose our jobs.  We cannot depend on the Chinese government, or else we become Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po.  They lack public trust in Hong Kong."  Linus Cheung said.

Ricky Wong followed next with a tirade on ATV: "I have never seen an organization that operates so poorly and has neither culture, goals nor communication.  It is so bad.  I can fix this with just 10% or 20% of my several decades of experience."

He emphasized that ATV does not want to become a red CCTV.  "It is a dead end to work for the mainland blokes.  This is not the strength of ATV.  We cannot be compared with mainland television stations on resources and cultural backgrounds."  He wanted to target a middle-class audience:  "There is no way to compete with TVB, unless I buy them out!  We don't have the resources to produce serial drama, so we will not go after that audience."

An informed source said: "The next day, the newspaper reported that he showed contempt about the 'mainland blokes.'  As soon as the word got out, certain Chinese-capital companies got upset.  Someone quickly yanked the video, excised the sensitive portions and reloaded it."

Ricky Wong paid each worker who spoke up HKD 200.  When one of them asked what the new management expected them to do, Ricky Wong upped the reward to HKD 500.  "Do you think money buys everything?  His behavior was repulsive."  One worker said.

(2) The most disturbing thing to the ATV workers was that Ricky Wong brought in five women who knew nothing about television operations.  Maggie, Amanda, Elsa, Jelly and Jessica all came over from City Telecom where they worked in marketing, purchasing overseas programs, buying equipment and cost control.  In the new organization chart at ATV, they rank just below Linus Cheung and Ricky Wong and higher than even the Operations President.  "At the first meeting with the management team, Ricky Wong lined them up in a row and introduced them.  He said: 'These five people represent me.  Whatever they say is what I say.  If they want you to do something, then it is my wish.  You must do it!'"  The five people have no specific job functions, but any one of t hem can order anyone to do anything.

Since the five knew nothing about television operations, they caused chaos.  The workers there have nicked them the "Five Fuwas."  Whenever Ricky Wong holds a meeting, the five are always present.  "They will jot down notes and they will question the managers on behalf of Ricky.  They were like five Ricky's challenging the managers.  At each meeting, Ricky will praised how the five have worked hard to help him and how they understand what he wants.  Everybody is appalled."

Among the five women, Elsa is considered the bitchiest.  "She was like a housekeeper who wants to meddle in everything.  If you tell her something is impossible, she will say: 'Then I will tell Mr. Wong that you said that you can't do it.'  The paychecks require her signature.  She said that all the previous articles in the contracts are going to be voided.  The Human Resources Department told her that all 900 plus employees won't be paid in that case.  Then she signed.  And she goes to the production department to tell them that their work is poor."

(3)  After Linus Cheung and Ricky Wong took charge, they said that they won't produce any more serial drama.  They also called a stop to all new productions after December 4 in order to save money.  By next year, there may be no programs left to snow.  When ATV has no good programs, there is nothing the sales people can sell.

According to an informed source, Ricky Wong also ordered the sales people to refuse mainland advertising.  "He told the sales people to get Hong Kong advertisements.  The sales manager told asked me whether to accept a mainland advertisement worth several dozen million.  Ricky said, 'Not unless that client changes the name of the brand!'"

In order to avoid head-on competition against TVB, Ricky Wong said during the press conference that he wanted to go after niche audiences.  But television veterans did not think that this was feasible.  "First, there are already so many pay cable/satellite television channels showing all sorts of programs.  If you want to be cheap and buy some lousy programs, why should I watch you?  Secondly, the government gives you a license to operate an over-the-air television channel for the masses.  Why are you running niche programs?  Is that acceptable to the government?"

(4) The image of Ricky Wong suffered even more when he met with several Miss Asia winners.  He flippantly asked Bonnie Yuen: "Are your tits fake?" (「你個波真定假」? ). Then he flippantt made fun of Miss Asia runner-up Belinda Yan for having "tiny tits."  Those present were stunned.

Videos:

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYbqod69Gh0 (inmediahk) Gangnam-style dancing to oppose issuing more free over-the-air television licenses.

(Bastille Post) March 26, 2015.

ATV's largest shareholder Wong China said on Saturday (March 21) that ATV is doomed because the last white knight has formally refused to invest. It is not surprising that Wong Ching is unable to sell ATV, but this interview is taken to be a threat to the government that he is going to shut ATV down.

This is a poker game. During the negotiations, one party complained that the asking price was too high, while the other party said that the offering price was so low that they would rather go bankrupt. More than a year ago, I already reported that someone offered HK$ 500 million but the counter-offer was HK$ 1 billion instead. As time drags on, ATV is worth less and less.

In the interview, Wong Ching said that two white knights offered HK$200 million to HK$300 million to obtain a controlling interest in ATV plus debt obligations. Wong Ching considered the offer to be too low. Perhaps he hopes to squeeze the government to find him a buyer willing to make a better offer. However, it is also possible that the government thinks that ATV is hopelessly dysfunctional with piles of debt and obligations, and therefore they would rather retract the license and open the bidding again.

On this day, HKTV share values rose by 14.7%. It is rumored that Ricky Wong (HKTV) has reached an agreement with Wong Ching, whereupon Ricky Wong purchases 50.1% controlling shares in ATV and then he will seek an extension of the license. If successful, he will pay HK$500 million to HK$600 million to Wong China. If unsuccessful, ATV will be declared bankrupt.

(SCMP) Turn off ATV and turn on HKTV. By Alex Lo. March 28, 2015.

Asia Television does not deserve to live. It's been airing re-runs; its news service staff are badly demoralised and many have left; it has had troubles paying employees and licence fees; and an unnamed white knight has baulked at the absurd HK$700 million price tag major shareholder Wong Ching is demanding.

Any regulators in their right mind would have let it die a richly deserved death long ago. Yet, the Executive Council is still struggling to come up with the semblance of an excuse to renew its licence. Frankly, it's just too bizarre.

If it's because of ATV's pro-Beijing stance, I suggest officials change existing broadcasting ownership laws so China's CCTV can take over. The state-owned station may be a mouthpiece for Beijing, but at least it has the resources to produce some decent news documentaries and historical soap operas.

In two rounds of licensing decisions, local regulators made complete fools of themselves. First, they allowed a financially and intellectually bankrupt TV station to continue. Then they granted new licences to two subsidiaries of i-Cable Communications and PCCW without ascertaining when they would start to provide free-to-air services. So far, both have little or nothing to show for it.

Meanwhile, the one station, Hong Kong Television Network, that actually committed investment, hired hundreds of people - subsequently forced into redundancies - and produced actual new programmes was rejected. HKTV had even promised not to provide any news service that might be politically sensitive.

The sorry excuse officials gave for rejecting HKTV was that it could not demonstrate financial stability and that it did not have the experience of i-Cable and PCCW. Well, financially, see where ATV is now. And in terms of programmes, when will the newly licensed stations start regular broadcasts? As soon as possible, they say.

Well, HKTV has been broadcasting on the internet and smartphones. It has just announced a HK$240 million loss, mostly because it could not charge mainstream advertising rates as a normal TV station. No doubt some officials would cite that as evidence of a lack of financial stability. But they let ATV live!

Kill ATV now and give the licence to HKTV.

And how was HKTV doing? You can see the weekly ratings data for HKTV at OccupyCentral_1.htm#096 plus other commentary At this time, its average prime time audience is around 0.4%, which is a whole lot less than TVB's 20% to 30% and even less than ATV's 1.0%.

Internet comments:

- (SpeakOutHK) According to a source, the Office of Communications Authority informed ATV about a month ago that their license will not be renewed. At the time, ATV pleaded to give them a chance to come up with a re-structuring plan for re-consideration. The government consulted with its lawyers and allowed ATV until March 30 to do so. However, the government has not received the proposal. On March 31, the Executive Council was scheduled to hold a meeting about the ATV license renewal. On the evening of March 30, Wong Ching failed to procure an agreement with another party. Therefore he decided to assert that he has turned over ATV to Ricky Wong, so as to create pressure on the government to allow more time. According to the HKTV spokesperson, Ricky Wong is away from Hong Kong and out of reach. Therefore, HKTV (as a listed company) has no information on such a deal. According to the source, the government bases its decision on license renewal upon performance history, and ownership is not part of the consideration. Therefore, this was a fake news story all the way.

- Pity the ATV workers. If the deal collapses, ATV goes bankrupt and all 700 of them will become unemployed. If the deal goes through, many of them will be fired (see what happened when Ricky Wong was hired as ATV CEO for 12 days in 2008) and those who are unlucky enough to keep their jobs will have to deal with the Five Bitches of Ricky Wong (Maggie, Amanda, Elsa, Jelly and Jessica).

- If ATV becomes an anti-communist propaganda television station in the manner of Apple Daily/RTHK, they will quickly find that they won't get re-transmitted in Guangdong province. That means they lose the mainland advertising revenues, which currently accounts for 30% to 40% of their advertising income.

- By the way, just before the deal was announced, ATV sold off all its rights to prior productions in their archive. So this deal is solely to buy a company with a license to operate terrestrial television (pending renewal). Oh, yes, there is some outdated equipment plus what remains of the news staff.

- Ricky Wong has lost HK$240 million on HKTV so far. Now he needs to come up with another HK$ 600 million to pay for ATV. He has a war chest of HKD$2 billion after selling City Telecom. How much will that last if he can't generate significant revenues.

- Ricky Wong's HKTV had opening ratings of about 200,000 viewers. After 17 weeks, the ratings are now more like 50,000 viewers. The initial programs are supposed to be the best of the lot. Acquiring ATV seems that HKTV programs can be seen on terrestrial broadcast, but the programs need to be good enough to attract viewers. That does not seem to be the case now.

- There are ways for the new ATV to attract the audience. Example: At their Miss Asia pageant, they can start asking questions are: "Are you tits fake?" or "Why are your tits so tiny?"


Once upon a time, people demonstrated for Ricky Wong to get a license to operate HKTV. Then they wanted ATV's license not to renewed. Now they want ATV's license to be renewed because Ricky Wong will be its owner.

- After HKTV failed to obtain a license, people have been suggesting that Ricky Wong acquire ATV instead. This finally took place on the last day before the Executive Council decides on the ATV license renewal, because Ricky Wong wanted to maximize his leverage and push the asking price down. Of course, ATV was bleeding to death during the waiting.
- At the time, Ricky Wong said that he preferred to buy a new house than an old one. An old house probably requires lots of repair and maintenance, but less so for a new house. He has just purchased an old house.
- I wonder who was pressuring whom. Could it be instead that Wong Ching knew that Ricky Wong desperately wanted ATV to save HKTV and therefore waited until the last minute to push the offering price up?
- No wonder Ricky Wong has been going anti-Occupy Central in his recent newspaper column articles.

- According to Ming Pao on March 12, 2015, Ricky Wong wrote yesterday that he hated Chief Executive CY Leung once upon a time, but not anymore. He said that if he had been able to obtain the television license, he would have drawn a great response with higher ratings than TVB. But his failure led him to be even more presumptuous and self-important. Since then he has matured and changed his personal image after self-reflection. He no longer thinks money is everything and he can put up with injustice. In closing, he wrote: "If I didn't do this, must I use force like the anti-parallel trader demonstrators in Tuen Mun?"

- East Week came out in the morning on Tuesday (March 31, 2015) with this cover:

HKTV burned through HK$ 1 billion in three years
Ricky Wong in deep hot water
Audience ratings fallen by 75%
Stock price fallen by 40%
Cool response to Internet shopping
Production centre lot unused

- Interestingly, the Executive Council had previously scheduled Tuesday (April 1) morning to discuss the renewal of the ATV license. What would they say? Very simply put, based upon existing information (such as failure to invest HK$2.3 billion as they promised in 2010, to broadcast more programs in HDTV format, to pay license fees, suppliers and workers) provided to them previously, the ATV license would not be renewed. ATV can probably appeal based upon a change of corporate structure while making sure that all past transgressions are rectified.

- In Hong Kong Economic Times on March 30, 2015, Ricky Wong wrote an analysis of what might happen if ATV closes down.
(1) The government won't give the license to anyone else.
(2) The government will open the license up for application, but the process will take two to three years to complete
(3) The government will give the frequency channels to NOW and Cable TV which has received licenses already.
Of course, this article was a feint. If you believe Ricky Wong 10%, your eyes will go blind.

- According to the Broadcasting Services Act, the government needs to notify the television station 12 months ahead of time that the license will not be renewed. That relevant date for ATV is November 30, 2014. The government has issued no such notice. However, the delay was at the request of ATV, which requested the government not to make any decision until after March 2015 due to possible changes in corporate structure.

- When Ricky Wong could not get a license for HKTV, he hinted obliquely that "a certain man" was the obstacle. People believe that he was referring to Chief Executive CY Leung. Now will "a certain man" obstruct Ricky Wong's quest for ATV?

- In 2008, new ATV CEO Ricky Wong said that he did not want ATV to become the CCTV Channel 10 of Hong Kong. In 2015, if new ATV CEO majority owner Ricky Wong says the same, he will be interfering with editorial independence and freedom of press.

- According what veteran media person Stephen Siu said to Memehk.com, the negotiations between ATV and the potential buyer hinged around whether the Executive Council would renew the license for ATV. Siu said that Ricky Wong will probably pay around HK$500 million, which is HK$100 million higher than what a second bidder was offering. The key to Ricky's successful bid was an agreement with the China Liaison Office. "For example, the China Liaison Office will purchase a small symbolic number of shares and retain the right to veto the appointment of senior managers."

- Actually, Ricky Wong is probably more acceptable to the China Liaison Office than Wong Ching at the helm of ATV. Both are Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference members and therefore part of the 'establishment'. Remember the Death of Jiang Zemin? Wong Ching was believed to be behind that dud.

- It is extreme egotism for any Hongkonger to think that the Beijing authorities are obsessed with the destiny of ATV. All such speculations are unfounded. Just think: Do you think the Beijing authorities give a rat's ass about Apple Daily? Next Magazine? Boxun? Epoch Times? RTHK? RFA? VOA? So why would ATV be different?

- When this news broke, the first reaction was: Another April fool's joke, like the death of Jiang Zemin? Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

- CCTV Channel 10 news report on April 1: Jiang Zemin announces the death of ATV even as Wong Ching said this was the darkest day of Hong Kong.

This type of dark humor is being threatened by the so-called Internet Article 23 law for Hong Kong. Under that law, this use of the ATV logo and Jiang Zemin's photo would be violation of intellectual property rights.

- Read your history. All of the previous owners of ATV have lost money. Ricky Wong won't be an exception either.

- This is the funniest plot twist of the day. (Bastille Post) In order to raise money to pay salaries, ATV had been selling its assets. It is well-known that ATV sold off the rights to 700 black-and-white movies as well as several thousand hours of serial drama. In addition, they sold off a lot of equipment. This allowed them to raise several tens of million dollars to cover some of the operating expenses. But less known is that ATV sold off the HDTV transmission equipment at the top of the mountain to rival TVB. This means that if and when Ricky Wong takes over, TVB will want to re-negotiate, just as they did when Ricky Wong bought a mobile license from China Mobile (see SCMP). Without those towers, there would be no ATV signals.

- ATV reported on its 6pm news program that ATV major shareholder Wong Ben-koon and principal investor Wong Ching have sold controlling shares to Ricky Wong's HKTV while forgiving most of the debts. By midnight HKTV still hadn't responded. Because HKTV is listed on NASDAQ, trading there was active. By 11:33 EST, HKTV share prices stood at US$ 9.88 compared to the closing price of US$ 7.60 the day before. That is a 30% rise.

So far there has only been the unilateral announcement from ATV. Before the deadline yesterday, the government had not received any information from ATV about any corporate re-structuring proposal. Therefore, the Executive Council meeting at 3pm today may result in termination of the ATV license. Those NASDAQ speculators may be running a huge risk. It is also likely that both NASDAQ and the Hong Kong stock exchanges will be looking into possible insider trading.

- A careful reading of the HKTV statement showed that Wong Ching and Ricky Wong met on March 26, whereupon Ricky Wong offered some conditions for taking over ATV. However, the two sides did not reach an agreement. The ATV announcement states that Wong Ching and others decided to accept the main conditions offered by Ricky Wong. This means that Wong Ching and others unilaterally decided to accept the proposal by Ricky Wong. Literally speaking, ATV is not reporting false news. They were only reporting on the unilateral decision made by Wong Ching and others. This decision is real. But the two sides never signed anything, and that is why HKTV could announce today that there was no signed agreement.
Yesterday was the deadline for ATV to provide the government with a corporate re-organization proposal. The deadline has passed. ATV does not know who will take over, and they don't have any agreements. Therefore, they don't have a convincing proposal. HKTV's denial is the last nail on the coffin for ATV. The Executive Council meeting may result in a termination of ATV's license.

- According to Ming Pao, it happened this way. At 5:50pm, ATV News and Public Affairs vice-president Chan Hing-cheong was informed by Executive Director Yip Ka-po about the exclusive breaking story. Yip used Whatsapp to forward the text of the ATV announcement. Chan got on air personally to deliver the news. There was no reaction from HKTV.
The sequence of events was similar to the 2011 ATV report on the death of Jiang Zemin. During the 6pm live news broadcast, then News Department Executive Vice-president Tam Wai-yee sent the news bulletin to the newscaster.\

- At 14:08 on April 1st, 2015, Derek Lai Kar-yan of Deloitte who was appointed by the court to supervise ATV held a press conference to declare that Wong Ben-koon and Wong Ching have signed an agreement (including price and future operations) with an investor. He emphasized that the situation is different from whatever was previously reported. Lai said that the agreement will take effect only if ATV succeeds in getting its license renewed. Lai did not disclose the identity of this investor.
During the press conference, Lai said that he couldn't name the investor but waved a copy of the signed agreement. Reporters spotted the name AID Partners. This is Kelvin Wu's company which recently purchased HMV's operations in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Lai was asked about ATV's announcement yesterday. He said that he was informed one or two hours beforehand. He said that the transaction was not approved by Deloitte. He referred all questions to ATV. However, he says that he does not think that it was a deliberate lie.

The agreement was signed between the two Wongs and AID Partners at around 11am. The Deloitte press conference was held at around 2pm. But look at the stock price for AID partners. It began rising just after noon, reaching as much as 22% higher. So someone had inside information.
What kind of company is AID partners? Its 2014 EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) is HK$ -92.2 million. So it is made just for ATV -- one loser marries another loser.

- Derek Lai of Deloitte was very unprofessional. He said that he does not have permission to disclose the identity of the "white knight. Then he waves a document in which the name AID Partners was clearly visible to all those present.

- (Bastille Post) When Derek Lai held the press conference, the Executive Council was already meeting. One of the items on the agenda is the AID Partners letter of agreement. According to information, the deal with Kelvin Wu (AID Partners) was worth HK$550 million to be paid in three steps. The buyer was entitled to take back the initial payment of HK$50 million. The second payment of HK$ 350 million was due one month later, contingent upon the government renewing the license. The third payment of HK$150 million was due one year later when no other problems arise. Three years later, if ATV is worth HK$500 million in market value, an extra HK$150 million would be paid. However, this list of conditions were vague. For example, was the initial payment already paid? If not, when will it be paid? Such basic information was missing. The buyer could take back the initial payment anytime? This document is at most some statement of intention, and is not a done deal. Furthermore, the document was dated March 31. At the press conference, Derek Lai said that it was signed at 11am on April 1st. In the end, the Executive Council decided not to renew the license for ATV.

- As for the "white knight" AID Partners, they are a venture capital company that is making a cost-free bet that the ATV license will be renewed. On one hand, if license is renewed, the asset will be worth something and they will look for a buyer to sell at a profit. On the other hand, if the license is now renewed, then they walk away freely because the agreement would be voided. The corporate history of AID Partners showed no experience in running a television station.

- ATV threatens to take the government to court over the denial of license renewal. Which law firm is willing to take up the case? Any company with a conscience would pay its workers before its lawyers. So that law firm will be performing pro bono work for a lost cause. If ATV can't pay its workers, they will seek employment elsewhere. What is the point of a ghost company winning the court case many years later? The more immediate problem is paying the workers for the month of March.

- Formally speaking, the government has issued a notice of non-renewal of license to ATV. ATV has to continue operations for 12 months before stopping. If ATV stops earlier than that, its license may be revoked immediately. What are Wong Ching's options?
Option 1: Continue operations for 12 months in accordance with the law, spend a lot more money on salaries (@HK$ 14 million a month) and other expenses even as revenues dwindle down to nothing.
Option 2: Stop operations as soon as possible and sell of everything (intellectual property rights, equipment, land).
That second option looks better every day.

- (The Stand) The Journalist Association issued a statement on Facebook. They point out that the ATV 6pm news broadcast reported that ATV majority shareholder Wong Ben-koon and principal investor Wong China have transferred their controlling shares to HKTV chairman Ricky Wong. The next morning, HKTV said that Ricky Wong has made no such agreement. The Journalist Association expressed its strong dissatisfaction that the ATV investors would use the ATV news department as a personal tool to release unconfirmed information as trustworthy news reporting.

- The Executive Council meeting took 3-1/2 hours (from 1pm to 430pm) on a single topic, because they had to make sure that every step that the Communications Authority took was in accordance with the law. This is what CY Leung referred to as "procedural justice". They also covered plans to cover various contingencies. For example, if ATV ceases operations immediately, the 700 or so workers will have to looked after.

- ATV expresses surprise and anger at the Exco decision not to renew its license? Hmmm. Please refer to the Five Stages of Loss and Grief:
1. Denial and isolation
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

- ATV Executive VP Lau Lan-cheong said that if the license bidding were to restart, ATV would stand a good chance because they already own terrestrial signal transmission equipment. Sorry, that is wrong. Because as soon as the license expires, the government can re-purchase the said equipment at a fair market price determined by arbitration.

- (Speakout HK)

Less than one hour after ATV announced the news at 6pm on March 31, Legislative Councilor Claudia Mo Man-ching (Civic Pary) reacted: "Now that Ricky Wong has invested in ATV and dedicate himself to running the television station, there should be no problem with ATV getting its license renewed."
Now that HKTV has denied that Ricky Wong is investing in ATV on April 1, the same Claudia Mo said: "I regret that it took so many hours before Ricky Hong and HKTV made the clarification."
Wow wow wow. As the Internet saying goes, you should not follow the preceding car too closely. When a piece of weird 'news' appears, you should spend some time thinking about whether it is plausible first before staking out a position. When you make a rash blunder, it is your fault. Don't blame others for not pointing it out to you.

- (Speakout HK) Did the government rush to judgment too soon?

... Last November, the Communications Authority recommended the government not to renew the ATV license. But at the time, the High Court had just appointed a new manager to re-organize ATV and seek new investors. Therefore, the Executive Council delayed its decision.
This January, ATV wrote to the government and the Communications Authority to postpone the deadline. At the time, the government consulted legal advice and was told that the government should give ATV reasonable time to re-organize. That was why the deadline became March 31 instead of November last year.

Why is ATV in such dire straits today? Does it lack money to operate? No. The problem is that the shareholders are squabbling with each other. As a result, ATV sometimes has the money on hand but refuses to pay its salaries in order to generate public pressure in negotiations among shareholders. On March 31, the principal shareholder even used the ATV news department to release a false news story about Ricky Wong becoming an investor. Of course, the victims are the ATV workers who did not get paid regularly and will now lose their jobs (if not immediately, then certainly within a year).

- (Sing Tao) April 3, 2015.

On the evening of March 31, ATV reported an exclusive story that the majority shareholders Wong Ben-koon and Wong Ching have decided to accept HKTV chairman Ricky Wong's offer and sold their shares. This became the last straw that sealed the Executive Council's decision not to renew ATV's license.

Why did Wong Ching released this self-destructive piece of news? According to informed source, this was the action of a spoiled brat. On the day before, Deloitte had already reached a deal with AID Partners managing director Kelvin Wu. But that agreement contained a clause in which AID Partners have to pay HK$50 million to the major shareholders but which has to refunded if the license is not renewed. Wong did not want to refund anything under any circumstances.

The two sides were in a stalemate. Wong Ching decided to play his trump card and released information to the effect that he was selling to Ricky Wong. The next day, HKTV denied that such an agreement exists. Wong Ching met with AID Partners and finally reached their deal. But the whole affair had already stirred the whole city up, to the point where the Executive Council could only deny the license renewal.

According to this informed source, the Executive Council meeting could have been held after the Easter vacation. If a white knight emerges and ATV can submit a new plan, the Executive Council could have asked the Communications Authority to re-evaluate. Actually, the Executive Council was undecided about how to proceed. There was even a proposal to give ATV a provisionary extension of three years to straighten itself out. But with Wong Ching's rash actions of the day, it was over.

According to former ATV Executive Director James Shing (who happens to be Wong Ching's cousin), Wong Ching got overly confident and made the wrong bet. He said that Wong Ching was funding ATV for the past five years to the tune of HK$ 14 million a month. This is equivalent to throwing a HK$ 500,000 Mercedes-Benz down into the ocean every day. "No matter how successful this entrepreneur is, he must be going nuts."

Addendum: (SCMP) Hong Kong advertisers fear loss of competition with demise of ATV. April 11, 2015.

Advertising industry veterans in Hong Kong are urging the government to decide as soon as possible on the reallocation of the free-to-air spectrum to ensure fair and open competition in the television market.

They say that with ATV out of the picture and its analogue spectrum to be taken over by public broadcaster RTHK - which does not take advertising - TVB will be the only option for high-penetration television ads.

They estimated that more advertising money will go to digital online platforms - which have already increased 50 per cent, from HK$1.7 billion in the first quarter of 2014 to HK$2.7 billion, in the first quarter of this year.

Estimates of industry advertising spending obtained by the South China Morning Post - based on the pre-discount price tag listed on rate cards - show that TVB's Chinese Jade channel, available via analogue spectrum, is the dominant player among all television stations.

However, estimated advertising spending on TVB Jade in the first quarter this year dropped by nearly 4 per cent from the first quarter of last year.

ATV, which had been urging advertisers to place ads with the beleaguered station to pay staff, saw a nearly 79 per cent jump in the estimated ad spend in the first quarter of 2015 to HK$350.86 million - from HK$196.32 million in the first quarter of 2014. But the increase is still small compared with TVB Jade's HK$3.98 billion.

Melanie Lo Ka-wai, chairwoman of the media committee of the Association of Accredited Advertising Agencies of Hong Kong, said TVB's dominance had been a long-time issue, but she expected it would be worse in the future, after ATV's licence expired in November.

"If RTHK is going to take over ATV's analogue spectrum, advertisers are left with no option, because RTHK doesn't take ads. It is confusing," Lo said. She added that despite the government awarding a 12-year free-TV licence to PCCW's Hong Kong Television Entertainment Company, it would have limited access because it would be transmitted via a fixed network covering 65 per cent of the households in its first year. Analogue, however, can reach 99 per cent of the city's population. Some 480,000 households can receive analogue signals only.

Ray Wong, CEO of media agency PHD, said advertisers would soon have to come up with their media buying plan for 2016. He said the government must introduce a player that could be an effective competitor to TVB as soon as possible. "If there is no competition [in the TV industry], there is no talking point to draw the audience back to watching television," Wong said.

"If RTHK has no resources and keeps repeating its programmes from decades ago, it will be no different from ATV. "The significant increase in internet advertising shows that the traditional terrestrial TV market is shrinking," Wong said.

(Oriental Daily) March 28, 2015.

At 5:58pm on September 28, 2014, the Hong Kong police fired the first tear gas canister in Admiralty. This led to a large number of citizens rushing into the street, and Mong Kok, Tsim Sha Tsui and Causeway Bay became Occupy zones. Today is the half-year anniversary of the eent. About 200 persons gathered in the remaining tent area in Admiralty. At 5:58pm this afternoon, they raised their yellow umbrellas for the countdown. When the count went down to zero, they chanted the "I want genuine universal suffrage" slogan.

According to a member of the 2047 Hong Kong Monitor group, there are still more than 100 tents along Tim Mei Road. But he admitted that most Occupy persons have to earn a living and therefore they do not stay in the tents for long periods of time. Fewer than 25 persons stay there for the long term.

(Oriental Daily) March 28, 2015.

At around 8pm, a group called Umbrella University held a discussion forum in the Legislative Council demonstration area. Legislative Councilor Cheung Chiu-hung and several other guests showed up to discuss the roles played by different persons during the Umbrella Movement. About 30 to 40 demonstrators stayed until 10pm. They talked and folded yellow ribbons.

Videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MpH5P59U7U (dbc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzKVHAsiY5U (dbc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ17idWcWTo (dbc)

Internet comments:

- A half-year anniversary? Wikipedia on "Anniversary": An anniversary is a day that commemorates or celebrates a past event that occurred on the same date of the year as the initial event. Only Yellow Ribbons can come up with the idea of a half-year anniversary, just as they came up with the idea of a hunger strike with glucose and Pocari on the side.
- On April 28th, we will be holding the 7/12-th anniversary, etc.
- "You need to check into the Castle Peak Psychiatric Hospital"

- Fond memories of the Yellow Ribbon zombies:

- The Ching Ming Festival is approaching, and Hongkongers are out early to sweep the graves of the deceased Umbrella Revolution/Umbrella Movement/Occupy Central.

- According to SCMP (March 25, 2015), the Umbrella Movement Tents Population Census showed that there are 147 tents. The total number of those present today was less than 200. Are the attendees also tent dwellers? Are the tents mostly unoccupied? Or are they outsiders who came in to take photos to post on Facebook for the sake of Likes? Whatever. This is truly pathetic.
- Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme reported that 1.2 million persons participated in Occupy Central. But fewer than 200 showed up for the half-year anniversary?
- When I read "200", I thought a "000" must be missing behind it. Oh, Apple Daily will probably cite the organizer's claim of 200,000 anyway.
- There were 200 people on Tim Mei Road, and another 198,000 shoppers at the Times Square (Causeway Bay) mall.
- If 37 votes can represent all Hong Kong university students in the recent Hong Kong Federation of Students election, then 147 can represent 7 million Hongkongers.

- (The Guardian, December 11, 2014)  There was no danger of missing the parting message from Hong Kongs protesters on Thursday. It was chanted as they awaited arrest, spelt out in gold balloons, chalked on to the road and formed in giant letters made from their discarded tents: Well be back.

On this day, they did come back. All two hundred strong hoisting yellow umbrellas. Where are the rest? They are home, hoisting white flags.

- The attendees raised yellow umbrellas. The District Council elections will be held this November. I wonder how many candidates will be holding up yellow umbrellas to beg for votes.
- It's been raining in the morning this week, and the umbrellas are out. How many of them were yellow ones?
- Pan-democrats are already passing out pamphlets and flyers at the train stations. However, I notice that they scrupulously avoid any political party logo or identification, and hence anything about the Umbrella Revolution. They are running stealth campaigns. They hope that they can run under the radar. We will not forget, and we will not let them forget. We will ask each candidate: Are you for or against Occupy Central? An evasive response ("Occupy Central has nothing to do with District Council affairs") will be taken as "for". We will not vote for anyone who says "for".

- WE WILL NOT FORGET ... the 79 days in which these Yellow Ribbon zombies took over parts of our city.
- WE WILL NOT FORGET ... the Hong Kong Professional Students Union telling students not to go to school, but most students showed up anyway.
- WE WILL NOT FORGET ... Lee Cheuk-yan calling for a citywide workers and business strike, but almost all workers and business showed up anyway.

- How come nobody hung a banner down from Lion Rock? Did the sponsor cut off the funding?

- A very strange lot. They decry tear gas as violent suppression. They prefer to get clobbered in their heads by police batons.

- Occupy Central is far from dead. I went to Asia Society today, and I passed the Occupy British Consulate General Group site on the way. These Occupy British Consulate demonstrators are made of much sterner stuff than the Occupy Central demonstrators. Let's hope they never leave.

(Wen Wei Po) March 27, 2015.

Even though the illegal Occupy Central is over, the fallout continues. This includes the so-called anti-parallel traders campaigns run by the radical elements in the opposition camp. DAB legislator Elizabeth Quat said yesterday that one of the reasons for these violent demonstrations filled with lawbreaking and hatred is that people believe that the courts will deal leniently with the troublemakers. She said: "Some Hong Kong citizens tell me that they think during and after Occupy Central, the police would arrest people and then the judges would release them. This encouraged the extremists to act."

(Ming Pao) March 28, 2015.

Yesterday, 30-year-old Billy Chiu of the Self-Determination Party of Tibet and Hong Kong appeared in court on the charge of assaulting a police officer on November 27 last year at the intersection of Soy Street and Sai Yeung Choi Street South (Mong Kok district). Chiu asked for more time to collect evidence, including video segments taken by the police and the media. The magistrate questioned whether it was necessary to collect more unnecessary evidence. Chiu's lawyer said that the police have shown over-reaction or even abuse towards the demonstrators. As an example, a defendant in a similar case was able to produce a video taken by citizen to establish his innocence. This means that a video is essential because it is left to the assertion of the police otherwise.

The magistrate asked the defendant's lawyer: "When I consider a case, do I have to consider the doubts from the public? There was a news report yesterday that a political party said: "The police arrest someone and the judges release him." Do I need to consider that? Every case has its unique circumstances. When the court has to decide whether a defendant is guilty or not, it will be based on the evidence produced in court." The magistrate thought that the defendant's request would make the case more complicated, besides being a waste of time. Nevertheless, in fairness to the defendant, the magistrate approved the application and postponed the trial until April 24.

What then is a case in which the police made an arrest and then the court renders a conviction?

Here is the incident as recorded by multiple cameras on October 4, 2014:

- (RTHK) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBLq0CHT1wI
- (NOW TV) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R8aCyDA0jc
- (Apple Daily) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCQtFUsjnvE
- (Ming Pao) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCKJcDcs7lg
- (ATV) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E31s4iq6KnQ Interview with the victim

(Apple Daily) March 26, 2015.

The man who hit the RTHK reporter will have to serve four weeks in jail. Yesterday morning, the 56-year-old defendant So Sze-kit looked grim. He had earlier pleaded guilty to assault, and he was probably more displeased after hearing the sentence.

Last year in Occupy Mong Kok, the defendant swung his fist against the reporter Mak Ka-wai. The reporter wanted to know why Mak was hitting him. The defendant threw another punch, causing the eyeglasses of the reporter to fly off. Mak was injured in the face, and required three stitches over his left eyebrow.

Yesterday the defendant's lawyer asked the magistrate to review the media videos. The lawyer said that the defendant hit Mak only once and did not leave any permanent damage. The magistrate said that the defendant was upset that the reporter's camera hit him and wanted to push the camera away. However, the defendant has low education level and ultimately hit the reporter in the forehead once. Even though the defendant had 12 prior records, those were mild cases that took place more than 15 years ago and therefore had no bearing on this case. However, someone was injured in this case and therefore a punishment must be imposed. Therefore, the magistrate imposed a jail sentence of 4 weeks. In addition, the defendant has to pay Mak Ka-wai and RTHK more than $3,000 to compensate for property damages (eyeglasses and camera). As for Mak's personal injury, that would have to go through the civil courts.

Mak Ka-wai said that based on the severity of the case, the penalty could have been harsher. But compared to previous cases in which those persons who assault reporters were simply released, this sentence is relatively heavy already and should have a cautionary message that Hong Kong is not some place where you can beat up other people at will.

Internet comments:

- This is selective judgment. When those anti-parallel trade demonstrators beat up the music-playing grandpa, nobody went to jail. When Captain America pushed two different grandpas onto the ground on two different occasions, he only had to sign a good-behavior bond. When the Polytechnic University student attacked the government website, he was give a suspended sentence.

- This is a very light sentence. Meanwhile the guy who store some chocolates was sentenced to two months in jail. His lawyer pleaded that his client was the sole care provider for his infirmed parents, but nothing doing.

- It is wrong to hit people. That is a truism like saying your mother is a woman. Nevertheless the series of court verdicts has caused the rift between different camps in society to widen. The courts have their explanations for individual cases, but those professional presentations do not impact common perceptions. It is like as if the judges want us to trust them and not our own lying eyes.

- I watched all of the videos. The reporter was harassing the retired uncle. He deserves to be  punched. That's all there is to it.

- Nowadays there are usually more reporters than demonstrators plus police at Hong Kong demonstrators. It seems that everybody with a smartphone is automatically a civic journalist for some Facebook group or the other. In the previous case, a female spectator came forth with her video to clear the defendant against an assault charge against a police officer. But it is telling that there are plenty of videos on Yellow-on-Blue assaults but the video owners refuse to testify (thus nullifying the videos as court evidence). See, for example, Shopping Revolutionaries versus Reactionaries.

- Earlier three arrestees appeared in court: A 16-year-old Form Four student named Lam Chun-kit, a 16-year-student Form Three student named Kwok Ho-pun and 1 21-year-old third-year university student named Chan Ming-fung. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNWG_e_GQjY Lam said that the police beat up him in the van, and then made him let them search his home, thus scaring his younger sister into years. Kwok said that the police used foul language and put their feet on his head. Down at the station, he was punched to the ground by a police officer. "Don't take too many pictures of me. I suspect that some Blue Ribbon want to assault me now. I am somewhat afraid. Therefore, I am very careful when I go out. Are there any Blue Ribbons around here?" The magistrate Lee Ya-chi said: "Anyone who passes through should be treated as a guest. Many Hongkongers travel overseas, and they surely don't want to be treated the same way." He also aid that "anti-parallel trader demonstrations are getting more vigorous, and the actions of the demonstrators are disappointed." The three individuals were allowed out on $3,000 bonds. They will re-appear in court on May 5th.
What do you think they will get? A $500 fine for resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer is my bet.

(Fortune) Fortune's World's Greatest Leaders: 50 intrepid guides for a messy world. By Geoff Colvin. March 25, 2015.

Leung Chun-ying is the leader of Hong Kong. As chief executive, he signs bills into law, issues executive orders, appoints and removes judges and other public officials, and pardons convicted criminals. Hes the leaderexcept that last fall well over 100,000 Hong Kongers chose dramatically not to follow him. When they learned that the 2017 election for Leungs position would not be free and democratic, as authorities had previously suggested, they poured into the streets and followed Joshua Wong, then 17, who had started a pro-democracy student group. Leung, 60, commanded a vast city administration, including police wielding pepper spray and truncheons. Wong had a cellphone. Yet the protesters paralyzed Hong Kong for three months, Leungs already low approval ratings plunged to their lowest ever, and Wong landed on the cover of Times Asia edition, which called him the Voice of a Generation.

So whos the real leader? The answer is obvious: Leung has the leaders job, but he doesnt have leadership. Wong is the one who demonstrated thatwhich is why hes the one on our 2015 roster of the Worlds 50 Greatest Leaders.

...

Most deeply, people still want to be led. They understand instinctively that no group achieves anything worthwhile without someone in charge. Thats why, especially in crises, people inevitably rally around a leader. Whats strikingly new is that in a radically more open, more connected world, that leader could be the designated authorityor it could be a 17-year-old kid with a cellphone.

(Fortune) World's Greatest Leaders

#10. Joshua Wong. Activist, Hong Kong Pro-Democracy Movement

Slight, and with a bowl cut and black-framed eyeglasses, the 18-year-old Wong doesnt look like Hollywoods idea of a charismatic rebel leader. But Wong, a co-founder of the student-activist group Scholarism, was one of the most compelling figures in Hong Kongs pro-democracy Umbrella Revolution last year. His nonviolent protest message and energetic idealism galvanized crowds that, over months, numbered in the hundreds of thousands.

Internet comments:

- Fortune magazine? Remember these articles?
The Death of Hong Kong. By Louis Kraar and Joe McGowan. June 26, 1995. ["The naked truth about Hong Kong's future can be summed up in two words: It's over."]
Oops! Hong Kong is hardly dead. By Sheridan Prasso. June 28, 2007. ["Back in 1995, Fortune predicted the downfall of Hong Kong once it was handed over to China. But in 2007, the city is thriving more than ever, says Fortune's Sheridan Prasso."]

- Scholarism is an undemocratic group involving less than 100 'students' in Hong Kong. Joshua Wong is the 'convener'/'founder' and Supreme Leader. All their official spokespersons have resigned since, because whatever they say can be superseded by their Supreme Leader at will. If the Hong Kong government is run in the same manner as Scholarism, we're all screwed.

- He is such a great leader that the United States should make him the governor of Guam (or something).

- Joshua Wong as a global leader? Why is this coming out now? It isn't April 1st yet.

- Let it be noted that the Fortune list of leaders also included: #3 Xi Jinping; #4 Pope Francis; #6 Taylor Swift; #18 Bill and Melinda Gates; #25 Mark Zuckerberg; #26 Yao Ming; #27 Jeff Bezos; #29 Lei Jun; #31 Lebron James; #48 Richard Liu. Some notable omissions: Jesus Christ; Buddha; Barack Obama; Vladamir Putin; Bibi Netanyahu; Shinzo Abe; Jack Ma (Alibaba); Pony Ma (Tencent); Malala Yousafzai; Dalai Lama; Rebiya Kadeer.
- Never mind Joshua Wong, in what way is Yao Ming a greater leader than Barack Obama? This is truly unfathomable.
- If Joshua Wong is in tenth place, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (ISIS) should be in first place because he has led many more people to follow his cause.
- When did they vote on this list? Was it one-person-one-vote with civil nomination?

- Fortune magazine ranked Joshua Wong as a global leader. On March 25, 2015, Protest Times (Hong Kong) reported that the referendum at Hong Kong's top forum Golden Forum found that almost 90% of voters considered Joshua Wong to be a political hack, who is chased around like a rat in the street.

- Joshua Wong was facing off a police force whose maximum force so far was tear gas on one occasion. Fortune magazine comes from the United States of America, where tear gas is a matter of routine (for example, Ferguson). They also shoot and kill black people there.

- If Barack Obama can get a Nobel Peace Prize, then anything is possible.

- "His nonviolent message?" On December 1st, Joshua Wong instructed students/activists to lay siege to Government Headquarters. Here is what happened:

(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.
0:03 (Public announcement system): Friends, this is the appeal from Scholarism. Our action tonight has non-violence as the principle. Non-violence as the principle.
0:14 (slogan chanting) Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Surround Government Headquarters. Escalate action. Escalate action. Surround Government Headquarters. Escalate action.
0:31 (female voice): Everybody continue ahead. Tonight we will surround Government Headquarters and the Chief Executive's Office. Right now, we are crossing Tamar Park towards Lung Wo Road.
0:42 (Police): To avoid causing physical harm to people, please do not push forward.
0:51 [shield being passed from the rear towards the front line people]
0:52 (Demonstrator): Evil cop! Evil cop! Evil cop! Evil cop!
1:00 (Demonstrators) Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress. Chu King-lun! Keeps a mistress.
1:10 (Demonstrators) Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road! Open the road!
1:26 (Police): Will the people up front not charge at the police defensive line? There are many people on the stairway. Do not push forward. 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 for a little bit, we will use our own method to get out.
1:45 (Demonstrator): Will the police show some restraint and retreat!?
1:46 (Police): Please do not charge at the police defensive line. Thank you for your cooperation.
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! ...
[Subtitle: So much for the Federation of Students' plea "to stick to the principle of non-violence and not to provoke or charge at the police."]

Throughout the violent clashes that evening, Joshua Wong was very nonviolent because he was comfortably housed in the Legislative Council watching television coverage while eating instant noodles.

P.S. Joshua Wong also let students on a hunger strike during which he sneaked in some Pocari and glucose. By his example, he gave a new meaning to the term "hunger strike."

- This will drive the the Federation of Students leaders Alex Chow and Lester Shum, the Occupy Central trio and pan-democratic legislative councilors crazy, because a dyslexic teenager is a global leader and they are not.

(Apple Daily with video) Four new makeover looks per Hong Kong fashion designer Makin Ma and his MJM brand. March 26, 2015.

Internet comments:

- I like the older version much better. (see (TVB) News report on the occupation of Civic Plaza on September 26, 2014).

- Apple Daily called this process "detoxification." Well, he is still toxic afterwards. As the saying goes, a dickhead will always be a dickhead. By the way, was he having a hard time pooping in the second photo? And he looks retarded in the wrong-sized clothes in the third photo.

- Actually it doesn't matter what the designer can do, because Joshua Wong will always be the River Child in my mind.

- Excuse me, was this a man pretending to be a monkey? Or a monkey pretending to be a man?

- Well, he should go back to the standard Yellow Ribbon dress code: black ninja clothes and surgical masks to avoid identification by the police.

- This new look is only going to misdirect the focus. Are you struggling for democracy/human rights/freedom/liberty/universal suffrage? Or are you shooting a movie or making a music video? Which is it?

- Why so much publicity about Joshua Wong in the last few days after going missing in action for months? Is he really launching his campaign to run for District Council and/or Legislative Council?

(New Left Review 92) March-April 2015. Scholarism on the March. Joshua Wong.

Can you tell us something about your family background?

My parents come from Hong Kongs lower class, who mostly live in public-housing estates or villages. But they studied hard, did well in their exams, and got into Hong Kong University. With their degrees they were able to find jobs in middle-class occupationsmy father with an it company, my mother in family counselling. So I was brought up in a typical Hong Kong middle-class family, on a private housing estate. I was born in 1996, the year before Hong Kongs handover. My family is Christian, and I went to a Christian school. The culture of the city was very conservative, built around the idea of individual success. Once when I asked a teacher how we could contribute to society, she told the class: You can join a multi-national corporation and when you are wealthy you can give donations to the poor. That was a typical outlook.

How important has the Christian background of your family been for your outlook? What church does the family belong to?

My family belongs to the Christian Tsung Tsin Mission of Hong Kong. The denomination of the church is not important, because Hong Kong people do not choose church membership for theological reasons. My parents went to this church because it was close to home, and because I went to the kindergarten affiliated to it. I started going to church when I was three years old. Christianity teaches me that the most powerful being is God. No human being can have supreme power over other human beings, and no one is perfect because all of us have original sin. There are many high officials and legislators who are also Christians, so religion does not have the same effect on everyone. For me, the teaching of Christianity has laid a good foundation to be concerned about elderly people who live alone, and many other social justice issues. In addition, I saw the film Jesus Christ in China. From the time I was in primary school, I realized that it was very difficult to have religious freedom under a Communist regime, and that quantifiable material things should not be the goal of our lives. Rather, we should be prepared to make sacrifices for values and beliefs. The church has also had a big impact on my organizational capacity. Every Christmas and Easter there are large-scale activities, parties, shows and cell groups. When I was a senior high student, I had to lead junior high students in Bible classes. I learned how to lead small group meetings and games, as well as public speaking. I got these skills by being involved in the church. It so happens that there are about two or three hundred high-school and college students at my church, out of about a thousand members in all, because its located in the Central and Western District, with a high density of the so-called famous schools.

When and how did you become politicized?

When I was fourteen, there was a campaign in Hong Kong against building a high-speed rail link to China. That was in 200910, and caught my attention. I read the news about it, and followed the arguments on the internet but as an observer, not a participant. The turning point for me was the announcement in the spring of 2011 that a compulsory course in Moral and National Education would be introduced into the school curriculum over the next two years. In May, I founded an organization with a few friends that we were soon calling Scholarism, to fight against this. We began in a very amateur way, handing out leaflets against it at train stations. But quite soon there was a response, and opposition built up. This was the first time in Hong Kongs history that secondary-school pupils had become actively involved in politics. We opposed the new curriculum because it was a blatant attempt at indoctrination: the draft course hailed the Communist Party of China as a progressive, selfless and united organization. Secondary-school students didnt want this kind of brainwashing. But they also didnt want an additional subject of any kind, on top of their already heavy course loads, so even those who didnt care much about the content of Moral and National Education were against it, and came out in large numbers on the demonstrations we organized.

Were you surprised by the speed and scale of the response?

Yes. Three months after Scholarism started, we organized a petition to the government demanding the withdrawal of the programme. A team of 200 volunteers stood outside train stations in ten districts, six to eight hours a day in 30-degree heat, collecting signatures. In ten days, 100,000 people signed the petition. Initially, there had been no media interest in Scholarism, and even the teachers union paid little attention to us. But this soon changed, especially after I was interviewed on television with lots of microphones in front of me, and showed I could handle that. All this attracted some of the political parties to our cause, and drew growing support among Hong Kong people generally.

Scholarism was born in May 2011, between the outbreak of the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt at the beginning of the year and the occupation of Wall Street that autumn. Did either of those movements have any significance for you?

No, these events had no impact on us. I was aware of them, but their demands and methods were so different from the anti-National Education movement that they were not part of our political imagination. In 2011, the general public in Hong Kong did not understand the meaning of civil disobedience, and we had no interest in the Arab Spring or Occupy Wall Street. When Scholarism was first established, we were just thinking of distributing flyers on the street.

In March 2012 came the election of C. Y. Leung as the new Chief Executive of the territory. Did it have any impact on the movement?

Yes, it dramatized the undemocratic system of rule in Hong Kong. The two leading candidates for the post were both multi-millionaires, and the choice between them was made by just 1,200 people. Leung had been picked at the last minute by Beijing, and was widely regarded as the worse of the twomore cunning and ruthless, and a secret member of the ccp itself. His election undoubtedly aroused a lot of anxiety and anger, which his performance in office has only confirmed. It helped radicalize the popular mood. In July 2012, a big march uniting a wide range of political and civic organizations drove home our demand for the withdrawal of National Education. The government turned a deaf ear. So in September, with all other avenues of protest exhausted, we turned to direct action, mobilizing 120,000 people for a demonstration at the Hong Kong Government Offices, with three of our members starting a hunger strike in the park opposite. Elections to the Legislative Assembly were due in mid-September: twenty-four hours before they were held, the government capitulated, putting the programme on hold.

You were still just fifteen at the time, leading this huge mass movement. Was that experience your only political education, or did some of it come from reading books or pamphlets?

Four years ago, I read no books at all. Like any other Hong Kong teenager, I just played computer games. I learnt about politics online, following arguments among social activists on the internet and looking at how the different parties among the Pan-Democrats were failing to organize any effective opposition in the city. You could say Facebook was my library. I like reading Wang Dans work; I met him when I visited Taiwan.

To what extent is the Chinese student uprising of 1989 a background influence for popular consciousness in Hong Konga quarter of a century later, there are still mass commemorations of June Fourth every year?

Thats true. The memory of June Fourth is very much alive. But you shouldnt overestimate its political meaning. The candle-lit vigils have become a kind of ritual. They are moved more by emotional pity for the victims of 1989 than by solidarity with their actions. You could see the same kind of reaction for our three-person hunger strike in the park by the Government Offices. The same cry went up: Protect the students! The belief is that adults should protect young people. Actually, it was we who were protecting them, not the other way around.

What was the next step for Scholarism, after your victory in forcing the government to abandon Moral and National Education?

The curriculum was withdrawn, but it was clear that the project behind itspreading the influence of the ccp in Hong Kong through business, media, educationhadnt been. If we didnt take action, it would come back. To stop that, we needed direct elections to the Legislative Council and the right of all citizens to nominate candidates for the post of Chief Executive. So we organized around these two demands.

How did you view your chances of success in launching this campaigncrossing traditional red lines for Beijing?

Well, of course we couldnt calculate the odds in advance, and we knew that the Pan-Democrats set the bar very low. Basically, their demand was just the minimum requirement for a democratic election, that everyone should have an equal vote in choosing the Chief Executive. They had lost every time they tried to put up a struggle, and were quite pessimistic. They had very limited hopes. Based on my experience, I was optimistic. We felt we had just won a big victory, and should be aiming for another: not merely the right to vote directly for the Chief Executive, but also to choose who would be the candidates. The Pan-Democrats regarded that as impossible. In early 2013, Benny Tai, a professor of law at Hong Kong University, initiated a movement to Occupy Central with Love and Peace. He invited me to a restaurant for a meal, and told me over lunch that I was too idealisticthere was no sense in demanding civic nomination of the Chief Executive, the people of Hong Kong wouldnt accept it.

How did this difference play out in what became the Umbrella Movement?

Tai and his two colleagues called for a peaceful demonstration in the Central Business District on October 1 to send a message to the government. We didnt think that was either meaningful or adequate. The cbd is very unfavourable terrain for a mass occupation, difficult to access from overhead walkways and deserted at weekends. So four days earlier, on September 26, Scholarism led a breakthrough past the security barriers surrounding Civic Square in the middle of the Government Offices complex, occupying the space, which was quickly cordoned off by police with the students inside. It was this action of ours that triggered the whole subsequent movement. I was arrested for the breakthrough on September 27, along with others. Most of us were released soon afterwards, but I was held for 46 hours, longer than the rest, and while I was locked up, police attacked the students in Admiralty with tear gas. This was unprecedented in Hong Kong, and transformed popular attitudes to the protesters. There was a huge outpouring of solidarity, and soon students were even outnumbered by young professionals and office workers taking part in the movement, which covered areas in three separate parts of Hong Kong and lasted eighty days in all.

University students took a more prominent part in these events, in which the Hong Kong Student Federation was a leading actor. How would you describe this organization?

The Federation supported the Pan-Democratic parties for many years, going back to the eighties, and showed solidarity with the student uprising in China in 1989, when its then Secretary-General Andrew To went to Beijing, and was one of the last students to leave Tiananmen Square on the night of the crackdown. But there has never been much continuity in its actions, as the Chairman and Secretary change every year. Today only three out of the citys eight universities, which number no more than 80,000 students out of a population of seven million, can really be regarded as politicized: the old colonial Hong Kong University on the island, the Chinese University of Hong Kong in Shatin, founded in 1963, and Lingnan University, a liberal arts college created in 1999. They have different profiles; the hku student newspaper has called for the independence of Hong Kong, a right-wing idea. The cuhk is on the left, with a campus culture like Berkeleys. Lingnan is a fortress of Cultural Studies, where nearly every professor is progressiveits the most radical of the three. The others are apolitical. During the Umbrella Movement, some five or six hundred professors signed a statement in support of student struggles. But in general, its only teachers of politics and social science who take an interest in public affairs. The majority of professors are in no way progressive: they just want to write research papers and pursue their academic careers. This is a big contrast with Taiwan, where they are more socially conscious.

Would it be correct to see the different forces taking part in the Umbrella Movement as composing a spectrum from moderate to radical positions, with the main Pan-Democratic parties at the most moderate pole, Occupy Central a bit less so, the Federation of Hong Kong Students more radical, and Scholarism as the most militant and uncompromising? Where would Civic Passion, on one side, and the League of Social Democrats, on the other, fit into such a classification?

I think the Pan-Democrats and the Occupy Central leadership are equally moderate in terms of ideas and action. Similarly, Scholarism and the Federation of Students are quite similar in terms of radical action and ideas. The difference I would say is in their respective analyses of the situation. Scholarism proposed and successfully convinced the Federation of Students to take control of Civic Square; otherwise there would have been no subsequent movement. Going to Beijing was their idea and only half the members of Scholarism agreed to pursue this line of action. Also, the core leaders of Scholarism tend to be more willing to be in the front line, facing the police, and more receptive and prepared for radical action than our counterparts in the Federation of Students. The League of Social Democrats has always stood with these two student organizations in ideas and actions. Civic Passion talks about radical action, such as rewriting the Basic Law, but it is not practical; they clamour for Hong Kong independence without saying how. They are not always consistent in their slogans: they promoted the idea of fighting back against police violence yet they set the action goal of no injuries and no arrests. So I dont really know how to place Civic Passion in the political spectrum.

How strong is sentiment in favour of independence for Hong Kong now?

Its increasing. But its not a serious prospect. There is no international support for it. The demand poses as being very radical, but its superficial and will fade.

What kind of support did the movement get from the trade unions in Hong Kong?

Very little. De-industrialization has weakened them a lot. Leung Kwok-hungLong Haircalled on them to come out in solidarity with the movement, but only the Free Union responded positively.

What kind of balance-sheet would you make of the Umbrella Movement?

It greatly increased political awareness in Hong Kong society, as more and more people joined the movement. The city had no prior experience of large-scale civil disobedience. In 2012, the campaign against National Education involved no civil disobedienceat that time I myself was against it. The Umbrella Movement made it much more widely accepted as an instrument of changein my view, as the only route to change in the political system, after twenty years of futile agitation of a conventional sort. Of course, this time we gained nothing by way of political reform. The government refused to give way, and the movement eventually came to an end without achieving any of its aims. But we didnt lose the war, because well start the next round stronger than we did this one.

But will you just be reiterating the same demands as last year? They ran into a blank wall then. Wont people say, whats the point of repeating demands that have already been flatly refused? Dont you risk disillusioning them?

The last time we got 10,000 students on strike. If we keep pressing for political reform, the next time we can get 50,000. The fight for direct elections has been going on for ten years in Hong Kong, and theres no sign of support for it declining. Its a popular demand, and Hong Kong people are persistent. In June or July, well be calling for an unofficial referendum, larger and more militant than the one Occupy Central set up in 2014 calling for universal suffrage, in which 800,000 citizens participated.

Whats the strength of Scholarism today?

We have three hundred members, 30 per cent at university and 70 per cent in high schools. The gender balance is 60 per cent men and 40 per cent women. The numbers sound very small. But you have to remember that all the Pan-Democratic parties put together have only 700 members, and proportionately fewer of these are active. Our job is to increase our organizational strengthto extend the structure of resistance and the networks around it, just as the ccp tries to do. For us the priority target remains the citys high schools. Thats where we should concentrate our efforts, because if you can win over youth, youll be winning the future. The task isnt at all easy, because there are intense pressures on students in Hong Kong, which is a very exam-oriented society, with narrow access to higher education. Less than 20 per cent of high-school students get entrance into universities. To succeed requires very long hours of study, leaving little time or energy for other activities. Then there is political repression. When we started, there was no personal price to pay for civic activism, apart from deduction from study. But since the Umbrella Movement, activists know they are likely to be arrested, and obviously parents put pressure on them not to risk that. Its crucial we find a successor for my role in the high schools, but it hasnt been easy to find one. Still, time is on our side.

How about your own studies, then?

Obviously, theyve suffered. I hated maths anyway, but during the two big mobilizations, I was working in the movement round the clock, with very little sleep. There was no way I could lock myself up in a study from nine in the morning till midnight. When the Sunflower student movement broke out in Taiwan, occupying the parliament and forcing a review of the trade deal with China, I was trapped in examsvery frustrating. So my results were poor, I didnt get into either hku or cuhk, but only into the Open University, the worst of the eight, where a lot of the teaching is just skimpy PowerPoints online.

Since youve been blocked on the political front, wouldnt it make sense to increase demands on the social front, given the enormous inequalities in Hong Kong society, and the wretched conditions in which the poor and the weak live in the city, while billionaires flaunt their wealth at the top? Could the government afford to be equally unyielding in the face of mobilization around issues like working hours, housing, pensions?

Hong Kong society is deeply conservativeeven lower-class attitudes are right-wing. Theres no support among the poor for pensions. Anything left is associated with the ccp: even such an elementary demand as a normal eight-hour working day, which is not particularly left-wing at all. The popular conviction is that if you just work hard, you will be a success and can become rich too. If youre not rich, thats because you didnt get better results in school or in your job. Poverty is treated as an individual failure, not as a structural problem. High-school students, especially, take no interest in social issues. They just want more democracy. Their mindset is that society should become more liberal, not more equal. In general, the most popular subject for study is economics, where courses drill in the mantra that the free market is always best, and social change amounts to no more than a shift in a demand curve. Its another kind of brainwashing, if a less drastic one than the ccps, but its not perceived as such. The only way to build Scholarism is to concentrate on political demands.

If Hong Kong society is so conservative that its very difficult to get popular support for even modest social demands, doesnt this create a paradox for the dynamic of Scholarism itself? For the question then would be: what actual difference would democratic election of the Legislative Council and the Chief Executive make, if you achieved it? After all, Hong Kong already enjoys freedom of expression and association, habeas corpus, an independent judiciary, and what is generally meant by the rule of law. Political democracy would no doubt prevent these being eroded, but apart from this negative gain, what positive benefits could it deliver, if the population is perfectly satisfied with the social and economic status quo?

The social mood in Hong Kong is conservativeon socio-economic issues, parents attitudes towards their childrens education and private property ownershipbut Hong Kong changes quickly and people also adapt quickly to new momentum. This conservative social mood can be changed if we influence our student base and help progressive politicians to win seats in the legislature. If the progressives can win more seats, have access to more resources (hk$100,000 a month for every seat won) then they can at least invigorate policy advocacy discourses for things such as standard working hours, universal retirement schemes or annual review of the minimum wage level. Under the current system, they are a permanent minority and people give up debating policies because they think these debates are futile, given the structural composition of the Legislature. If the Pan-Democrats can advocate policy change, then at least gradually the social mood may change. Our aim is to make society more equal, after we have made it more liberal.

Internet comments:

- (VJ Media) March 26, 2015.

Joshua Wong was interviewed by <New Left Revew> and he talked about the sentiment in favor of Hong Kong independence. He said: "Its increasing. But its not a serious prospect. There is no international support for it. The demand poses as being very radical, but its superficial and will fade."

These comments were roundly criticized. As always, Wong came out to explain. He said that "superficial" does not mean "shallow." Instead, he wanted to say that the discussion about Hong Kong independence has been very shallow and is limited to "the racism of resisting mainlanders."

There have definitely been discussions about Hong Kong independence that go beyond purely hating mainlanders. "The narrative of the Hong Kong people" and <Undergrad> were not sufficiently deep, but they have said plenty. The City-State people are another school. Various kinds of discussions are rising like bamboo shoots after the rains. Maybe some of them offended Joshua Wong's patriotism. But such actions show that the whole matter is not reducible to just hating mainlanders. This is just commonsense.

The original quote says that Hong Kong independence "will fade." This is an absolute statement without any doubt. It says that Hong Kong independence is unpopular, has no international support and THEREFORE WILL DEFINITELY FADE."

For a pan-democrat, such a statement is normal. Ten out of ten pan-democrats would have said the same thing.

The critics of Joshua Wong tend to follow Internet and current affairs closely. They may not understand why Joshua Wong felt the need to come out and clarify his statement.

To say that Hong Kong independence is shallow and will fade is just the sort of thing that Albert Ho (Democratic Party) or Joshua Wong will say, because of their patriotism per June 4th 1989. I consider that to be very much expected. "Most people" think that way. However, Joshua Wong will not give up any position. He will never go "all in" for one position or the other. He wants to place his bets on all the positions at the same time.

A couple of years ago, Joshua Wong was interviewed by <iSunAffairs>. Wong showed that he was no less patriotic than Szeto Wah. I regard that as his creed. Therefore, it is expected that he looks unfavorably upon Hong Kong independence. That is his honest view which does not require either revision or compromise.

Unless, of course, that individual needs to appease all sides and therefore his positions bounce around like rubber balls ... Joshua Wong is unwilling to lose support from anyone. This is a sustainable model. That's what you need to succeed in this world.

- (RTHK) Charles Ho Tsu-kwok, chairman of the Sing Tao News Group and a National Committee member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, called on Joshua Wong not be too elated about the Fortune leadership and to study harder. Ho pointed out that students contribute nothing to society, because they count on others to provide for them.

- Chinese University of Hong Kong Student union president Tommy Cheung Sau-yin jumped into the fray by saying that the student loan default rate of 13% is comparable to what happens in the USA. Therefore, there is nothing there to talk about. Well, Cheung was off by a factor of 10.
If Cheung even knows a little bit about the loan industry, he would know that 13% is unsustainable. Here is what happens. You save money, you deposit it in the bank and the bank pays you 0.1% interest now. The bank turns around and makes a loan to a creditworthy person at 5% interest. The difference 5.0% - 0.1% = 4.9% will cover the bank's administrative costs (rent, salary, office expenses, telecommunications), profits as well as a reserve against defaults. But if the default rate is 13% on loans, the bank would have to charge about 18% interest rate. Who can afford to pay?

- Joshua Wong attacked Civic Passion: "Civic Passion talks about radical action, such as rewriting the Basic Law, but it is not practical; they clamour for Hong Kong independence without saying how. They are not always consistent in their slogans: they promoted the idea of fighting back against police violence yet they set the action goal of no injuries and no arrests. So I dont really know how to place Civic Passion in the political spectrum." But Joshua Wong is always consistent in what he does, because everybody knows that he is perfectly described by the phrase: "叫人衝、自己鬆、你流血、我領功." (He tells other people to charge and he leaves the scene; you shed your blood and I get the credit.)

- However much Joshua Wong dislikes Civic Passion, he is not going to challenge Wong Yeung-tat in a mano a mano MMA fight. Why? Joshua Wong is a 98-pound weakling, and Wong Yeung-tat would have to lose about 70 pounds to get into the same weight class. Alternately Joshua Wong will have to eat a lot more instant noodles to reach the 170 weight class, discarding his newly acquired MJM wardrobe on the way.

- (Chan Ming-ya's Facebook)

I have just finished reading Joshua Wong's views on Hong Kong independence. Once again, it shows that his thinking is very shallow. His views on the subject is influential, but not because of their depth but because of his fame. If the Hong Kong democracy movement is to be led by him, he will basically become another Albert Ho.

Joshua Wong said: "Hong Kong independence has no international support. The demand poses as being very radical, but its superficial and will fade." In the January 2015 issue of Undergrad (Hong Kong University Student Union publication), I wrote that with the end of One Country Two Systems and the complete blockage of true universal suffrage, the idea of Hong Kong independence will become stronger as people move further away from Beijing, and that is true irregardless of any likelihood of success.

Therefore I am willing to make a bet with Joshua Wong on whose views are more accurate. I am willing to bet anything. Let this be stated here.

(Wikipedia) Parallel trading in Hong Kong

Parallel trading in Hong Kong refers to the phenomenon of mainland parallel traders taking advantage of multiple entry visa policy to import goods from Hong Kong to Mainland China, causing shortage of household goods in various locations starting in the North District and expanding to Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Tai Po and Shatin.

The Import and Export (General)(Amendment) Regulation 2013 prohibits the unlicensed export of powdered formula, including milk and soya milk powder for infants and children under 36 months. The Regulation 'does not apply to powdered formula that is exported in the accompanied personal baggage of a person aged 16 or above leaving Hong Kong if the person did not leave Hong Kong in the last 24 hours and the formula does not exceed 1.8 kg in total net weight.'

(Wikipedia) Individual Visit Scheme (see also IVS Research Brief)

The Individual Visit Scheme began on 28 July 2003. It allowed travellers from Mainland China to visit Hong Kong and Macau on an individual basis. Prior to the Scheme, Mainland residents could only visit to Hong Kong and Macau on business visas or in group tours.

(Dictionary.com) Tourist

A person who is traveling, especially for pleasure.

(Tourism Commission) Hong Kong's Tourism Performance in 2013

Total visitor arrivals = 54,298,804
- Overnight arrivals = 25,661,072
- Same-day arrivals = 28,637,732

Total mainland Chinese arrivals = 40,700,000 (75% of totals)
- Same-day mainland Chinese arrivals = 23,700,000 (83% of totals)
- Individual Visit Scheme (IVS) mainland Chinese arrivals = 27,500,000

Average length of stay of overnight visitors = 3.4 nights
Overnight visitor per capita spending = HK$8,123

Total tourism expenditure associated to inbound tourism = HK$343.1 billion

(Hong Kong Tourist Board PartnerNet; PartnerNet)

January 2015 visitor arrivals by source
- Grand total: 5,609,698
---- Grand total overnight visitors: 2,291,479
---- Grand total same night visitors: 3,318,219
-- The Americas: 136,906
-- Europe, Africa and the Middle East: 177,335
-- Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific: 66,155
-- North Asia: 229,594
-- South & Southeast Asia: 273,160
-- Taiwan: 155,775
-- Mainland China: 4,490,420
---- Overnight Mainland China visitors: 1,572,084
---- Same night Mainland China visitors: 2,918,336

(Apple Daily) November 11, 2004.

Almost 40 parallel traders showed up at Government Headquarters to petition against the closure of the special passageway for parallel traders at the Luohu border crossing. Led by "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung, they chanted slogans such as "We don't want to receive welfare payments, we want to earn our own livelihoods." They demanded East Rail to re-open the special passageway or otherwise issue special passes for parallel traders.

According to a parallel trader named Lau, he was introduced to bring goods after being unemployed a few years ago. At first, he was worried that he may be carrying contrabands. Then he saw that he was only carrying daily necessities or documents. Therefore, he took this as a job which was enough to provide for his family. Lau said: "If East Rail blocks the passageway, I may have to go back to taking social welfare."

(SCMP) Multi-entry permits help thousands of parallel traders cross into HK daily. September 17, 2012.

More than 3,000 parallel traders are crossing the border every day and over half of them are Shenzhen residents with multi-entry visit permits, according to government sources. The figures were revealed by a mainland official during a recent meeting of a newly formed working group between Shenzhen and Hong Kong customs authorities to combat illegal cross-border exports.

The disclosure comes at a time when emotions are running high among North District residents annoyed at the increasing numbers of parallel traders who they blame for pushing up prices of goods in the neighbourhood, blocking streets and littering. Hundreds of people protested at Sheung Shui MTR station over the weekend, resulting in ugly scenes and scuffles with parallel traders.

"At least 3,000 to 4,000 parallel traders are in operation every day. More than half are mainlanders who carry multiple-entry permits," the source said. "They make at least two return trips a day, but some can make four to five."

Based on these numbers, the parallel traders, who make a profit by evading import taxes charged by the mainland authorities, account for at least 2.2 million cross-border trips a year. Although they are not conventional tourists, the numbers are included when the city calculates its tourist arrivals.

In 2011, Shenzhen residents with multi-entry permits accounted for 6.17 million arrivals in Hong Kong, while a total of 28.1 million mainland tourists visited the city last year.

Following Saturday's confrontations, there seemed to be far fewer traders at Sheung Shui station, prompting hundreds of protesters to march to a nearby warehouse building, which they said suppled many of the goods. However, its gates were closed and some of the marchers returned to the station where they hurled insults at anyone calling heavy boxes or pushing a trolley.

Sociology Professor Chan Kin-man, of Chinese University, feared the demonstrations could evolve into yet another wave of widespread discrimination against mainlanders. "There are signs the residents' anger is going beyond hatred of parallel goods carriers some of the traders are Hongkongers, but the protesters still chant slogans like 'Go back to the mainland'," Chan said.

(Ta Kung Pao) February 17, 2015.

Over the past four years, the Customs Department has penalized more than 33,000 travelers suspected of being parallel traders at the Shenzhen border crossings. Of these, almost 20,000 are Hong Kong residents and the rest are mainlanders. At the busy Luohu border crossing, 163 "professional" parallel traders were arrested for three or more times of which 134 (82%) were Hong Kong residents.

According to the Customs Department, the parallel traders have operated long before the Individual Visit Scheme came into being. Because it was a lot easier for Hong Kong residents to go back and forth back then, the earlier parallel traders were predominantly Hong Kong residents. Today, the mainland parallel traders are taking over because they are willing to work harder for less pay. This caused the Hong Kong parallel traders to be unhappy.

Of the 163 cases at Luohu, 50 (or 31%) were bailed out, most of whom for medical reasons. According to information from multiple sources, the parallel traders are mostly grassroots people, many of whom are poor in wealth and health. Many of the Hong Kong parallel traders are elderly people with no children or labor capacity. Therefore, they are trying to earn a little bit more than the social welfare payments from the government. Upon arrest, they are found to be infirmed and must be released from the detention centers.

Those 163 cases resulted in smuggled goods worth less than HK$2 million and the total amount of evaded taxes was less than HK$400,000. Compared to other smuggling cases where the jail time is assessed only from HK$100,000 and up, this is nothing. Therefore, these cases were assessed not on the total value but on "three strikes or more."

(Ming Pao) March 5, 2015.

According to our tabulation of the distribution of pharmacies across the 18 districts of Hong Kong, Yao Tsim Mong has the highest density of one pharmacy per 638 residents for a total of 494 pharmacies. Wan Chai is next with one pharmacy per 837 residents. Sai Kung and Southern District (Hong Kong Island) are lowest at about one pharmacy per 4,000 residents.

Northern District, which is supposed to have been plagued by parallel traders, was ranked number four at one pharmacy per 1,603 residents for a total of 192 pharmacies for its 308,000 residents.

... According to one scholar, once multiple-entry permits are subjected to greater restrictions, the parallel traders will be forced to hire Hongkongers to do their work and thus increase the operational costs. This will cause some of the pharmacies to go out of business, rents will fall and the retail market will go back on its path of healthy growth.

According to another scholar, if parallel trading continues to be profitable, Hongkongers will be hired to carry the goods and restricting multiple-entry permits will be meaningless with respect to the profitability of the pharmacies.

(Sina.com.hk) March 5, 2015.

In Tsuen Wan, some residents think that there are too many jewelry stores and pharmacies. On Chung On Street, there are 13 jewelry stores and 5 pharmacies. On Chuen Lung Street, there are 6 jewelry stores and 11 pharmacies.

Businesses say that the influx of jewelry stores and pharmacies, especially the chain stores, have caused rents to soar through a vicious cycle. According to information, the rent on Chung On Street is 7 times more than a decade ago.

But the reality was that back in 2003 during the SARS period, the Tsuen Wan District Council and the Civil Affairs Bureau jointly established Tsuen Wan Jewelry Street in the area of Chung On Street/Chuen Lung Street, including spending more than HKD$200,000 to erect a landmark in the form of a gold ingot. In 2007, the Urban Renewal Authority and the Hong Kong Housing Authority spend HK$6 million to beautify those streets under the theme of "gold."

[Note: In Hong Kong, there are many street markets/shopping streets (see Discover Hong Kong), such as Goldfish Market, Bird Garden, Flower Market, Sneakers Street, etc). The residents at the Flower Market can claim that they find it undesirable to have only flower stores on their street block, just like these Tsuen Wan residents claim that they don't want jewelry stores on Jewelry Street.]

(Ming Pao) March 7, 2015. By Lui Tai-lok.

Here is what we know:

Based upon these figures, many people would think that the same day visitors must be mostly parallel traders. Yet, according to Ming Pao's information, about 20,000 mainlanders came 52 to 99 times during the year and about 10,000 mainlanders came 100 times or more during the year. Many people think that this is a big number.

Let me suppose that the 20,000 who came 52 to 99 times came 75 times on the average. That would make 20,000 x 75 = 1.5 million trips in total. Let me suppose the 10,000 who came 100 or more times came 150 times on the average. That would make 10,000 x 150 = 1.5 million trips in total. Together these people made 1.5 + 1.5 = 3 million trips during the year. This is just 20% of all mainlander trips using the multiple-entry permits, and also just 10% of all same day travelers.

We would be making a mistake to assume that those who travel frequently under the multiple-entry permits are parallel traders. They are clearly not the main factors. The parallel traders problem is easy to solve, because the activities (picking up and delivering the products) must take place close to the border for economic reasons. So this is different from regular shopping activities which can take place anywhere.

At the same time, we need to understand that parallel trading is a commercial activity based upon demand/supply. Even if we ban mainlanders from carrying anything across the border, as long as the market demand exists and mainlanders are willing to pay for those products, parallel trading will continue to exist. The difference is that only Hongkongers can act as parallel traders.

According to Ming Pao, about 1.5 million Shenzhen residents came to Hong Kong last year under the multiple-entry permit at an average of 9 times per year. Of these 1.5 million, about 1.2 million came fewer than 10 times. If you assume that they come once every two months for an average of 6 times per year, they account for 1.2 million x 6 = 7.2 million trips, or about half of the 14,840,000 multiple-entry permits visits for the year. Setting the maximum number of trips allowable to 8 times per year is not going to affect these people at all.

Of the 28,170,000 same night arrivals, multiple-entry permit holders account for only 14,840,000 which is about half. This means the rest are dispersed in the Pearl River Delta outside Shenzhen. This is still a formidable number with lots of growth potential.

... Let me make a simple summary.

(Oriental Daily) March 18, 2015

According to Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, between March 2014 and February 2015, there were 4,986 cases of unlicensed export of powdered infant formula. A total of 61,200 kilograms of powdered formula were found and 5,000 persons were arrested. Of the arrestees, 1,758 were Hongkongers, 3,235 were mainlanders and 17 were foreign nationals. Most of those arrestees were fined, but 157 were sentenced to jail time ranging from 1 day to 140 days with another 668 being given suspended sentences.

Lai said that the Immigration Department has a watch list for parallel traders. As of February 2015, the list contained 13,500 mainlanders who have been rejected entry 58,000 times.

Lai said that it is not feasible to impose an entry/exit tax on all travelers across the border. Every day, 180,000 Hongkongers cross the border and it is impossible to make mainlanders pay an entry/exit tax while insisting that the mainland authorities must not impose such a tax on Hongkongers. Furthermore, such a tax would affect the local tourism, retail and restaurant sectors negatively.

(Wen Wei Po) March 19, 2015

Lai Tung-kwok explained that mainland laws are different from Hong Kong laws. The mainland Customs Department have restrictions on the types and quantities of material being brought in. According to his understanding, the cases that were caught on the mainland side are mostly Hongkongers who are breaking the mainland laws.

Between December 2014 and February 2015, MTR East Rail has monthly rejections of 8540, 15149 and 8155 cases in which the luggage exceeded the maximum dimensions or weights allowable.

(SCMP) Guangdong to limit cross-border visits to curb Hong Kong parallel goods trade. March 19, 2015.

Mainland authorities plan to limit the number of visits travellers can make to Hong Kong in a bid to combat cross-border trading, with a source close to the Guangdong government suggesting a cap of two visits per person, per day.

The plans come amid rising tension in Hong Kong over the impact of tourism and so-called parallel trading - the bulk buying of goods in the city for resale over the border. Pro-Beijing newspaper Ta Kung Pao reported, citing an unnamed Guangdong government source, that mainland authorities had put forward several proposals to limit the number of visits Shenzhen residents could make.

The potential changes would affect the individual visit scheme, introduced in 2003 and since expanded to allow residents of 49 mainland cities to travel to Hong Kong without joining tour groups. In 2009, Beijing extended the arrangement to allow people with household registration in Shenzhen to apply for multiple-entry permits.

The scheme is opposed by Hong Kong protesters who say it encourages cross-border trading; critics say the influx creates a nuisance due to overcrowding and that their activities push up prices in the city. A series of recent protests have turned violent. The unnamed source quoted by Ta Kung Pao did not say how many visits were being proposed under the plan.

Professor Zheng Tianxiang, of the Pearl River Delta Research Institute at Guangzhou's Sun Yat-sen University, said he had proposed to Guangdong authorities liming the number of visits by a holder of a multiple-entry permit to two a day. "For visitors travelling to Hong Kong for academic exchanges and business trips, two visits to Hong Kong per day are already enough. My proposal should be able to resolve the problem arising from the influx of parallel traders," Zheng said.

A person familiar with the Hong Kong government's position said the Hong Kong and central governments were working towards setting a cap on the number of visits multiple-entry permit holders could make. "But the mainland authorities are juggling with the number of visits a multiple-entry permit holder is entitled to," the person said.

Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Greg So Kam-leung said the central government would take into account different factors in its deliberations on how to refine the individual visit scheme and the multiple-entry arrangement. But he said Beijing had yet to make a decision

Zhou Bo, deputy director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, said last week the individual visit scheme and multiple-entry arrangement for Shenzhen residents would be refined to "better suit the situation in Hong Kong".

Ip Kwok-him, a lawmaker from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, said pupils who live in Shenzhen and study in Hong Kong and their parents should be exempted from the restriction. He urged authorities to gather figures on this group before deciding on a cap.

Another lawmaker, tourism representative Yiu Si-wing, said in the short term, the authorities should not consider raising the number of visits for mainland tourists or extending the multiple-entry scheme to other cities. "If parallel trading worsens after implementing these measures, it would create more problems and grievances," he said.

(Post852) March 21, 2015

According to published information, 14,850,000 trips were made by mainlanders coming to Hong Kong from Shenzhen using multiple-entry permits. According to <Ming Pao> on March 1st, about 1.5 million individuals came to Hong Kong holding multiple-entry permits. Of these, 80% came to Hong Kong 10 times or fewer during the year, and 2% (or 30,000) came 52 times (=once a week) or more often. More than 10,000 came to Hong Kong 100 or more times during the year.

Therefore, if you impose a maximum of two trips allowable per day, it will achieve absolutely nothing towards reducing professional parallel traders.

Before you analyze any data, you should state your goals first. At this point, it is unclear just what the goals are, as different people have different goals and people are frequently moving their goalposts around during their discussions. Here are some frequently stated goals:

I. Eliminate congestion in the streets (sometimes facetiously stated as the fear of sustaining mortal injury when someone towing a luggage case rolls it over your toes).

II. Stem the tide of rising housing costs, which is reflected in purchase prices and also commercial/residential rents.

III. Stop the proliferation of jewelry stores and pharmacies/dispensaries and bring back the good old days of small bookstores and eateries.

IV. Stop parallel goods trading

V. Stop the infiltration/pollution of Hong Kong by mainland Chinese culture/ideology.

and so on ...

After you have selected your goal(s), you can assess your method(s) which is based upon choosing who you allow to enter Hong Kong and the relevant conditions.

Generally, the major visa types are:

Mainland Chinese have more variations:

For each method, you can assess whether it helps you to approach your goal(s).

Example 1: Get rid of all tourists to reduce street congestion.

There are 54 million tourists per year. 25.7 million of them stayed overnight for 3.4 nights on the average. Therefore they were in Hong Kong for 25.7 million x 3.4 = 87.4 million days. Another 28.6 million came and went the same day. Therefore the grand total number of tourist-days is (87.4 + 28.6) million = 116 million per year, which works out to 318,000 per day. If there are 318,000 fewer people around per day in a population of 7 million, the streets will definitely be less congested.

However, getting rid all tourists would affect the business at 236 hotels with their 71,998 rooms, Ocean Park/Disneyland, retailers, restaurants, etc. In 2013, the tourism sector had employed 269,700 workers for total revenues of HK$343.1 billion

Example 2: Stop parallel trading by imposing a cap of 8 trips per year for Shenzhen residents with multiple-entry permits.

(RTHK) The Democratic Party has called for the number of visits multiple-entry permit holders can make to Hong Kong to be capped at eight a year. This is in response to recent protests against the growing number of parallel goods traders - who are accused of driving up the prices of daily necessities and causing a nuisance to local residents.

1.5 million Shenzhen residents came to Hong Kong 14.84 million times last year, for an average of 10 times per year. About 1 million of them make 8 or fewer trips per year, so they won't be affected by this cap of 8 times per year. Assume that these 1 million people come 5.5 times per year, this makes 5.5 million in total trips. Of the other 500,000 who make more than 8 times per year, let us assume now that they will only make the maximum of 8 trips per year. So this makes 500,000 x 8 = 4 million in total trips. The grand total is (5.5 + 4) = 9.5 million per year. Therefore the net savings is (14.84 - 9.5) = 5.35 million trips per year, or 5.35 million / 365 days = 14,600 per day. In the best assumption, these saved trips were all parallel traders who only do business in the five districts (Sheung Shui, Tai Po, Sha Tin, Yuen Long and Tuen Mun), that would mean 14,600 / 5 = 2,900 persons per district. On a typical day, 200,000 persons pass through New Town Plaza in Sha Tin. 2,900 persons is 1.5% of that total. This is not going to change anything.

By the way, do you know what kind of person would make two trips a day for 180 days out of the year? From the news report above: "Ip Kwok-him, a lawmaker from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, said pupils who live in Shenzhen and study in Hong Kong and their parents should be exempted from the restriction. He urged authorities to gather figures on this group before deciding on a cap."

As long as the market demand exists, the parallel traders will simply hire more Hongkongers to take up the slack left behind by the departing mainlanders. Labor costs will go up, but it means nothing if mainland customers continue to want these products. The streets will still be congested and the queues at the border crossings will still be just as long.

(Bastille Post)

During the Occupy Central period, Chief Executive CY Leung has pointed out that there were outside influences. However, he has declined to disclose the details. Yesterday while meeting with more than 100 guests at Government House, he described four different levels of outside influences.

Firstly, there are the foreign governments. Secondly, there are the foreign services departments of various foreign governments, wherein the senior foreign government leaders may not be fully aware of everything that these departments are up to. Thirdly, there are the non-government organizations. Fourthly, there are the individual foreigners.

CY Leung also said that Occupy Central trio member Benny Tai predicted beforehand that ten thousand people would turn themselves in to crash the court system. This never happened. This proved that most citizens are still law-abiding and that the whole Occupy Central idea was a failure.

An attendee noted that CY Leung referred to "outside influences" and not "foreign influences." The difference is that "outside" includes Taiwan, whereas "foreign" would not because Taiwan is not a sovereign nation.

(Oriental Daily)


Legislators Gary Fan Kwok-wai and Claudia Mo Man-ching hauling suitcases around in Tsim Sha Tsui to demand an end to multiple-entry permits and restrictions on Individual Visit Permit.

CY Leung pointed out that after the Lunar New Year, the number of tourists visiting Hong Kong fell whereas those visiting Macau grew. Since there is no issue of government interference or changes in mainland economic conditions, the cause must surely be the series of anti-mainlander activities in Hong Kong which made mainlanders reluctant now to come here.

Specifically, CY Leung pointed to Civic Party legislator Claudia Mo Man-ching for hauling a luggage case around to make fun of mainlanders. He said such actions affect the amity between Hongkongers and mainlanders.

When our reporter contacted Claudia Mo, she initially denied ever "leading to oppose parallel traders." She questioned CY Leung to name when and where she called whom to do what. She condemned Leung for fabrication and misdirection. However, our reporter found out from Claudia Mo's Facebook that she collaborated with the Hong Kong First group and legislator Gary Fan Kwok-wai to haul suitcases in Tsim Sha Tsui to oppose multiple-visit permits. Claudia Mo immediately changed her tune and admitted that she did demand restrictions on Individual Visit Permits. But she denied any involvement in the recent anti-parallel trading demonstrators. Later she said that her suitcase act was merely performance art and she does not oppose mainland tourists, just that there are too many of them.


Oriental Daily March 23, 2015 front page story

(Oriental Daily) Initially, some media outlet misquoted CY Leung as accusing Claudia Mo of opposing parallel traders. This allowed Claudia Mo to demand that CY Leung to produce evidence to that effect. The correct quote is that CY Leung accused Claudia Mo of opposing mainland tourists, as evidenced by her suitcase-lugging performance art.

(The Standard) March 23, 2015.

Irate Civic Party lawmaker Claudia Mo Man-ching has challenged Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying to produce evidence to show she is one of the instigators behind anti-parallel trading protests.

Federation of Trade Unions member Pan Pey-chyou claimed Mo was singled out by Leung during a meeting with pro- establishment district council members after he had accused the pan-democrats of causing a decline in mainland visitors. But Mo denied any involvement. "When did I? Ask him to provide evidence: on which day, what time, on what occasion did I gather people to do what? This is entirely irresponsible. Such accusations are false."

She later added: "The livelihood of New Territories citizens has been greatly disturbed. I was there pointing out the problem - that he [Leung], as a chief executive, has to provide solutions. But not only does he not provide solutions, he shifts the blame onto others." Mo was pictured last year pulling a suitcase in a protest against multiple visas for mainland visitors.

Leung was also quoted as having criticized Civic Party lawmaker Kenneth Chan Ka-lok for writing, "Have you ever thought that, when you wake up one morning, the red five- starred flag cannot be hoisted?"

The chief executive also allegedly criticized Occupy Central co-founder Chan Kin-man for writing that China would experience a great change in a decade if its current development model remains unchanged. Leung reportedly said the intentions of the pair were obvious and warned that such dangerous thoughts called for a cautious response. For his part, Kenneth Chan responded that Leung's comments were groundless attempts to attack freedom of speech and thought when he does not like what he hears.

Chan Kin-man said Leung had "over-interpreted" his words as he was merely pointing out that China is at a crossroads in its anti-corruption political movement - a topic entirely unrelated to overthrowing China with foreign forces.

Both criticized Leung for exaggerating the comments in order to make Hong Kong seem like it was under a dangerous threat from foreign and localist forces thereby winning the central government's support and securing his power.

There was a peaceful standoff outside Sheung Shui MTR station yesterday between the North District Parallel Imports Concern Group and the pro- government Defend Hong Kong.

(Bastille Post)

On January 18, Civic Party legislator/Baptist University Politics and International Relations Department associate professor Chan Ka-lok said that he wants his students to have a sense of calling: "I often challenge my students in class. I ask them if they ever imagine that one day when they wake up in the morning, the five-star red flag (=national flag of the People's Republic of China) would not longer be rising. Have they ever imagined that one day the burden of history will rest on their shoulders." When the five-star red flag no longer rises, it means that the government has fallen.

Occupy Central founder and Chinese University of Hong Kong Sociology Department professor Chan Kin-man wrote in <Ming Pao> on March 4th that Hong Kong does not have the conditions for a revolution. Nevertheless, Chan is firm on not accepting the political reform package based upon the August 31st resolution of the National People's Congress Standing Committee. His underlying reason was that the Chinese Communist government may collapse at any moment. He wrote: "The current model of development in China is unsustainable. There will be drastic changes within ten years. When that time comes, Hong Kong will have the opportunity for constitutional reform." Therefore Chan thinks: "Unless I give up all hope, I won't pocket the current proposal first."

Central Policy Unit consultant and Chinese University of Hong Kong Social Work Department professor Wong Chack-kie criticized these scholars in <Ming Pao>. He said that the Collapse of China theory is weakly grounded, even though it manages to mislead people in certain circles. To count of hoping that the "five-star red flag won't rise" as the basis of deciding the path to democracy is unwise in terms of culture and history.

This debate is bound to continue. However, I suspect that the pan-democratic political parties won't publicly advocate this line. When a political party embraces the Collapse of China theory as one of its main tenets, it fails to meet the "I love Hong Kong, I love China" test. In which case, they had better forget about ever electing one of their own as Chief Executive. In the past, the Democratic Party and the Civic Party have both been very careful in articulating their views on such matters. Let's see what they say now about the Coming Collapse of China.

(Ming Pao) Wong Chack-kie: Basing Democracy on Some Vague Hopes. March 16, 2015.

Previously, one of the Occupy Central founders Chan Kin-man acknowledged that the conditions for a revolution are not present in Hong Kong. However, he insisted that he won't accept the constitutional reform based upon the August 31st resolution of the National People's Congress Standing Committee. However, he seemed to have based his argument on the vague assumption that the Chinese Communist government will collapse at any time. He wrote thus: "The current model of development in China is unsustainable. There will be drastic changes within ten years. When that time comes, Hong Kong will have the opportunity for constitutional reform." Based upon this assumption, he said that: "Unless I give up all hope, I won't pocket the current proposal first."

Chan Kin-man is not alone. Another pan-democratic scholar and Civic Party legislator Chan Ka-lok said on January 18, 2015 about demanding his students to have a sense of calling: "I often challenge my students in class. I ask them if they ever imagine that one day when they wake up in the morning, the five-star red flag (=national flag of the People's Republic of China) would not longer be rising. Have they ever imagined that one day the burden of history will rest on their shoulders."

On the same day, RTHK's City Forum featured former Hong Kong University Student Union's Undergrad deputy editor-in-chief Keyvin Wong who made the bold assumption that Hong Kong independence is possible given that the Chinese Communist government may fall at any time ...

The two scholars named Chan are stalwarts in the pro-democracy camp. Chan Kin-man is fairly moderate, but his political judgment is based upon a vague hope. The sense of helplessness is tremendous, even if it is not moderate at all. His position is very passive: Hong Kong does not have the conditions required for a revolution, but mainland China has. Therefore, I will wait until the mainland government collapses, and then I shall have a democracy that meets western standards!

This type of passive resistance is not restricted only to the so-called "moderate" scholars or pro-independence Hong Kong university students. Otherwise, you cannot explain how the entire pro-democracy camp want to stand on the moral high ground and reject the practical political needs of the moment. The most recent example is the joint letter signed by 27 pan-democratic legislators that they will veto any constitutional reform not meeting "international standards." Do they believe that China will collapse at any minute? Do they think that the Chinese Communists are deep in structural crises with no political credibility left? Are they just waiting to see how China finishes?

American economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz thinks that based upon GDP Purchasing Parity estimates, we are moving into the Chinese century just as the 19th century was the British century and the 20th century was the American century. Using Purchasing Parity would be over-estimating the national power of China, because the GDP per capita of China is far lower than that of America. Thus, the Chinese authorities do not accept the Chinese century appellation. Nevertheless, in terms of national power, China and America are becoming two nations on opposite poles. On one hand, the gap between China and America is shrinking. On the other hand, the gap between China and other nations is growing. Under such circumstances, very few people dare to invoke the Collapse of China theory. If they do, they run the risk of being Gordon Chang, who wrote a book on the Coming Collapse of China in 2001 where his many predictions failed to materialize. We will wait and see if Chan Kin-man's "collapse within ten years" will become another joke ...

(Oriental Daily)

CY Leung said that many things have happened over the past two to three months, and people should pay attention to the views expressed by three types of persons. The first type are university students who speak their minds directly. He expects to see more from them.

The second type are more subtle about Hong Kong independence. These people talk about "the flag doesn't rise anymore" or "big changes within the next ten years." Although they don't spell it out, their message is clear. CY Leung is referring to Chan Ka-lok and Chan Kin-man.

CY Leung said that the third type of persons will emerge sooner or later, even though he does not describe their speeches or actions directly. Leung would like the social/district opinion leaders to make sure that citizens do not get misled by these people.

More at Occupy Central Part 2.


Archives:

Occupy Central Part 1, Occupy Central Part 2, Occupy Central Part 3
Brief Comments
Blog Posts

Google  
Search WWW Search www.zonaeuropa.com

        Blogroll   Press