Section 1 of 3:  Recommended Photos/Videos/Reading

Global (in English) Greater China (in English) Greater China (in Chinese)
Mexico: The War on Journalists Alma Guillermoprieto, NYROB
Hispanic, Latino, or neither? Why people can't agree on these labels Vox
Owen Jones talks to Calais migrants: "They forget we are human" New Statesman
Who Profits From the Bangkok Bombing? Pepe Escobar, CounterPunch
A Critical Realization About Journalism is Learned by Being its Subject Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept
China Rising: Parsing the Big Parade Peter Lee, CounterPunch
Explosions shock China's Tianjin port The Big Picture, Boston Globe
When One App Rules Them All: The Case of WeChat and Mobile in China Connie Chan

What China thinks of Donald Trump  Ana Swanson, Wonkblog
Turkey's "Passports for Uyghurs" Scheme Continues Its Messy Public Unraveling China Matters

《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
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.]

(dbc) October 1, 2015.

More than 10 People Power members gathered this afternoon near Star Ferry (TST) to commemorate those who perished in the Lamma Island ferry disaster. They raised banners that read "Commemorate the dead, resist tyranny" and they chanted slogans such as "It is no crime to commemorate the dead." They also set fire to the Chinese national flag. The participants engaged in a minute of silence with some people holding up yellow umbrellas. People Power legislator Chan Chi-chuen said that People Power wanted to cancel the national day fireworks show permanently.

(Oriental Daily) October 2, 2015.

About 50 League of Social Democrats and Chinese Democracy College members marched from the Western District Police Station to the China Liaison Office to hold three minutes of silence for the dead in the June 4th 1989 movement and the late mainland democracy activist Li Wang-yang. League of Social Democrats member  Koo Sze Yiu attempted to pick up the coffin prop and toss it inside the China Liaison Office, but the police stopped him. Social activist Lui Yuk-lin tried to set fire to a Chinese Communist flag but the police doused water to put out the fire.

Meanwhile another 30 people of the Tiananmen Mothers Movement including League of Social Democrats legislator Leung Kwok-hung, Alliance to Support Democratic Patriotic Movements in China's current chairman Albert Ho and former chairman Lee Cheuk-yan marched earlier in the morning from the Western District Police Station to the China Liaison Office. They held banners and wreaths, and demanded that the June 4th movement be indicated. They placed the wreaths outside the China Liaison Office and bowed to the wreaths. Several counter-demonstrators showed up and demanded Lee Cheuk-yan and others to "pay the bill" (in reference to accepting responsibility for Occupy Central). The police separated the two sides. Eventually they all dispersed peacefully.

(Oriental Daily with video) October 2, 2015.

League of Social Democrats legislator Leung Kwok-hung and about 20 persons set out from the Family Planning Council in Wanchai towards the site where the national day flag ceremony was to be held. They carried a coffin and flower wreaths and they chanted slogans to demand the vindication of the June 4th 1989 movement. They clashed with a group of Localists who carried banners that say "Hong Kong Independence" and "I am not Chinese." These Localists cursed out Leung and company for being "off the ground." Meanwhile regular demonstrators Andy "Captain America" Yung and others waved their British Dragon/Lion colonial flags.

(Wen Wei Po) October 1, 2015.

Civic Passion cadre Cheng Chung-tai led a group of ten or so radical Localists towards the Convention Centre. The police on duty stopped them from approaching the Golden Bauhinia Plaza. So Cheng and company set up a stage on an empty lot near the intersection of Convention Avenue and Fleming Road and started yelling. Several City-State members waved the British Dragon/Lion colonial flags and showed Hong Kong independence banners. Hong Kong Indigenous cadre Ray Wong also put in an appearance. Meanwhile across the street from the Convention Centre, Hong Kong Localism Power cadres CK Ho and Simon Sin yelled at passersby by megaphone. League of Social Democrats legislator Leung Kwok-hung brought more than 10 persons to try to approach the Golden Bauhinia Plaza, but they were also stopped by the police.


SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUiZz08QNUY Awful rendition of "Do you hear the people singing?" led by Civic Party legislator Kwok Ka-ki
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRVmAVRuXSM League of Social Democrats march towards Golden Bauhinia Plaza
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEKctZA-Gqk CK Ho chanting "I am not a Chinese person" and "Hong Kong is already a nation"
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ccHVX7K3IU Cheng Chung-tai (Civic Passion) gives a speech

Resistance Live Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCNdY-fbgXA People Power commemorate the disaster victims by chanting "Bring down the Communist Party" and burning an imitation Chinese national flag

Internet comments:

- How do the number of demonstrators compared against a benchmark as reported on the front page of Sing Tao --- 270,000 forgot their worries and enjoyed the fireworks on both sides of the harbor?

- (Wen Wei Po) 31,829 were present at the Sha Tin Horse Racing Course on National Day.
- They are not Chinese, but they didn't mind taking the Chinese National Day holiday. Why aren't they working on a Thursday?

- You are not a Chinese person. Okay, so what are you then? I can't tell because you have hidden your face (cap, sunglasses and ski masks on a hot day). How do you expect me to ever support a man who won't show me his face? P.S. Is he missing four fingers on his right hand?

- The message from this banner is perplexing in three ways.

Firstly, the Chinese phrase is translated directly as "I am not a Chinese person." That is a negative statement, which naturally leads to the question: "So what are you? Pakistani? Filipino? Korean?" This banner does not provide an answer. Methinks that they want to say: "I am a Hongkonger." I think just about every Hong Kong citizen will agree with the statement "I am a Hongkonger." So that serves no purpose. Methinks that they really want to say: "I am a Hong Kong person and/but I am not a Chinese person." This is going to raise many more questions about the meaning of "I am not a Chinese person": Do you mean that you come from a different genetic pool, like the Maoris versus the British in New Zealand? Do you speak/write a completely different language (that is, does your Cantonese dialect not come from Canton (=Guangzhou)?)? Do you have different cultural traditions (for example, you don't have the Chinese New Year, Dragon Boat Festival, Ching Ming festival, Mid-Autumn Festival, rice dumplings, hairy crabs, etc)? What is your citizenship/nationality as stated in your passport (HKSAR passport is issued by the People's Republic of China, while BNO passport does not confer UK citizenship)?

Secondly, the English phrase is "Hong Kong Is Not China." I checked the map:

This is true: Hong Kong is just one little black dot whereas China is the big yellow chunk in the middle. In the same way, New York City is not the United States, Osaka is not Japan, Marseilles is not France, Perth is not Australia, etc.  But what is the purpose of saying so?

Thirdly, the Chinese phrase and the English phrase do not match each other. Why, oh why?

The problems with this banner reflect the bigger problem of the lack of a grand narrative that makes sense.

- Here is a simple test: Ask them who issued their Hong Kong ID? It is the People's Republic of China's Hong Kong Special Administration Region. If they don't have an ID, they are breaking the law.

- Hong Kong Localism Power's CK Ho declared that Hong Kong is already a nation. As a nation, taxes can be raised from the people. So please send in your checks to government headquarters at Hong Kong Localism Cultural Company Limited, Portland Street Number 280 c/o East Asia Bank account number 015-515-68-?????-?.

(Wen Wei Po) September 27, 2015.

A 200-day-plus chronology of the Johannes Chan affair.

January: The Research Assessment Exercise conducted by more than 300 international-class scholars evaluated the research articles of 4,400 Hong Kong scholars. Hong Kong University's School of Law had only 46% of its articles rated "excellent" or "world-leading" whereas the 10-year-old Chinese University of Hong Kong's School of Law was 18% ahead. The former School of Law dean Johannes Chan was ridiculed by Internet users for "successfully reducing the grade of HKU School of Law." Johannes Chan counter-attacked and said that all criticisms of his RAE problems are "political oppression" because he is reported to be a candidate for pro vice-chancellor. Some media agreed with Chan's viewpoint and characterized the criticisms as "political oppression."

February: Unidentified parties told the media that Johannes Chan was recommended unanimously by the selection committee headed by HKU president Peter Mathieson as the vice pro-chancellor. At the same time, these parties also said that the Hong Kong SAR Chief Executive CY Leung applied pressure on the HKU Council members to thwart the appointment of Johannes Chan. A member of the selection committee was interviewed by other media, and said that the committee has made no recommendations yet. The Chief Executive's office also issued a strong denial. Other HKU Council members also said that they have never been under any pressure. They thought that the leaker must have ulterior motives to pass out such erroneous information. Although nobody ever emerged to substantiate the media stories and no evidence was ever produced, the pro-democratic legislators and certain media insists that the autonomy of HKU has been "politically interfered with" and they want to exercise the special Legco powers to investigate government interference. They also demanded HKU explain the pro vice- chancellor selection process and to immediately appoint Johannes Chan to that position. Meanwhile Johannes Chan tried to defect attention on himself and proposed that the Chief Executive should not serve as the university chancellor in accordance with the law.

March: With questions being raised about Johannes Chan's academic leadership and a report on the "secret donations" being due so, he was at risk of losing out. So certain media polled the various deans of HKU schools and finally came up with four school deans praising Johannes Chan. Although HKU president Peter Mathieson said that there was no government pressure on the appointment of the pro vice chancellor and that his personal conversations with the Chief Executive did not broach this topic, some groups are still demanding the amendment of the university ordinance which automatically makes the Chief Executive the chancellor at all eight universities. In addition, the appointment of Executive Council member Arthur Li to the HKU University Council was taken as proof that he was interfering with the appointment of Johannes Chan and that the pro-establishment camp was affecting autonomy at the university. At the end of the month, the report on the "secret donations." Certain media said that the report said that Johannes Chan did not break any regulations and therefore this should not affect this appointment as vice pro chancellor. But the report clearly states that there were problems with how Johannes Chan handled the money, and his conduct was said "not to meet the expected standards" of a senior administrator at the university. During the regular March meeting of the University Council, there was no discussion about the vice pro chancellor position because the selection committee has not yet made it recommendations. Certain media reported that "the University Council was stalling on the appointment of the vice pro chancellor."

April: Hong Kong University Surgery Department director Lo Chung-mau was elected by the staff to represent them in the Council. However, the opposition said that this conclusively proved that the University Council is now populated with CY Leung fans. The Professional Teachers Union once again called for amending the university ordinance so that the Chief Executive is no longer the chancellor of the eight universities.

May: At the time when Johannes Chan was the Dean of the School of Law, he took $300,000 in donations to the Law School via Occupy Central Trio member Benny Tai. He did not follow procedure and report the name of the donor. The school had to ask Benny Tai. Johannes Chan's conduct was said not to meet the expected standards of the university.

The opposition now mounted a defense based upon Johannes Chan and Benny Tai, namely that there are no expected standards as such at Hong Kong University and therefore this is making up charges against them.

June: Former Ming Pao chief editor Kevin Lau wrote in an opinion column in Ming Pao that Johannes Chan applied for the pro vice chancellor position after being persuaded by HKU Council chairman Leong Chu-hung. Lau said that Chan was supposed to be promoted to that position in March, but his appointment was stalled. The opposition promoted this allegation to apply pressure on Leong Che-hung and the council to make the appointment. But the facts were that Johannes Chan's secret donation issue is unresolved and the selection committee has not made any recommendations. But the opposition didn't care and continued to say that the Council was stalling Chan's appointment. On June 30, the "secret donations" report came out. The investigation committee said that Chan and Tai acted in a manner that does not meet expectations and they recommend the university to take action. At the Council meeting, university president Peter Mathieson said that the Provost will be arriving in August and so the council voted 12-to-6 to postpone the appointment of the pro vice chancellor until the Provost arrives. The opposition the delay and threatened to use the special powers of the Legislative Council to investigate the matter.

July: The opposition said that it was unreasonable to wait for the Provost. The HKU Alumni Concern Group conducted various activities such as gathering signatures, holding press conferences, publishing statements to demand that HKU make the appointment. Former Ming Pao chief editor Kevin Lau published an article just before the July meeting of the Council that "the pro-establishment camp led by Arthur Li and Leong Che-hung" asked a middleman to persuade Johannes Chan to withdraw his candidacy.

On the day of the July meeting, several dozen HKU students and several radicals unconnected to Hong Kong University charged into the conference room and applied pressure on the council members. Lo Chung-mau fell down on the ground injured. Ayasha Macpherson felt ill after being surrounded and not allowed to leave. The two were taken to the hospital by ambulance. Arthur Li was surrounded by students and called "shameless." Afterwards, Johannes Chan told the investigating press that Arthur Li has never sent anyone to get him to withdraw.

August: The assault was regarded negatively by society and that was unfavorable to Johannes Chan's candidacy. But Johannes Chan disclosed that he had been "recommended" to become a candidate for pro vice chancellor for academic staffing and resources. He said that his successful appointment means that the university still has autonomy and vice versa. The opposition chimed in to say that failure to appoint Johannes Chan would lead to the disintegration of civilized society.

On the day of the August meeting, it was noted that all four candidates for the Provost positions with withdrawn in view of the known situation and so a Provost cannot be found in the short time. The Council decided to discuss the appointment of the pro vice chancellor in its September meeting. With respect to the "secret donation" affair, the Council accepted the university senior administrators group's advice to make recommendations to the various principals. The letter to Johannes Chan reminds him that as a senior staff member, he has certain duties and responsibilities which he must no overlook in the future.

September: The HKU Alumni Concern Group worked through the Convocation to hold a referendum in which several non-binding motions were passed by more than 7,000 persons, including demanding the Council to appoint the pro vice chancellor within 30 days. Although the turnout rate was only 4.8% of the Convocation, the HKU Alumni Concern Group told the Council that there is a strong public opinion among the alumni.

In summary, the opposition has been using seven dirty tricks:

1. They disseminated false information through the media to portray themselves as being politically suppressed

2. They made false accusations against the Hong Kong SAR government and the University Council as if these are the enemies

3. They used violent force to lay siege to the University Council members

4. They gathered signatures, issued statements, bought newspapers ads and held press conferences to force the University Council to appoint Johannes Chan

5. They used the Hong Kong University Convocation to apply pressure

6. They put HKU president Peter Mathieson in a bind by saying his governance would vanish if he fails to appoint Johannes Chan

7. They said that if Johannes Chan is not appointed, it would mean the disintegration of civilization.

(Wen Wei Po) September 28, 2015.

Yesterday, Profession Teachers Union legislative councilor Ip Kin-yuen held a press conference to release an open letter to the University Council. The letter contains two demands. The first demand is for the University Council to makes its appointment of the pro vice chancellor of academic staffing and resources. The second demand is tht the University Council must provide detailed explanations of their rationales. Ip said: "The University Council should adhere to the principles of academic freedom and institutional autonomy while forgetting any political issues. The University Council members are held responsible for their decision. We recommend that the vote be conducted by open balloting with all the votes being written into the record." Of course, this recommendation is inconsistent with the principle of confidentiality that is in place for the University Council.

Ip Kin-yuen said that they don't really care who gets appointed or not, but they want the University ZCouncil members to make the decision in accordance with the guidelines and rules. He said that he will present a petition at the meeting and HKU Alumni Concern Group representatives will be outside. A forum will be held one week later at which point Leong Che-hung will explain the relevant decision. "As for any other actions, that depends on whether the explanation of the University Council is reasonable." When asked whether there will be another violent like during the July meeting, Ip Kin-yuen said that they will use peaceful means to express their views. HKU Student Union president Billy Fung merely said "Nothing further to add" to avoid answering the question.

(Ming Pao) September 28, 2015.

The HKU Council has 22 members. One of them will be away from Hong Kong and the president normally does not vote. That leaves 20 votes to be cast. According to the assessment of the HKU Alumni Concern Group, 9 votes (mainly staff members, teachers and students) support Johannes Chan's appointment. The pro-establishment side has 10 votes. That makes president Leong Che-hung's vote critical. If he supports the appointment, the vote will be 10-10 and further debate will be necessary. If he vetoes the appointment, then the game is over.

(HKG Pao) September 29, 2015.

On radio this morning, legislative councilor Ip Kin-yuen said that is was rare for the University Council to hold secret balloting, and it was also rare for the University Council to reject a candidate recommended by the selection committee. Former HKU Council member Cheung Pok-yin was on the same radio program and pointed out that during his tenure, controversial issues were usually voted by secret balloting and not "rare" as Ip asserted.

(HKG Pao) September 29, 2015.

The HKU Council has 21 members, of which 8 come from inside (namely, staff members, teachers and students). One of them will be away from Hong Kong tonight. Of the 8 from inside, 7 (including HKU president Peter Mathieson and School of Physics dean Kwok Sun) are for and 1 (Surgery Department director Lo Chung-mau) is opposed. Of the 12 from outside, all are opposed. So the writing is on the wall not to appoint Johannes Chan as the  pro vice chancellor.

(Oriental Daily) September 29, 2015.

The Hong Kong University Council voted on the candidate for pro vice chancellor recommended by the selection committee. Council president Leong Che-hung did not cast a vote himself. By a small majority, the candidate was rejected. There were 20 members present. The vote was 12-8. Afterwards, Leong Chu-heng told the press that the decision was made for the sake of the long-term interests of the university. Based upon confidentiality, Leong said that they will not discuss the decision-making process and they can't even provide any information on the unnamed nominee.

(SCMP) University of Hong Kongs council votes 12-8 to reject Professor Johannes Chans appointment as pro-vice-chancellor. September 29, 2015.

After months of delay and under a cloud of controversy, the University of Hong Kongs governing council has voted by 12 to eight to reject Professor Johannes Chan Man-muns appointment as a pro-vice-chancellor. The decision was described by the chair of the institutions governing council Edward Leong Che-hung, who did not take part in the vote, as being in the "long-term interests" of the university.

The outcome is likely to cause outrage among students and alumni, who are accusing the council of making a politically-motivated decision. Previous discussion deferrals on the pro-vice-chancellor appointment matter have been seen as an attempt to punish Chan for his support of democracy and his close ties to colleague Benny Tai Yiu-ting, a co-founder of the Occupy Central movement. Beijing-loyalist media have heaped criticism on the pair.

Ahead of the critical meeting that has decided whether liberal scholar Johannes Chan Man-mun will be appointed to the key managerial post at the University of Hong Kong, Leong said he was giving up his vote in order to be objective and fair. Leong announced his move before the meeting started at 5pm, which was a turn from his previous practice as he voted twice in the decisions to defer deliberations of the appointment. The council voted in a secret ballot on Chans appointment tonight. 

I really hope [the issue] can conclude as soon as possible, said Leong as he arrived. I hope the meeting can reach a consensus. Leong and university vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson received letters from an alumni group and a group of university students, who urged the council to confirm the appointment.

Earlier, ahead of the meeting too, Chan urged the council to make a decision tonight, whether or not it wants to take him or reject him for the post, because the delay had affected the universitys operation. I hope the council will conduct business in a transparent manner, particularly because this is a matter of public concern, Chan said. If their decision falls short of public expectation, its inevitable they should explain. Chan disagreed with the councils tendency to keep everything confidential.

(SCMP) Going down swinging: University of Hong Kong's Johannes Chan decries political interference and wants reasons after appointment defeat. October 1, 2015.

Legal academic Johannes Chan Man-mun yesterday urged the University of Hong Kong's governing council to give a public explanation for its controversial decision to reject his appointment to a key managerial post, as renowned international scholars spoke up for him. But Chan said he had no plan to challenge the decision in court, even though students and alumni were considering such a move as well as a class boycott.

The council set off a storm by voting 12-8 in a secret ballot on Tuesday night against a search committee's recommendation that Chan be made the pro-vice-chancellor in charge of academic staffing and resources. Opposition to Chan's appointment had been linked to the liberal scholar's close ties to colleague Benny Tai Yiu-ting, a co-founder of the pro-democracy Occupy Central movement.

On a radio programme yesterday, Chan said the council, being a statutory publicly funded body, had a duty to act fairly when exercising its powers. "Rule number one is openness and transparency," the former law dean said. "Confidentiality should not be an excuse to avoid accountability to the public, especially when this matter has drawn a great deal of public interest." Chan added on another radio show that he thought his rejection stemmed from "political interference", citing over 300 articles in pro-Beijing newspapers attacking him.

However, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, the city's sole deputy to the National People's Congress Standing Committee, said those who alleged Beijing interference should prove it.

After the closed-door discussions on Tuesday night, angry student representative Billy Fung Jing-en abandoned confidentiality rules and revealed the reasons eight pro-government members had given for rejecting Chan, ranging from his having no PhD degree to his failure to "show sympathy" to a council colleague who collapsed in July when students stormed a meeting.

Several renowned international public law scholars, including HKU's Yash Ghai, dismissed council members' reservations about Chan's academic qualifications. They said a doctorate degree was not important in the discipline, and praised Chan's work and professional experience. "As a long-serving member of HKU it grieves me greatly to see the council turn to these nasty tricks to deny [Chan the job] in order to - one must assume - appease the Chinese government," Ghai said.

But some of the council members who were "exposed" by Fung hit back. Arthur Li Kwok-cheung accused Fung of lying, Leonie Ki Man-fung said the student leader had no integrity in breaching confidentiality rules and he "misinterpreted" their words, and Edward Chen Kwan-yiu denied saying Chan did not have a PhD. But they refused to reveal what they had actually said.

Meanwhile, HKU vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson clarified a Reuters report that quoted him as saying he could not rule out Beijing was behind the rejection of Chan. He said last night the interview was done on August 4, and he was talking about his email account being hacked, since he "did not know who" did it.

An alumni group is inviting council chairman Dr Leong Che-hung and other members to a forum to explain the decision.

(Ming Pao) A century-old university weakened by political struggles. October 2, 2015.

THE COUNCIL of the University of Hong Kong has rejected the recommendation to appoint Johannes Chan, the former Dean of the university's Faculty of Law, as a Pro-Vice-Chancellor of the university. The issue might have come to an end, but Hong Kong as a whole has paid dearly. First, the university has been severely weakened by the turmoil. Second, the international community is likely to form a negative impression about Hong Kong's academic freedom and the autonomy of its educational institutions. Furthermore, there are a lot of signs showing that different political forces have been involved in the affair. They have turned the university into their battleground.

The Council, in accordance with the principle of confidentiality, did not release an official explanation for rejecting Chan's appointment. However, Billy Fung, the HKU Student Union president and student representative to the Council, has breached confidentiality by disclosing some of the comments made by Council members. If what Fung said is true, it will mean that the Council does not have any convincing arguments to support their rejection of Chan's appointment. No doubt Fung's breach of confidentiality is itself a controversial action, and he might be punished by the Council. However, his unofficial account has brought to light the thinking of some Council members.

The Search Committee, which was led by the university's Vice-Chancellor, recommended five individuals for the posts of Pro-Vice-Chancellors. Johannes Chan was one of them. The other four individuals have all received their appointments and are carrying out their duties. True, the HKU Council has the power to make a better arrangement regarding the appointment of Johannes Chan. However, if Chan has failed to get the job just because he does not have a doctorate or his academic achievement is not up to standard, this will mean that the Search Committee might have failed its tasks. It is because, if a doctorate and a solid academic background are the prerequisites of the job, Chan should not have been recommended for the job in the first place. And there is a Council member who claimed that Johannes Chan did not send him regards after he tripped and fell. If this was one of the reasons why Chan was denied the post, most people will be left speechless or be stumped for words.

In fact, by rejecting the appointment of Chan as a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, the HKU Council has mounted a challenge to the authority of the Vice-Chancellor. It is because the Search Committee was led by the Vice-Chancellor. Though the Council is the organisation that has the final say in the university, its focus should be on the university's long-term strategy. The Vice-Chancellor, on the other hand, should be responsible for its routine operation. This incident has the effect of redrawing the line between the power and duties of the Vice-Chancellor and those of the Council. It is worth our concern whether the Vice-Chancellor will be able to lead the university effectively. When interviewed by a foreign news agency, Peter Mathieson, the HKU Vice-Chancellor, said he and Chan's supporters had been under pressure. He also disclosed that his email account had been hacked into and some of its contents had been published by the media. He would not rule out the possibility that the incident was a carefully orchestrated one, he said.

Hong Kong's political situation remains unclear in the post-constitutional reform era. The political struggles that arose from the appointment of Johannes Chan are in fact a microcosm of Hong Kong's political situation. Unless all sides change their mindsets and give up political struggles, incidents of similar nature will keep coming up in different forms. As the powers that be play a crucial role in shaping the political climate, society will fare better if the authorities give up political struggles. The University of Hong Kong has received a huge blow from the political struggles it has been caught up in. It is our hope that the university and Hong Kong will no longer be plagued by political struggles, that all disagreements will be resolved in a rational, tolerant manner and that internal strife will be kept to a minimum.

(SCMP) University of Hong Kong council member accuses student of 'dishonest means' in Johannes Chan decision uproar. October 2, 2015.

A University of Hong Kong council member has slammed a student representative who sits on the institutions governing body for disclosing discussion details of a controversial personnel decision.

In a statement issued late Thursday, Dr Lo Chung-mau also said some had been exaggerating matters by attacking him online. He said such actions would further split HKU and split Hong Kong.

Lo, a renowned liver surgeon, was quoted today by RTHK as saying he had received 2,000 emails since details of Tuesday's council meeting were exposed. He said some messages contained offensive language.

In his statement, Lo referred to a student member on the council breaching a confidentially agreement by one-sidedly making statements on what was discussed by council members during a recent meeting to discuss whether to appoint former university law school dean Johannes Chan Man-mun to a key managerial post.

Lo did not identify the student representative by name.

Integrity is the cornerstone of character, Los statement read. Using dishonest means to achieve goals must not be tolerated. He added that he hoped the student could reflect on what he did.

After the closed-door discussions on Tuesday night, student representative Billy Fung Jing-en angrily abandoned confidentiality rules and revealed the reasons pro-government members had given for rejecting Professor Chans candidacy for the post.

According to Fung, one reason raised by Lo was that Chan failed to show sympathy to him when he collapsed in July when students stormed a meeting. Reasons from other members included Chan's not having a PhD, Fung said. 

Fung was immediately criticised by several pro-establishment figures, including those mentioned in his revelations, with some calling him a liar and lacking in integrity.

Meanwhile, Legislative Council president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing, a university alumnus, said he felt sad about what had transpired. The handling of the incident was undesirable and would hopefully not be repeated, the veteran lawmaker said.

Pro-Beijing newspaper Wen Wei Po first revealed last year that Chan was the recommended to the post of pro-vice-chancellor, and since then the appointment which was supposed to be confidential until it was confirmed had been heavily debated in the public sphere.

Tsang yesterday defended the newspapers move, saying it was hard to stop media from reporting. Even if Chan were approved by the council, Tsang expected it would be very hard for him to be effective given his clear pro-democracy bent at odds with the central government. Some staff [in the university] might question whether [Chans decisions] not to promote them are related to their patriotic stance, Tsang said.  These excuses could easily be made and would make Chans job very difficult.

In the face of criticism from several pro-establishment figures, including those mentioned in his revelations, Fung yesterday said on a Commercial Radio programme that he had no other goals to achieve than ensuring students right to know. I dont benefit from this, said Fung. This is different from some executive council members who leaked information for their own interests.

(Wen Wei Po) October 2, 2015.

HKU Vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson was quoted by Reuters that he could not rule out the possibility that Beijing was behind the episode. Mathieson quickly clarified that the interview took place in early August and was taken out of context. But certain people refuse to accept the explanation. They said that the storm over the pro vice chancellor appointment showed that Mathieson had no leadership qualities and therefore he should resign in order to protect the reputation of the university.

About 20 members of the Cherish Group and the Defend Hong Kong Together Group demonstrated outside the HKU MTR Station. They said that Mathieson smeared out nation and his "Beijing interference" talk is an insult to the intelligence of the people of Hong Kong. Mathieson has also been completely indifferent to Billy Fung's breach of confidentiality.

It so happened that HKUSU members were also using the megaphone on campus. So the two sides started cursing each other out and drawing more than a hundred spectators. A teacher cursed the students and then broke down in tears. Students cursed out the demonstrators with obscene language and displayed their middle fingers. Finally, the university sent out a representative to accept a letter from the demonstrators who then dispersed peacefully.

(SCMP) University of Hong Kong council leak prompts debate over transparency. October 2, 2015.

On Tuesday, there were red faces all around when barely two hours after the university's governing council voted 12-8 against appointing law professor Johannes Chan Man-mun to a managerial post, a student representative let the cat out of the bag.

Billy Fung Jin-en abandoned confidentiality rules and exposed the reasons pro-government members of the governing council of the University of Hong Kong had given in the closed-door meeting for rejecting Chan for the post of pro-vice-chancellor. Their arguments allegedly ranged from him not having a doctorate to his failure to "show sympathy" to a council colleague who collapsed in July when students stormed a meeting.

It was not as if the council had been unprepared. Sources told the Post that before the discussion on the appointment began that afternoon, a council member suggested that all members have their phones taken away to stop anyone leaking the closed-door discussions to the media.

The phones were put in sealed envelopes and were only returned when the meeting ended.

They took this extra step even though the council had been tightening its confidentiality rules over the years.

Advocates of the move argued it made for more free-ranging discussion, while critics claimed it also allowed people to offer blunt or even offensive comments without fear of being challenged publicly. Yet others said outsiders should respect the council's decisions.

The council updated its Guide and Code of Practice in August amid accusations it had been delaying Chan's appointment due to political interference.

In the latest version, the guide says "it is absolutely necessary to keep confidential the council agenda, supporting papers and minutes".

In last year's version, the line said "it is necessary" to keep things confidential, while the 2004 version read "it is normally necessary".

Dr William Cheung Sing-wai, chairman of the HKU Academic Staff Association, said ever since the latest change, some council members had told him their discussions had been more "one-sided" towards members who supported the government.

But pro-establishment lawmaker Christopher Chung Shu-kun, who is also a member of HKU's court that has the power to amend university statutes, said the council needed to change its rules according to new circumstances. He called on every council member to obey the rules and outsiders to respect the governing body's decisions.

While the council is considering punishment for Fung, Chung said the student leader should be kicked out for breaking the rules.

The controversy has raised questions as to how confidentiality rules being tightened and then breached will affect the council.

Chong Yiu-kwong, a solicitor and senior teaching fellow at the Institute of Education's department of education policy and leadership, said it was not possible to make everything absolutely confidential. He cited exemptions such as when the council's discussions were part of a police investigation or a court case, when someone's rights were infringed or when there were "overriding ethical considerations".

He said a public university funded by taxpayers' money should strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality. "The university is not an independent kingdom," he said.

Former civil service minister Joseph Wong Wing-ping said in many countries, whistle blowers who revealed confidential information for "greater justice" would be protected.

The Guide for Members of Governing Bodies of Universities and Colleges in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, which the HKU council's code of practice refers to, says: "The agenda and the signed minutes of governing body meetings should generally be available for inspection by staff and students."

But matters related to individuals or commercial sensitivity may be kept confidential, it says.

This is the crux of the issue - whether information relating to individual appointments ought to be made public even if a person has waived his right to confidentiality and the implications for hiring decisions.

Internet comments:

- Why secret ballots? The secret ballot is a voting method in which a voter's choices in an election or a referendum are anonymous, forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation and potential vote buying. The system is one means of achieving the goal of political privacy.

If you cast an open ballot and I know how you vote, I can take retaliation. For example, here is the entire history of HKU Council member Ayesha Macpherson. If you don't like how you voted, you can take retaliation against her, her husband, her mother, her biological father, her foster father, her company, her book publisher, etc.

If you cast an open ballot, it will become obvious that you sold your vote because you voted the opposite of what you say that you believe. So that will stop vote buying.

But if you cast a secret vote, it will also stop vote buying. In Taiwan where vote-buying is rampant, they always tell you to take everybody's money and then vote for your true choice because nobody is going to know how you actually voted.

So it all depends on the situation. If you are a legislative councilor, your vote should be open because you are accountable to those who elected you and your voting record will be decisive as to whether you are elected, ousted, impeached, etc. If you are an ordinary voter in the District Council/Legislative Council elections, your vote should be secret because your choice is nobody else's business.

Ip Kin-yuen wants an open vote. In the short term, it will make life hellish for those who voted nay. In the long term, it is going to make sure that no decent person would want to serve on the Hong Kong University Council because of what happened here. When that happens, Ip Kin-yuen will respond as he did last time to the violence in the July meeting: "Hey, I didn't bring those people here. Why are you blaming me?" The scenario here is foreseen by anyone who knows anything about the Hong Kong Internet (especially the Golden Forum boys).

- Why does Leong Che-hung say that the Council cannot disclose any information on the unnamed job candidate(s)? Well, you imagine that when you apply for the job, you may not have informed your current employer yet. If you get the job, you may tell your employer that you are leaving. If you don't get the job, you will have to continue to work at the same place. You wouldn't want your employer to read in the newspapers that you were the candidate. That may affect trust, promotion and bonuses in the future. That is the reasoning behind the principle.

- You don't believe this could happen? Well, it has already happened. Because Billy Fung told everybody that Council member Lo Chung-mau criticized Johannes Chan did not "show sympathy" to him when he was injured by students in the July Council meeting, Progressive Lawyers Group convener Kevin Yam used his Facebook to start a "Show sympathy to Lo Chung-mau" campaign. "If we want to show sympathy to Lo Chung-mau together, compose your message and add the hashtag." Many netizens joined the campaign. Yam told the newspaper that he did not expect such a great response, but he noted that many of the comment crossed the line and so he is asking people to refrain from personal attacks and foul language.

- Ip Kin-yuen demands that Leong Che-hung give him a full explanation of the decision. Leong said NO WAY and hid behind the shield of privacy/confidentiality. The voting was by secret ballots, so Leong is in no position to say who voted which way. The only thing for sure is that he didn't vote himself. During the pre-vote discussion, certain members said certain things from which one can infer revealed preferences. But others are less sure. The decision was made in a 12-8 secret vote, in which each member cast his/her vote this or that way for personal reasons. This is an aggregated decision. There is no way that Council chairman Leong Che-hung or anyone else can give a "full explanation" on behalf of the Council.

- As Henry Tang said after losing to CY Leung, "I lost because I didn't get enough votes."

- Ip Kin-yuen seems to be the only pan-democratic legislator standing out in the open to push for Johannes Chan. Everybody else is in hiding. The reason is that the political parties have to be concerned about their District Council election prospects, whereas Ip Kin-yuen represents the Education sector and is supported by the Professional Teachers Union.

- The missing Council member is Abraham Shek, who is overseas for the moment. He is a pro-establishment legislative councilor representing the real estate/construction industry. He would most likely vote against the appointment too. Also Leong Che-hung recused himself, but he is labeled by Kevin Lau as pro-establishment, so we assume that he will also vote NAY. That is, the final score should be 14-8.

- In social activism, it is common to use misinformation to attain your goals (such as talking about the specter of the phantom voters during these District Council elections). But this is usually done to mislead the people who hold the votes. The misinformation campaign here was conducted by people like Kevin Lau, who wrote a number of evidence-free "exposs". So the people of Hong Kong may have been successfully misled. But the people of Hong Kong don't hold the votes here. The votes are in the hands of 22 council members. They read Kevin Lau's articles about government pressure on them, and they don't find that to be true in their real lives. So there is this huge blowback now because they won't submit to this type of dirty trick!
- Example of misinformation:

September 28, 2014
One hour ago: Armored vehicle has arrived at Government Headquarters; independent media reporter threatened with being shot at; the orange flag has been raised; the police may open fire.
31 minutes ago: Somebody appears to have been shot with rubber bullets.
4 minutes ago: Latest news - they will begin shooting soon at 8pm; please be careful.

- Is there any chance that Arthur Li could vote for Johannes Chan? Previously, Kevin Lau wrote in Ming Pao that CY Leung and Arthur Li sent a middleman to persuade Johannes Chan to withdraw. This precipitated the student siege of the Council members at the July meeting. Kevin Lau wrote this breaking story in his opinion column and therefore he said that he did not need to verify the information. A Ming Pao reporter contacted Arthur Li before publication, and Li denied that he did anything like that. However, Ming Pao did not publish Li's response. It was several days later that Johannes Chan told the media that Arthur Li did not send any middleman to contact him. Yes, several days later when he knew exactly what the truth was the moment that Lau's column appeared in Ming Pao. As far as Arthur Li is concerned, Johannes Chan has problems with integrity, and he does not have the interests of Hong Kong University as his top priority.

- (The Stand) Ip Kin-yuen said that he was really pained and disappointed by the decision. He said that it was clear that this was made for political reasons, and that is why he is angry and pained. "Hong Kong University will likely be ruined in the hands of the outside members of the HKU Council." He pointed out that someone has took over personnel appointments through the HKU Council. He doesn't know where HKU's autonomy has gone. He said that Leong Che-hung has sworn that he won't give any accounts and he questioned whether this was the right attitude. He condemned the Council for talking only about privacy and confidentiality while tossing accountability and transparency to the winds.

- Leong Che-hung hinted obliquely that the decision was made for the "long-term interests of the university." What does the codeword stand for?
In the short term, the appointment of Johannes Chan to pro vice chancellor will make Ip Kin-yuen, Billy Fung Jing-en, the Civic Party, etc shut up. That is good.
In the long term, Johannes Chan will be a negative asset to Hong Kong University. First of all, every decision that he makes as pro vice chancellor for academic staffing and resources will be regarded as political. For example, if he approves the hiring of XXX or the dismissal of YYY, it will be regarded as political. XXX and YYY may decided to file a judicial review just like Ip Kin-yuen threatened to file a judicial review over Johannes Chan. Secondly, Chan's boss is the Provost, for which all four candidates have backed out already. Nobody wants to have a political time bomb ticking under his wings. The Provost wouldn't dare reprimand Johannes Chan for any mistakes, because Chan will scream: "Political witch hunt!" If Johannes Chan is appointed, they may never be able to hire a Provost. Thirdly, if Johannes Chan is appointed, he will always be in a weak position because his critics will continue harping away at how he is unqualified but given the job for political reasons. He will never get R.E.S.P.E.C.T. Fourthly, if Johannes Chan is appointed, it will validate the perception that the way to get a promotion is to "use force to stop tyranny" while "feeding misinformation to the press."
- The best example of someone who draws fire no matter what he does is Chief Executive CY Leung. But he pushes on, only because even if he resigns, his replacement will be in the identical situation. For the pro vice chancellor for academic staffing and resources, they can find a completely apolitical person to fill that job.

- According to Cap 1053 University of Hong Kong Ordinance, the Council shall consist of:

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

Why is there only one undergraduate student representative on the Council? Because undergraduate students are there for only four years and have no idea how to run a University (even if they think they do).

Here is the current HKU Council membership (see also SCMP).  You can Google their respective qualifications. Example: Arthur Li Kwok-cheung.

- The university belongs to its staff, teachers and students. All decisions should be made by these stakeholders and not by any outsiders who know nothing about the university and its regulations.
- Know nothing? Pick any council member from outside the university and any student, and quiz them about university regulations. Who do you think knows nothing?
- The mental hospital belongs to its staff and patients. All decisions should be made by these stakeholders in a democratic fashion. Since there are far more patients than staff, this means that all decisions in the mental hospital shall be made by the patients.
- No, schools are not mental hospitals. The situation is different.
- Okay, the elementary school belongs to its staff, teachers and students. All decisions should be made by these stakeholders in a democratic fashion. Since there are far more students than staff and teachers, this means that all decision in the elementary school shall be made by the students aged 12 or under. Okay?
- The reason why there are outsiders on the Council is that they provide broader perspectives and they have no conflict of interest. For example, Ip Kin-yuen says that the Hong Kong University Ordinance should be amended so that the HKSAR Chief Executive is not the chancellor. Fine, but how do you get there? HKUSU president Billy Fung's method would be to "use force to stop tyranny." That may crack a few skulls but it won't change the ordinance. You can get an opinion from Council member Abraham Shek, a legislative councilor who can tell you one or two things about legislating.

- Last time, Hong Kong University Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en said:"We are going to charge and clash at all University Council meetings."

- The Oriental Daily news story says that Hong Kong University Student Union president Billy Fung has just spilled the beans. He is the undergraduate student member of the HKU Council. So much for privacy and confidentiality. Here are some of the highlights:

Billy Fung said that he was willing to be criticized for violating the confidentiality rules, and he apologizes for it.

Video: Resistance Live Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk9nHxN1TDI

- (SCMP)

- Former Lingnan University president Edward Chen was contacted by Ming Pao for Billy Fung's quotation of him. Chen said that he did not say that. He seemed to imply that Fung had not paid attention to the content of the discussion. "He did not even know who said what."
- (Wen Wei Po) Another source said that what Edward Chen said was that Johannes Chan seldom published in academic journals. Furthermore, Johannes Chan was not evaluated after he was promoted to professorship in 1998 so that there is no up-to-date objective assessment of his academic qualifications at this time. So there is a discrepancy with Billy Fung's presentation of what Edward Chen said.
- Billy Fung said that he was merely reading from the notes that he took during the meeting, and he does not know for sure it was Edward Chen who said it. Is that fair?

- Martin Liao was quoted by Billy Fung as saying that he used Google Scholar to check up on Johannes Chan and found that his articles were "searched" for only four times over the last five years. Internet users immediately checked and found that Johannes Chan was "cited" more than four hundred times over the last five years. This proves that Martin Liao does not know how to use Google Scholar and therefore Johannes Chan should be appointed vice pro chancellor. Eh, the alternate scenario is that Billy Fung's English was poor and he knows nothing about Google Scholar such that he took "cite" to mean "search" and he jotted down "four" instead of "four hundred." Is that what Edward Chen is hinting at?

- (EJinsight) "HKU Council member Cheung Kie-chung said he believes that Fung was left with no choice but to make a disclosure to the public, given the lack of explanation surrounding Tuesdays vote." Well, that's sweet. If people are harboring doubts about whether Fung is telling the truth or merely misunderstanding what was spoken, then maybe the righteous Cheung Kie-chung can hold a press conference to confirm that everything that Fung said was true or otherwise make some corrections. But, no, Cheung Kie-chung has a choice and he has decided to say nothing. This is just typical Yellow Ribbon Zombie behavior -- he tells others to charge at the police while he stays behind because he says that there has to be a division of labor.
- Eight council members voted to support Johannes Chan. Where have the other six gone? They've got the same problem as Cheung Kie-chung.

- Billy Fung said that he had nothing personal to gain but he wanted to protect the students' right to know. Fine. So why is he only quoting the council members who appear to oppose the candidate. What about the others? For example, what (if anything) did Vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson say? Shouldn't we know where he stands? Why is the selective release of partial information protecting the students' right to know?

- (Wen Wei Po) Billy Fung said that one criticism of Johannes Chan was that he revealed in public that he was selected before the appointment process ended. However, people tracked down later that Wen Wei Po was the first to leak that Johannes Chan had been selected. This is confusing the roles of the press and the principals. On one hand, the press has the freedom to report on what it thinks is important to the public. On the other hand, the principals have the obligation to stay silent about the appointment process. Indeed, the Council kept its side of the bargain and declined to answer all press questions about the pro vice chancellor appointment. Even after the final vote was taken, the Council chairman Leong Che-hung refused even to name the candidate on privacy grounds. But the principal Johannes Chan decided to speak to the press and talk about his candidacy. LegCo chairman Jasper Tsang said: "If a newspaper reported that Chan is the sole candidate, those in the know who support or oppose him should remain silent, or simply answer that no comments will be made on a matter that is being handled. Perhaps the pro-Beijing Wen Wei Po does not like Johannes Chan for what he did during Occupy Central. Maybe Wen Wei Po published many articles to denigrate him. But so what? As the saying goes: It takes two to tango. If Johannes Chan and the other Council members refuse to comment, there is no story."

- These Council members were questioning Johannes Chan's academic accomplishments. His supporters (including Billy Fung) seemed to be ill-prepared to mount a defense either because they were unfamiliar with his work (so how could they make a reasoned decision then?) or else they were familiar with it and knew that it was indefensible. Their only recourse is either to "use force to stop tyranny" in the July meeting or else hold a post-meeting press conference to launch a news bomb with mis-attributed information.

- The diatribe from Billy Fung may just lead investigative reporters to look into the scholarly articles of Johannes Chan and give them a proper appraisal. Not sure that Johannes Chan would appreciate this. Nothing good can come out of this for him, because the fight for the pro vice chancellor job is over and done with already.
- With allies like Billy Fung, who needs enemies?
- This seems to be the message that the discussion forums are getting -- namely, Johannes Chan sucks in academic research. They are wondering if Billy Fung is helping Johannes Chan, or stabbing him in the back?
- The tragedy is that Billy Fung actually believes that he is doing a favor to Johannes Chan.
- (Wen Wei Po) Arthur Li neither confirmed or disavowed to i-Cable about what Billy Fung attributed to him. He criticized Fung for signing a letter of confidentiality and then betraying the promise. "Should you believe this liar?" Li said that there are many reasons why the contents of the discussion should be kept confidential, because there are some allegations that may have negative impact on the character, reputation and standing of Johannes Chan. In a free discussion, allegations may be raised but also rebutted with counter-arguments. But if you insist on total transparency, it means that everything you say will be used against you.

- Billy Fung said that if the council members are not ashamed of what they did, they should not worry about other people knowing what they said. Fung does not understand what the system of confidentiality is there for. Lo Chung-mau said: "As a university scholar, anonymous academic or job evaluations should be routine. For example, articles that are published in the academic journals, applications to fund research projects, nominating individuals for academic prizes and awards, job promotions/demotions/transfers/hires/dismissals are all based upon this gold standard. Confidentiality allows one to be objective and honest in making the evaluations. Without confidentiality, everybody becomes hypocrites who act as rubber stamps for the sake of friendship and power."
- Yes, there should not be any attorney-client, doctor-patient and priest-penitent privileges. Every discussion with your attorney/priest and all your medical information should be posted on Facebook/Instagram/Twitter. If you don't, it means that you must be ashamed of something or the other.

- If Johannes Chan is such a lousy candidate, then why is he the only choice for the selection committee? So he must have some good.
- Easily explained. Johannes Chan and his cohorts have turned the whole affair into such a stinking mess that no one else would put themselves forward for that position. Thus, Johannes Chan was the only applicant. What else could the selection committee do?

- Billy Fung said that he will accept the consequences of his news bombs. This sounds exactly like the kind of rubbish that Alex Chow was spouting: "You break the law, but as long as you surrender yourself afterwards, you will have completed the loop for the rule of law." Except one year later Alex Chow hasn't surrender himself and completed the loop yet. Billy Fung has no intentions to either. He will continue to sit on the Council and read out the minutes to the press afterwards. If he gets booted off, he will cry POLITICAL PERSECUTION!
- Who is going to hire Billy Fung when he graduates? He has shown himself to be thoroughly untrustworthy. If he goes with you to meet with a client, he is going to post what everybody said on his Facebook with negative annotations!
- Not even pan-democratic legislators would hire him as an aide. How can you let him get close to any secrets?  You go and have a lunch with a government official, and nothing really happens. When you get back to the office, you find that the lunch date is already known all over Facebook. You ask him, Why? He'll tell you that if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have to worry that everybody knows.
- Apple Daily can hire him for their paparazzi team. He seems to have no moral scruples and knows how to rant on about the people's right to know and the freedom of expression.

- Civic Party legislator Kwok Ka-ki said that the confidentiality system isn't everything and should not override the quest for justice. I'm all for it. So why doesn't Kwok Ka-ki ask Occupy Central trio member Chu Yiu-ming who gave him that secret donation? So far Chu has been hiding behind the shield of confidentiality! Don't we the people have the right to know just how was funding Occupy Central?
- Johannes Chan got reprimanded for that affair too, so he presumably knows the identity of that secret donor. If there is "nothing to be ashamed of" (in the words of Billy Fung), Chan should tell us.
- While we are at it, we the people also want to know the financial details for Alliance to Support Democratic Patriotic Movements in China, Occupy Central, Scholarism, etc. All these organizations solicited donations from the public by street booths and other means. None have divulged where the money went. We the people have the right to know.
- (Oriental Daily) April 6, 2015. The Federation of Students objected to the recommendation that those university students who have defaulted on their student loans have the information forwarded to the credit bureaus. The amount of default loan is $200 million over the past 3 years. Well, why have they suddenly embraced confidentiality? If the defaulting students have nothing to be ashamed of, they shouldn't violate the public's right to know who the deadbeats are.

(i-Cable) October 2, 2015.

Because Billy Fung named the council members one by one and detailed what they said, he has become a target of criticisms. Fung said that he had decided to disclose what the council members say on the day before the meeting. He also assessed the potential consequences.

Afterwards, Billy Fung was denounced for being a "liar" and for violating the confidentiality rules. Fung counterattacked by saying that if he was lying, then he would not be violating confidentiality. He said that the worst case scenario was that he would have to withdraw from the school.

Fung said that he was still seeking legal advice. Once the council makes its decision, he would file for a judicial review as an individual and he will apply for legal aid to pay the bills.

- If he told the truth, then he broke the confidentiality rule. If he lied, then he is a liar. Either way, he has an integrity problem. What kind of student would back himself into this dilemma? Is this the typical HKU student?

- Usually you play the coin tossing gain with "Heads I win, tails you lose." Billy Fung plays "Heads you win, tails I lose." He is a true gentleman.

- If he told the truth, then he may get kicked off the Council or even the university. If he lied, some council members may file libel suits. So which is worst for him?

- Half the time he told the truth, and half the time he told lies. He broke confidentiality and he is a big fucking liar too. So he gets kicked out of school and then sued for libel.

- Fung wants to apply for legal aid in order to file for a judicial review. DLLM! I as a taxpayer will have to pay the bill! Fucking parasite!

... digging an ever deeper hole for himself each day.

- (Passion Times) September 30, 2015.

Cheung Ka-man (Apple Daily): Fung Jing-en, do not think that just because you did something heroic means that you can look down on everybody. If it is alright if you don't respond. But saying "I feel that it is a common courtesy to show your telephone number when you call" and "I only speak to XXX and YYY over at Apple Daily" really makes people laugh. When those two colleagues of mine call you, you don't fucking reply either? These are unusual times, so I don't want to fucking scold you. But I need to say this: "I fuck your mother, please don't be so naive, University Student, Student Union president!"

Melody Chan (Occupy Central Secretariat): He worked on withdrawing from the Federation of Students, but he won't work on a class strike now.
Cheung Ka Man: So it is.

Yvonne Leung Lai Kwok (former HKUSU president): Everybody, I understand that it is important to have polite manners with others. But I hope that you can appreciate the pressure he has been under over the past half year. Each time that a reporter calls, it is not one independent call. Several dozen more calls will be coming in. Sometimes he becomes a machine that answers the calls from reporters. Over the past couple of days, he finds it hard to even attend work meetings. I apologize on his behalf to everybody for not being thoroughly considerate. I hope that you can appreciate that. Even though he is elected by the students, he is responsible for everything in the Student Union. In the end, public relations should take the majority of the Student Union president's time. I think that he must be vexed now.

Cheung Ka Man: To the Queen, it's okay. The peers and I are alike. We will just mumble something on our Facebook. When we write our articles, we won't target his lack of manners.

- (HKFP) Hero or traitor? Student leader Billy Fung receives mixed reactions for HKU Council leak. October 2, 2015.

The University of Hong Kong Student Union president Billy Fung Jing-en has come under fire from members of the HKU Council for disclosing confidential information regarding the appointment of the pro-vice-chancellor.

On Tuesday Fung breached the Councils confidentiality rules by publicly revealing the reasoning behind the Councils controversial decision to reject Johannes Chan Man-muns candidature for the Universitys pro-vice-chancellor.

Council member and HKU professor Lo Chung-mau released a strongly-worded statement accusing Fung of using dishonest means to achieve his aim, RTHK reported.

Earlier, Council chairman Edward Leong Che-hung had also issued a statement condemning the deplorable action by Fung for showing disregard and disrespect for the Council members pledge of confidentiality. He said the Council would consider sanctions against Fung.

Fung, however, continues to defend his decision. He told the RTHK that the open and transparent operation of the Council is more valuable than the confidentiality clause. He also said that his revelation was not for personal gain but was in-keeping with the right of the students to know the Councils reasoning.

Others are applauding Fungs move as a heroic one.

In a China File blog post, Oxford University doctoral student and China commentator Samson Yuen said that if it was not for Fungs heroic leak, the public would have been kept from the Councils anti-intellectual reasoning behind Chans rejection.

Chairman of HKUs Academic Staff Association Dr. William Cheung Sing-wai told The Stand News he is proud of Fung for speaking up for righteousness.

- HKU Department of Education associate professor Li Hui: "You (Johannes Chan) have no doctorate and no genuine academic accomplishments. We can deal with that. But while you were the Dean of the Faculty of Law, you led the way to encourage Occupy Central, you mishandled donations, you destroyed the rule of law and you violated university regulations. We find that hard to accept. We cannot believe that you are qualified or that you have the nerve to still want to become the university pro vice chancellor. Even if you get the job, how can you convince the masses?"

- (The Stand) The 12 Council members and the Council president Leong Che-hung were implementing a political assignment from the Chinese Communists and the 689 government. They gave up academic freedom and institutional autonomy. They damaged the basic interests of Hong Kong University. The students, staff, teachers and alumni have no choice but to fight till the very end for themselves, their alma mater and Hong Kong society as a whole. The most direct action is for the students to stop attending classes and the teachers to stop teaching. Let us boycott the Council until as such time as the decision is retracted. Hong Kong University affairs is not just for Hong Kong University people. It is actually an extension of the Umbrella Movement. The democratic movement did not end with the clearance of the Occupy sites. As long as the deep-layer social contradictions are resolved, they will explode out at various levels. The battle will continue until we attain the final victory.
If we cannot occupy the streets, let us occupy the University of Hong Kong.

- CY Leung must be saying: "Yes, go ahead. Stop attending classes and stop teaching, as if I care. Ouch, this is really hurting me ... NOT! Go ahead make my day."

- If the students go on strike by not attending classes, they may get failing grades and thus postpone their graduation. But that would be something that they choose to do themselves as adults. If the teachers go on strike by not holding class, some student is going to file a civil lawsuit to recover tuition fees and/or lost time. E.g. "I'm in my sixth year of undergraduate studies and I am only two courses short of graduation. I've paid my tuition fee of $50,000 for the year already. I plan to go overseas and study Buddhism next year. But now the teachers refuse to hold classes!? I am screwed!"

- The student/teacher strike is consistent with the philosophical approach of Occupy Central. That is to say, you hold the entire student/teacher population (especially your own selves) as hostage in order to extract something from the authorities.

- Another similarity with Occupy Central is that the tactic dominates over any goals (their definitions and realistic assessment of the likelihood of success). Do you think a student/teacher strike will enable Johannes Chan to become the pro vice chancellor? Or make the Legislative Council amend the law so that the HKSAR Chief Executive does not automatically become the chancellor of all eight universities? Or make the University Council elected completely from among the staff, teachers and students by genuine universal suffrage without any outside members? What are the chances of these goals being realized by student/teacher strikes?

- The biggest similarity with Occupy Central will be the end result. After months of student/teacher strike, the silent majority is going to explode in anger, speak out and stop this type of thing from then on. Except for a few diehards, the participants will pretend that they have nothing to do with the strikes.

- (HKG Pao) October 2, 2015. Former HKUSU magazine Undergrad deputy chief editor Chan Ah Ming wrote on Facebook: "After the battle last year, I no longer advocate a student class strike. A class strike only hurt yourselves, not them. It does more harm than good. At the next Council meeting, let's have another physical clash to counter-attack the Communist dogs. This is the best option out of very bad options." This drew praises from many radicals: "Magnify it" "The revolution is the main dish, because it is better than small actions without material gains" "bring tomatoes to throw at the Council members" "Fucking beat up Arthur Li and Lo Chung-mau!" "If only we had beaten up those old bastard Communist dogs so that they have to be hospitalized for a few months ..."

- (Reuters)

... the HKU's president, Peter Mathieson, told Reuters before the vote that he believed pressure on him and others who back Chan's appointment was being "orchestrated". He said his personal emails had been hacked and some had been published in pro-Beijing media. He added that he could not rule out the possibility Beijing was behind the episode.

- (Hong Kong Free Press) September 30, 2015. Hong Kong University president Peter Mathieson believes the pressure on him and others who had backed the appointment of Johannes Chan as pro-vice-chancellor was orchestrated by some political elements. Mathieson told Reuters that his personal emails had been hacked and that some had been published in pro-Beijing media. He said he cannot rule out the possibility that Beijing was behind the episode.

- Well, I can rule out the possibility that Beijing is hiding underneath my bed -- I just checked. I am being facetious here, but what grown-up can tell the media that? This is the same as the factually challenged fantasies from Kevin Lau -- if Peter Mathieson has a shred of evidence (such as a midnight phone call from the bogeyman CY Leung), please say so.
- Interesting. You cannot rule out the possibility of XXX. Just how can you rule out that possibility? Maybe Xi Jinping gave you a call and assured you, but can you trust him? Maybe the CIA/MI6 told you that their surveillance did not reveal anything, but that only means the Commies are even smarter? There is in fact no way for you to rule out the possibility of XXX.

- (RTHK) As a HKU graduate, Martin Lee feels ashamed and humiliated by the outcome. With respect to Vice-chancellor Peter Matheison's disclosure that he could not rule out the possibility of Beijing behind the affair, Martin Lee said that Johannes Chan would be pro vice-chancellor already but for Beijing's interference.
If not for Beijing's interference, Martin Lee would be President of the Hong Kong Republic already.
If not for Beijing's interference, Jimmy Lai would be operating Next TV in Hong Kong already
If not for Beijing's interference, Hong Kong would have vindicated the June 4th 1989 movement already.
If not for Beijing's interference, [Please fill in the blanks with your own wish list; don't worry if you have no evidence because that is not a requirement]

- (SCMP) "Meanwhile, HKU vice-chancellor Peter Mathieson clarified a Reuters report that quoted him as saying he could not rule out Beijing was behind the rejection of Chan. He said last night the interview was done on August 4, and he was talking about his email account being hacked, since he "did not know who" did it." Dr. Mathieson, welcome to the Hong Kong world of media distortion!
[Note: The above is put in bold red because it did not seem to have been picked up by other media outlets.]

- Every word that Reuters reported was true, except it was placed in a different context!

- (SCMP) The universitys vice-chancellor has declined to say whether Beijing was behind the councils decision. Speaking after the official National Day reception this morning in Wan Chai, Professor Peter Mathieson stated, The council made the decision based on a thorough debate of all the issues. When asked whether he believed Beijing interfered with the council members deliberations, Mathieson said only that council members could speak for themselves. Everybody has their own reason, he said. The principle should be that decisions are made in the best interest of the university, and thats certainly the principle I bring to all my decisions.

(Hong Kong Free Press) October 1, 2015. In an interview with Reuters published on Tuesday, Mathieson reportedly said back in August that he believed pressure on him and others who back Chans appointment was orchestrated. He also said that the contents of his email had been published by state media and it was possible Beijing was behind the episode. However, Mathieson told Ming Pao on Wednesday that the interview took place before the Tuesday HKU Council meeting. He said the contents were taken out of context. He also said he was not sure who was behind it and that he could not exclude any possibilities, but he was not deliberately criticising or pointing the finger at anyone.

- (SCMP) In a statement, Johannes Chan said he had no further comment, now that the decision was made. "This is not an issue of personal gain or loss, but one about the core values of academic freedom and institutional autonomy," Chan said. He called on HKU supporters to keep safeguarding those values and not to feel frustrated.
- Thus begins the Johannes Chan watch to see how many days elapse before he files a judicial review. He will not be ignored. Addendum: He held off for less than 12 hours because he turned up on two radio programs the next morning. Tsk tsk tsk.

- On July 27 2015, Johannes Chan told the Hong Kong Economic Journal in an interview that he was informed by the HKU Selection Committee in December 2014 that they will recommend him for the job of pro vice chancellor. The start date was set at March 17 2015, and all the terms and conditions in the contract have been agreed upon. According to the Cap 1053 Hong Kong University Ordinance Section 12 Officers and teachers, their appointment, powers, duties and emoluments Article (6) The Vice-Chancellor, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the Pro-Vice-Chancellors, the Treasurer, the Registrar, the Librarian, and the other officers designated as such by the statutes shall be appointed by the Council in accordance with the statutes." That is to say, the power to appoint the pro-vice-chancellor lies solely with the Council and nobody else. So who on the selection committee is telling Johannes Chan that he has got the job ready to start on March 17 2015 with all the terms and conditions being finalized already? Just on March 4, 2015 Vice-Chancellor Peter Mathieson said that the selection committee has not forwarded its recommendations to the Council. If Johannes Chan has some familiarity with Cap 1053 Hong Kong University Ordinance, he must surely know that the person is acting beyond his authority. If Honorary Senior Counsel Johannes Chan is not familiar with that piece of legislation, then maybe he should not think about become pro vice-chancellor at that university.

- (Bastille Post) The Third Kind of Opinion. September 30, 2015.

At a dinner with friends, the Yellow Ribbons and Blue Ribbons began to argue with each other just like they did during Occupy Central (...). At this time, one person who seldom touched political subjects suddenly interjected: "If this keeps on, what will happen to Hong Kong University in the future?"

This friend is a HKU alumnus. He graduated more than 30 years ago. His daughter is in Form 5 of an elite school and considering whether she should apply to HKU to do a double major in Business Administration and Law. She was rated as capable of getting 34 marks in the DGSE and therefore can qualify for that program. But her father said that HKU is increasingly politicized and surpassed by UST in the most recent QS ranking. The daughter is vexed, because she does not like the politicized environment of HKU. She asked her dad whether she should be going instead to study law in England instead.

My friend said that law schools in England are just as good, but there is a separate problem. In recent years, the legal sector in Hong Kong has protected itself by requiring graduates from law schools in England to take a PCLL course before they are allowed to intern. Previously, those who graduated from law schools in England are automatically allowed to intern. Since PCLL places are limited, this may be a risk.

My friend said that he is a HKU alumnus and his daughter is a potential applicant. As such, they qualify as so-called "stakeholders". But does anyone care about what they think? He said that everybody likes to do politics nowadays, so that HKU has been a political institution with quarrels breaking out daily. Everybody including the University Council, the University president, the staff, the teachers and the students don't seem to care about the university rankings or recruiting the best and brightest. My friend said that if his daughter chooses to go to England, she better go there to do AS level at Form 6 in order to get into a good school. In England, the annual expenses are more than $400,000 per year. This is far more than the $50,000 to study at HKU. So it will cost him more than $2 million over five years. He said that universities in Hong Kong are subsidized by the taxpayers. But why do they wind up like this? If these people want to play politics, they ought to go to the Legislative Council.

As my friend went on, he got angrier and angrier. The Yellow Ribbons and the Blue Ribbons at the table dared not speak, because nobody knew how to answer him. Before he left, he reminded me to write down what he said and publish it, because there are many people like himself in the silent majority. They are all sick and tired of the endless politicking. They want to lead normal lives without politics driving everything. Unfortunately for them, things are otherwise as they find by reading any newspaper. Their "third kind of opinion" is completely ignored. He only wants to the university to stop politicking and do their academic work well.

- (SCMP) Doctorate not that important for HKU managerial post, says committee member in Johannes Chan case. October 1, 2015.

A member of the search committee that recommended Johannes Chan Man-mun for a pro-vice-chancellor's post at the University of Hong Kong has said professional experience and standing is more important than a doctorate degree.

As the committee's recommendation was rejected by HKU's governing council on Tuesday night, the member, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the council's considerations "differed" from the selection body. During the meeting, pro- government members who opposed Chan's appointment were said to have cited reasons including Chan having no PhD degree and not publishing enough in international journals. "This is a managerial post. We put more weighting on the managerial skills than academic qualifications," the member said. "For professional faculties such as law, medicine and dentistry, professional experience and standing count more than publications in journals."

International and local legal scholars came to Chan's defence. Yash Ghai, an internationally renowned public law scholar and an emeritus professor at HKU, said it was "absurd" to say Chan was not qualified for the job because he had no PhD, as some of the world's leading law professors and scholars did not have doctorate degrees. To say Chan seldom published in journals was a "deliberate attempt to vilify him", Ghai said, noting he had published in well known journals locally and overseas.

Chan has a 30-page list of publications on his HKU webpage that includes books, articles, conference papers and research projects. One of the recent works, Law of the Hong Kong Constitution, which he co-edited and co-authored, was hailed by former chief justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang as "a seminal work" on the Basic Law.

Cheryl Saunders, a laureate professor at the University of Melbourne, added that many senior public law scholars had published major books instead of undertaking PhD studies. Cambridge University professor David Feldman, who does not have a PhD, said it was a mistake to regard the international ranking of journals as reliable indications of the quality of the work published in them. Michael Ramsden, associate law dean at Chinese University, pointed to the fact that Chan was the only legal academic in town who was made an honorary senior counsel, having argued in landmark cases on constitutional law and human rights. He said it "speaks volumes" about Chan's contribution to the field.

- (Wen Wei Po) October 1, 2015.

According to Section 31A CAP 159 Legal Practioners Ordinance,

(4) The Chief Justice may, after consultation with the chairman of the Bar Council and the president of the Law Society, appoint a barrister as honorary Senior Counsel if he
(a) is a member of the academic staff of a faculty or school of law of a university in Hong Kong; or
(b) holds office as Director of Legal Aid or as a Deputy Director or Assistance Director of Legal Aid; or
(c) holds office as Official Receiver or an office specified in Part I of Schedule 2 to the Bankruptcy Ordinance (Cap 6); or
(d) holds office as Director of Intellectual Property or an office specified in Part I of Schedule 1 to the Director of Intellectual Property (Establishment) Ordinance (Cap 412), and who has in, in the Chief Justice's opinion, provided distinguished service to the law of Hong Kong.

(5) The appointment of a person as a Senior Counsel in an honorary capacity does not confer on the person a right to act as an advocate in proceedings before the courts of Hong Kong and will not accord precedence before the courts.

Chan's supporters said that the fact that he is a honorary senior counsel showed that he is "qualified" to be pro vice chancellor at the University of Hong Kong. According to senior barrister Devon Sio Chan-in, a honorary senior counsel is a honorific title compared to a senior counsel who had to have been a senior barrister with more than 10 years of experience, in a way that a honorary doctorate is to a doctor of philosophy degree. Sio explained: "Your curriculum vitae is your curriculum vitae, but a honorary senior counsel is a honorific title. Being a honorary senior counsel does not stand for your curriculum vitae." When HKU graduate Rita Fan was asked whether a honorary senior counsel is qualified to be pro vice chancellor, she had to say that she did not know what the term means. Is this an academic degree? Or does this mean that the person is a legal practitioner who specializes in court cases?

Another law practitioner said that the "honorary" before a title makes it a honorific title: "A honorary senior counsel is not a proper senior counsel." A honorific title does not imply academic accomplishment. The universities in Hong Kong have awarded a number of honorary doctorates, in order to praise the accomplishments of those people in their respective domains. "But that does not mean that these people are qualified to teach in universities."

- Jackie Chen is a honorary professor at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and a honorary Doctor of Science from the Hong Kong Baptist University:

- (Hutchison-Whampoa) Mr Li Ka-shing, GBM, KBE, Commandeur de la Lgion dHonneur, Grand Officer of the Order Vasco Nunez de Balboa and Commandeur de lOrdre de Lopold, has received Honorary Doctorates from Peking University, the University of Hong Kong, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong, The Open University of Hong Kong, University of Calgary in Canada and Cambridge University in the United Kingdom.

- (City University) Honorary Doctors of Law
John J Swaine (November 1993)
Woo Po-shing (May 1995)
Lu Ping (November 1998)
Henry Tang Ying-yen (November 2003)
Norman Leung Nai-pang (November 2004)
Xiao Yang (November 2004)
Patrick Chan Siu-oi (November 2008)
Simon Ip Sik-on (November 2009)
Andrew Li Kwok-nang (November 2010)
Tsang Yok-sing, Jasper (November 2011)
Hatoyama Yukio (November 2013)

- Top 10 Chinese celebrities with doctor degree
#1. Maggie Cheung (actress), honorary degree from the University of Edinburgh
#2. Zhang Yimou (director), honorary degree for Doctor of Fine Arts from Yale University
#3. Andy Lau (singer/actor), honorary doctorate from the University of New Brunswick, Canada although he was only a secondary school graduate.
#4. Jackie Chan (actor), honorary Doctor of Science from the Hong Kong Baptist University and honorary fellow of the Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts
#5. Lisa Wong (actress), honorary Doctor of Letters from the City University of Hong Kong
#6. Wong Kar-wai (director), honorary doctorate from the Open University of Hong Kong
#7. Chow Yun-fat (actor), honorary doctorate from the City University of Hong Kong
#8. Ang Lee (director), honorary doctorate from the Taiwan Art University
#9. John Woo (director), honorary doctorate from Hong Kong Baptist University
#10. Eric Tsang (actor), honorary doctorate from University of Dayton in Keladuoha.

- Johannes Chan is the only individual in Hong Kong who was given the honorary senior counsel title. Isn't that proof enough of his exceptionalism?
- Ahem, every other senior counsel earned it the hard way by working for decades. Johannes Chan got the honorary version through some cronies in the Bar Association/Law Society without having to work for it.

- (Bastille Post) A lot of universities hire pro vice chancellors with no doctorates mainly because these people are hired for their ability to raise funds from the business community. Very often, these people are hired with contracts that stipulate the expected amount of donations. If they failed to reach quota, their contracts will not renewed. Johannes Chan would clearly not be expected to fulfill this kind of function.
In addition, the university rankings often include the percentage of doctorates among its teaching staff as one criterion. Therefore they need to have a good reason before they will hire a pro vice chancellor without a doctorate.

- (EJinsight) October 2, 2015.

Is a doctoral degree necessary for the post of university pro vice chancellor?

The question arose after the governing council of the University of Hong Kong voted on Tuesday night to reject the search committees recommendation to appoint former law dean Johannes Chan Man-mun pro vice chancellor for academic staffing and resources.

Billy Fung Jing-en, president of the HKU Students Union and a council member, told media that during the deliberations, council member Arthur Li Kwok-cheung said that Chan had no doctoral degree and therefore was not qualified to be a pro vice chancellor.

Fung quoted Li as saying that Chan could have been appointed dean of law just because he was a nice guy.

Going by Lis stated reason for turning down Chan suggests that his being the only honorary senior barrister in Hong Kong is still not enough to qualify him for the post.

Chinese University professor Simon Shen Xu-hui, who specializes in international relations, indicated in a Facebook post that it is ridiculous to use a doctoral degree as a requirement for the post.

Shen cited the case of Chien Mu, who was considered one of the greatest historians and philosophers of China in the 20th century.

In 1949, he co-founded New Asia College, which later became the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and became one of its first principals. Chiens highest educational level was only junior high school.

In fact, from 2013 to this year, only four out of six current or former deputy vice chancellors and pro vice chancellors are doctoral degree holders, according to research by Ming Pao Daily.

In 2003, Chan said in a media interview that he did study for a doctoral degree in the London School of Economics and Political Science in 1988, but he later decided to give it up because he wanted to spend more time helping people understand legal problems in Hong Kong society that was then facing multiple issues regarding its return to Chinese rule.

Chan, who has published a number of books and theses and represented many famous legal cases besides teaching, said he has never regretted his decision.

On Thursday, Chan told Commercial Radio Hong Kong that a doctoral degree is not that important for someone in the legal profession, citing some judges in the Court of Final Appeal as examples.

- The supporters of Johannes Chan cite the case of Martha Minow, who is Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor of Law at the Harvard Law School. Here is what is said about the education background of Martha Minow:

After completing her undergraduate studies at the University of Michigan, Minow received a masters degree in education from Harvard and her law degree from Yale. She clerked for Judge David Bazelon of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and then for Justice Thurgood Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States. She joined the Harvard Law faculty as an assistant professor in 1981, was promoted to professor in 1986, was named the William Henry Bloomberg Professor of Law in 2003, became the Jeremiah Smith Jr., Professor of Law in 2005, and became the inaugural Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor in 2013.

Martha Minow does not have a doctorate. Therefore doctorates cannot be all that important. Right?

But you should take a look at this phrase: "She clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States." That changes everything. (Reference: The influence of the Supreme Court clerk at the SCOTUSblog). It means that many people know that Martha Minow was a central figure in many of the major decisions of the Supreme Court. So who did Johannes Chan clerk for? Nobody. In summary, you don't have to have a doctorate to become pro vice chancellor. But you need to have other accomplishments that are equivalent to or surpassing a doctorate. If you want to make the case for Johannes Chan, you cannot just say "Many other Law School deans don't have doctorates". That is just negating a negative; you need to accentuate his positives.

- From the Hong Kong University Department of Surgery staff list: Professor Lo Chung-mau, Chair Professor and Head of Department, MBBS(HK), MS, FRCS(Edin), FRACS, FACS, FHKAM(Surg), FCSHK. Well, this bloke doesn't have a doctorate (either doctor of philosophy (PhD) or doctor of Science (ScD)). All he has is a bachelor and a master, plus a bunch of fellow titles handed over by cronies. So how did he get to become a Chair Professor and Head of Department? By having cronies in high places, of course.
- Oh, on his way to cronyism, his papers have more than 20,000 citations and he carried out the world's first double liver transplant recently.

- They say that outsiders outnumber insiders on the 22-person university council and therefore the university has lost its autonomy. But all that happened in 2003.

(HKU)  A three-person review panel, comprising Professor John Niland (former Vice-Chancellor and President of the University of New South Wales), Professor Neil L. Rudenstine (former President of Harvard University) and The Hon. Justice Andrew Li (the Chief Justice of Hong Kong who had been the Chairman of the University and Polytechnic Grants Committee (now UGC) for many years) was established by the University to review its governance and management structure. 

The panel submitted its report (the Fit for Purpose report) to the Council in February 2003, with 17 recommendations on means of enhancing the University governance and management structure and procedures.

All recommendations in the Fit for Purpose report were accepted by the Council of the University for implementation in 2003.  These recommendations include the reduction of the size of the University's governance bodies, the reorganization of the management team, the establishment of full-time appointed Faculty Dean positions, the introduction of the trusteeship concept in membership of the Council, student and staff memberships on Council, changes to the staff grievances procedures, clearer definitions of the role of the governance bodies, improvement of communications, and streamlining the University committee structure. 

Specifically, the University Council was reduced from the previous 54 persons to between 18 and 24 persons, and the ratio of outsider-insider went from 3:2 to 2:1 so that more outsiders can provide independent and objective views to improve governance. CY Leung or the Commies have nothing to do with this. If you want a meaningful discussion of this issue, please go read the 2003 Fit for Purpose report first. The panel was formed because  the University of Hong Kong was seriously lagging behind international norms in governance and management structure. The reasoning is that insiders tend to be myopic and conservative (that is, they accept the existing structure as natural and see the need or possibility for change). If you want to move to reduce the proportion of outsiders, you better think hard first about the government/managements problems that had existed before 2003.

- Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2015-2016

#26 National University of Singapore (#25 in 2015)
#42 Peking University (#48 in 2015)
#43 University of Tokyo (#23 in 2015)
#44 University of Hong Kong (#43 in 2015)
#47 Tsinghua University (#49 in 2015)
#55 Nanyang Technological University
#59 Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
#85 Seoul National University
#88 Kyoto University
#116 Pohang University of Science and Technology
#138 Chinese University of Hong Kong
#167 National Taiwan University
#201-250 City University of Hong Kong
#201-250 Fudan University
#201-250 Hong Kong Polytechnic University
#201-250 University of Science and Technology of China
#201-250 Tohoku University
#201-250 Tokyo Institute of Technology
#251-300 Korea University
#251-300 Nanjing University
#251-300 National Tsing Hua University
#251-300 Osaka University

The trend for the University of Hong Kong (Wikipedia for historical data):
#21: 2010-2011
#34: 2011-2012
#35: 2012-2013
#43: 2013-2014
#43: 2014-2015
#44: 2015-2016

Yes, we need the students to quit going to class and the teachers to quit teaching so as to raise the rankings.
- What university in the world would let its students charge into a Council meeting and falsely imprison those members who appear to hold dissident views? If there was a Democracy Index for World Universities, the University of Hong Kong would shoot through the top of the charts.

(Oriental Daily) September 28, 2015.

September 28th is the first anniversary of Occupy Central. People Power's Tam Tak-chi said that he will assemble 1,000 persons to charge onto Gloucester Road and Harcourt Road at 5:58pm to occupy two car lanes for 87 minutes. The purpose is to commemorate the 87 tear gas canisters at that moment one year ago at that spot. This afternoon, the police used a megaphone to tell Tam Tak-chi not to incite the crowd, and to tell the crowd not to participate. Soon after 5pm, several dozen persons were assembled near the Admiralty overpass near Connaught Road. They held yellow umbrellas with People Power insignia and they approached the CITIC overpass. In response to the police calls, the crowd booed and gave the finger to the police.

(Oriental Daily) September 28, 2015.

At 5:58pm , the  People Power members yelled for the police to open the road. The police warned them not to charge the police line, but some of the demonstrators broke through. As People Power advanced, another person used the megaphone to denounce those "evil-hearted people who pushed others forward to die." The People Power members stood off against the police for 30 minutes at the intersection of Tim Mei Road and Harcourt Road. Eventually Tam Tak-chi told his people to conduct wildcat-styple Occupy's instead.

Afterwards Tam Tak-chi said that People Power was not retreating. He was just assessing the situation and judged that the police may use batons and pepper spray if they get on the Harcourt Road. As he spoke, many people cursed him out for "cowardice."

Because of what People Power was doing, the police asked the other groups of people who were holding a moment of silence to move retreat up Tim Mei Road.

(Oriental Daily) September 28, 2015.

Many pro-Occupy organizations gathered and held up yellow umbrellas for ten minutes at 5:58pm. The group dispersed at about 7pm. The police said that there were about 1,100 persons around Government Headquarters today. About 180 are anti-Occupy demonstrators, and 920 are pro-Occupy. The organizer said that they did not count the number of attendees but they were satisfied that so many turned up in spite of the suppression. As for People Power's attempt to charge onto Harcourt Road, the organizers said that they were too busy with their own assembly and did not pay attention to these other members. The organizers said that there needs to be clearly articulated goals for any Occupy activity, otherwise the public won't know why.


dbc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFCSUqFCm6I
dbc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUBZZABP0Dw Oust the pan-democrats march

ATV/NOW TV https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5gkvYqR0UM News reports

INT News Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xlbb4ki0CY Occupy Central Trio Chan Kin-man, Benny Tai and Chu Yiu-ming
INT News Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHc6mJZFQPk Law37 and Joshua Wong
INT News Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBJdRJ-Hiz0

Resistance Live Media: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDdOU9v3SmY Demonstrators said that they want to charge onto Harcourt Road. All talk and no action.

Internet comments:

- Here is the "slippery road" argument of the day: "Today, they used tear gas against us; tomorrow they will massacre us all." I guess the police ought to shot all these people, because today they are chanting slogan; tomorrow they will be detonating nuclear bombs (or something).

Video: https://www.facebook.com/socrec/videos/1227626740597588/?fref=nf

- Comedy of errors by "Female Long Hair" Lui Yuk-lin: At 7pm after the moment-of-silence assembly was over, Lui attempted to release a sky lantern with the words "I want genuine universal suffrage." The police told her not to, but she ignored them. But before Lui even released the lantern, it had already caught fire. The police had to use a fire extinguisher to put out the fire.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9xqyhcj-0g

- They are just kidding when they said that they didn't care about the numbers. It is true that they don't really care about how many showed up. What they really care about is how much money the attendees donated. The organizers aid that they hope to raise $2 million to pay for the legal fees of those are being suppressed politically for their Occupy Central activities.
- When asked about the police estimate of 920 pro-Occupy demonstrators, Civil Human Rights Front convener Daisy Chan said that the people know the truth and will not believe in the police estimate.
- Yes, I wouldn't believe the police either. My primary school has 1,000 students. So how could an Occupy Central assembly have fewer attendees than the student body. No, sorry, I can't accept that.
- There were more people in the 1,200-person Chief Executive election committee, which is therefore more representative than these 920 demonstrators.
- If they hold the police in such contempt, why did they bother to apply for a "no-objection" notice from the police to hold this assembly?
- $2 million donations from 920 persons, which works out to be an average of $2,000 per capita. These must be very wealthy students. But didn't they say that they can't even make a living and that was why they have the special responsibility to take action?
- 920 persons coming from 12 organizations, which works out to be fewer than an average of 80 per organization. What kind of organizations were those?

- Lost at sea:


Former Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow said that seeing so many resisters gathering again proves that people never give up and everybody has not abandon the goal of getting democracy. He believes that the chances of another Occupy action today are remote, because citizens know that this is not the right moment for a large-scale Occupy action again. He thought that the group that planned to dash out onto the roadway is only making a symbolic gesture.

--- First law of valiant resistance: Never go back and say what might have been if only we did it earlier/later/not at all. If you want to do it, you can do it this very moment. There is never any right moment that can be chosen. Instead, you take the action and it becomes the moment.
--- Alex Chow is still confusing Occupy Central/Occupy Movement/Umbrella Revolution/Umbrella Movement with the Democracy project. They are not the same. Public opinion polls have consistently show that the majority of the people of Hong Kong want 'democracy' but also the majority of the people of Hong Kong want Occupy Central shut down and go home. The people agree with the goal but not the method. Veterans like "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung must know that there is no hope for a social movement to succeed when the masses are against it. But the students are too arrogant to listen to such advice then, and they still don't get it even now.
--- The group that planned to dash out onto the roadway is not making a symbolic gesture; this is an election campaign stop for them.

Scholarism convener Joshua Wong said that they had expected 10,000 people to participate in the Occupy Movement last year, but ultimately 200,000 came. He thought that was a miracle. He hopes that Hong Kong politics will be different by September 28 next year.

--- The students wrought a miracle to whittle the 200,000 down to 920. The students were arrogant, they offended everyone and they made all the wrong decisions.
--- Last year: 200,000. This year: 920. Next year: 30. Yes, that will be different.

- Tam Tak-chi said that he would bring 1,000 people onto Harcourt Road to block two lanes of vehicular traffic. Since there were only 920 people, he didn't do it. It has nothing to do with cowardice (about getting clubbed on the head by police batons and hit in the eyes by pepper spray). It is because the people let down People Power.

- (Wen Wei Po) People Power did not apply for a "no-objection" letter from the office. So they deliberately set up their megaphone stand close to the Civil Human Rights Front's grand stage. Thus People Power blended in with the other persons. In addition, People Power planted their party flags all over the street, making it as if everybody came to attend their event.

- Tam Tak-chi is said to harbor aspirations for elected positions (District Council/Legislative Council) in Kowloon East district. Today's event says that his base support is only several hundred persons at most. He needs to be better known, but he is not the brightest light bulb. Anything he tries (such as today's event) only brings more negativity. And he has to be careful because a criminal conviction will cause him to lose his position even if elected. What can he do?

-  The ideal situation is for Tam Tak-chi to get arrested and jailed for a period of less than three months. That would make him a folk hero while not disqualifying him from electoral office.

- (Passion Times) Tam Tak-chi said that his planned action reflected co-existence. He only wants to occupy two car lanes so that the cars can use the other lanes. But he has to get onto the roadway no matter what, because that is the only way to make a show of force to the people of Hong Kong. Thus, this is a self-restrained action of expression. The action did not take place. Tam said that he saw the police formation and was worried about unnecessary injuries if the police use batons and pepper spray. Therefore he called off the action. However he disagrees that the action was a failure.

- (Wen Wei Po) As Tam Tak-chi was unable to get past the police, a dozen or so masked Civic Passion member began to holler from behind: "Tam Tak-chi, we support you to charge! Please do not disappoint me by bailing out!" They also chanted: "They tell other people to charge, but they don't charge themselves!" There were numerous quarrels but no physical clashes. Finally, after about one hour, Tam Tak-chi chose to bail out and leave his supporters behind.

- (Born In Chaotic Times Facebook)

--- I just saw Tam Tak-chi in Admiralty. At the time, he was leading citizens to charge the police line. One hour later, here he is Mong Kok already. He told the media that he spotted the police putting on "gloves with hard objects" and therefore he called the action off so as to avoid serious injuries to citizens. He does not consider the action a failure. He believes that an action should not be evaluated by success/failure; instead it is about whether experience was gained during the process.

 --- Because the news was that Tam Tak-chi was eating at the Mui Kee Congee Restaurant in Mong Kok, a large number of citizens went there to demand Tam to fulfill his promise. The police were called and the citizens had to leave. Tam eventually left by the back door.

--- At 22:00, the People Power's Shopping Revolutionaries cursed out other demonstrators for wearing surgical masks and therefore must be police moles.
--- At 23:00, the other demonstrators demand the People Power members to apologize for what they said before. The People Power members told these other demonstrators to take off their masks before speaking.

--- The issue of masks first surfaced several months ago. At the time, the Shopping Revolutionaries posted this policy statement:

In translation:

  • The Shopping Revolutionaries have never insisted on the single approach of insisting on peacefulness!

  • The Shopping Revolutionaries have always respected the decision of other persons to wear masks. They never demand others to remove the masks.

  • The Shopping Revolutionaries do not have spokespersons, and nobody can instruct what the Shopping Revolutionaries about what to do.

  • The Shopping Revolutionaries are justice fighters from all over the place (City-State, Civic Passion, Localists, People Power, League of Social Democrats, Civil Human Rights Front, Democratic Party, Labour Pary, various anti-Communists uncles, etc). Nobody represents someone else. We co-exist. We have no representatives.


But that was before People Power took over the Shopping Revolutionaries and used them to further their own political agenda.

--- The next night, four hundred people showed up during the regular Shopping Revolution meet. Except many of those who came are from competitive radical organization who want Tam Tak-chi to fulfill his promise of occupying Harcourt Road. The regular Shopping Revolutions told them that they don't know who Tam Tak-chi is. This is wildly hilarious.

- (Passion Times) September 28, 2015.

"Are you coming with me to the anniversary event for Occupy Central?" The message came. I was upset by this message. Why are they still calling it Occupy Central? Was Central ever occupied? Or are they talking about the Occupy Central when the ground floor of the HSBC building was occupied in mid-October 2011? If it is the Occupy Central that the Occupy Central trio talked about, then it lasted one day. That is because they told people to leave even as the police were still firing tear gas canisters.

This is the anniversary of the 928 incident. One year ago today, a bunch of unarmed warriors went into the streets and were showed with 87 tear gas canisters. The live television broadcast was still vivid. After the first tear gas canister was fired, I expected the people to scatter and not return. Surprisingly, they scattered and then they fearlessly returned. My heart was pounding and tears came out of eyes.

One year later today, as expected, the pan-democrats held a commemorative ceremony in Admiralty. It was a happy scene in a sea of yellow, with yellow ducks, yellow belts, yellow ribbons, yellow flowers and free t-shirts. If my school's Fun Fair (=Carnival) had as many fine gifts to hand out, it would be marvelous. My school has a lot to learn from these people. This show must have taken up a lot of effort and money? It is disgusting that these politicians would send so much time and energy on these useless vanity and aura instead of something useful.

It is one thing to pass out presents, but it was absurd for them to raise the yellow umbrellas and sing "Me Today." With due respect, they are just a bunch of fools who raise their umbrellas (note: they would be waving their mobile phones if this was nighttime), sing some karaoke songs and disperse peacefully afterwards. They bring disgrace to Beyond because they have branded the Beyond Songs as "leftist retard." I do not completely negate the value of commemoration. But their vanity and narcissism is a betrayal of those warriors who were hit by the tear gas last year? The government officials must be thinking: "When they finish singing, they will leave."

I am such a secondary school girl. My own contribution is to hand out mineral water at the supply station. I was not hit by tear gas on 928. I did not stay overnight. I did not sleep many nights on the road without taking a shower. I was not clubbed on the head by the police. I would never attend the commemorative ceremony in Admiralty in order to make the politicians look good. Please do something useful, or else Hong Kong will never have genuine democracy and autonomy.

I remember that on the day of clearance after 79 days of the Occupy Movement, there was a long banner with the words "We'll be back." One year has elapsed. When will we be back?

- (SCMP) One year after Occupy Central, the world is no longer buzzing to support Hong Kong's democracy. By Michael Chugani. September 30, 2015.

A year ago, the city was raw with anger. Live television images of riot police raining tear gas on citizens had seared the public psyche. A defiant uprising that came to be known as the "umbrella movement" lit the world's imagination, pushing Hong Kong into the glare of the international media. The movement's leading players boastfully declared "the eyes of the world are on us" - a warning to Beijing and the Leung Chun-ying administration not to crush the uprising. The world indeed was watching. Tent communes occupying key districts and a sea of yellow umbrellas fascinated the foreign media and spooked foreign leaders who feared a colour revolution that would be crushed by the People's Liberation Army. Well, the world has lost interest. If it really cared, wouldn't it have been opportune on the first anniversary of the democracy uprising for Barack Obama to press for Hong Kong's case during his recent summit with President Xi Jinping ? He didn't, even though the US is supposed to champion global democracy. The harsh reality is that Hong Kong is on its own in its fight for democracy. Will history judge Occupy as a success or failure? The jury is still out. But pro-democracy politicians are already running scared about how voters will judge them in the upcoming elections for their roles in the uprising. Most shunned Monday's ceremony marking Occupy's first anniversary. This is puzzling. If they believe occupying parts of the city for 79 days to press for democracy had the people's support, they should be cocksure of winning instead of fearing what they did has become political baggage.

(Passion Times) September 25, 2015.

City University has been in existence for 30 years. The 30th Executive Committee consisting of the cabinet "CITYAURA" has just been recalled based upon a no-confidence vote. Previously, 1,200 signatures from students were gathered to start this referendum. After seven days of voting, the results of this referendum are:

Total number of votes = 2662

Number of votes for = 2,206

Number of votes against = 317

Abstentions = 86

Null votes = 52

Thus the motion was passed and the entire executive committee is ousted.

According to the Impeach City University Student Union Concern Group member Haley Lai, the executive committee laid down many obstructions on the way. As a result, the referendum was postponed until the current academic year. This meant that the graduating seniors lost their chance to vote and the freshmen were thrown into this process without much knowledge of the issues. Therefore, Haley Lai was pessimistic. As it turns out, the motion received overwhelming support (2,206 against 317), which showed the gross unpopularity of the current executive committee. New elections are scheduled to be held in December. A temporary executive committee will be formed under the University Council chairman.

Internet comments:

- The first major strike against the CUSU executive committee took place last may when the president Cyrus Chu refused to sign off on the signature campaign for the referendum to withdraw from the Hong Kong Federation of Students. The referendum was eventually held (see #237). That campaign featured many cheap tricks. The most egregious example is this: the Student Union was responsible for publicizing the referendum and indeed they did with a large wall banner:

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 all the details except nobody can read a thing!

The results of that referendum were:

Total number of votes = 3,290

Number of votes for = 2,464

Number of votes against = 527

Abstentions = 174

Null votes = 72

Therefore, the City University Student Union is no longer a member of the Hong Kong Federation of Students. Because of the cheap tricks used by the executive committee, some students started the no-confidence motion referendum against them. The size of the landslide victory of the first referendum meant that the CUSU executive committee likely lose in no-confidence motion. Hence came all the cheap tricks again.

The second major strike against the CUSU executive committee took place at the Conrad Hotel, where there was a ceremony to celebrate a $200 million donation from businessman Yeung Kin-man to City University (see #319).

The City University Student Union said that they suspect that there are political aims behind this sudden donation. Accepting the money will destroy the autonomy of the university, including personnel appointments. They demand that the university authorities reject the donation. "Firmly reject blood-and-sweat donations, give integrity back to our City University" was the banner that they carried. The university administration angry responded, pointing out that the City University Student Union was aware but deliberately refused to mention that $50 million of that donation was specifically earmarked to enable students to go on overseas exchange programs.

In between those two major strikes are some lesser strikes, such as the executive committee taking $30,000 from the university to go on a trip to Japan which has more to do with pleasure traveling than any duty. And then there was the lead-in-water challenge (see #302).

- Eh, you missed the most egregious mistake of this executive committee. They screwed up on the annual computer festival. This was very important for the students, because they get to buy computers at sharply discounted prices. Even if they don't use those computers, they can always sell them at considerable profits. But now the students have nothing.

- On one hand, some people are sure to argue that these City University referenda show that democracy works because an unpopular executive committee was ousted by democratic processes. On the other hand, other people will argue that this shows the opposite is true. First of all, the turnout was only 15%. Who are the 85%? They could be people who came to City University to study and don't want to be bothered by any so-called social activism. They could also be people who know all about social responsibilities, but despair of a system that will replace one group of wastrels by another. When this so-called democratic system fails to engage 85% of the base, it is not working.

- The CITYAURA cabinet is running up against a mixture of opponents.
(1) There are Valiant Warriors who thought the CITYAURA people were wrong to align themselves with the leftwardist (leftist retard) Federation of Students. They want a new executive committee that will engage in Valiant Resistance by Force against the government.
(2) There are pro-China/pro-establishment students (such as the mainland students) who thought the CITYAURA people were wrong to align themselves with the rebellious Federation of Students. They want a new executive committee that is less focused on political issues and more focused on livelihood issues.
(3) There are politically neutral students who are simply disgusted by the series of cheap tricks used by CITYAURA.
Meanwhile, their supporters were few in numbers.

This breakdown is the same opposition line-up that the pan-democrats will be facing in the upcoming elections.
(1) There are Valiant Warriors who think that the pan-democrats' system has failed to deliver after 30 years, and therefore it is time to engage in Valiant Resistance.
(2) There are pro-China/pro-establishment voters who think that it is a patriotic duty to vote against the pan-democrats.
(3) There are politically neutral voters who are simply disgusted by Occupy Central, Shopping Revolution and Reclaim XXX. They want to elect people who are less political and more focused on livelihood issues.
So do the pan-democrats have a strong enough base?

(Oriental Daily) September 26, 2015. (Wen Wei Po) September 27, 2015. (Oriental Daily) September 27, 2015.

With the anniversary of Occupy Central near, the Shopping Revolutionaries planned to march from Mong Kok to Tsim Sha Tsui to Government Headquarters in Admiralty. They anticipated 100 attendees, but there were only about 20 present. Meanwhile, the police (including uniformed officers, plainclothes anti-triad team members and PTU members) numbered 60 to 70.

Those present today carried yellow umbrellas or yellow lanterns, shouting "Don't forget our original intentions, let us hold hands together and march, return to Admiralty". Those present included Leung Kam-shing, the Chalk Girl, Captain America, etc. The marchers started out at 710pm, proceeded the Star Ferry terminal in Tsim Sha Tsui and took the ferry across the harbor. As more joined in along the way, their numbers swelled to 60 to 70 (including the so-called "photojournalists"). About 50 police officers accompanied them.

Along the way at Haiphong Road, a citizen annoyed by the commotion told them to shut up. There was an argument but the police quickly calm things down. Shopkeepers along the way were negative. In Mong Kok, a dispensary workers said "this type of action is pointless" and "Do you see any customers come in while they march?" In Yau Ma Ti, retailer Mr. Chiu said the Shopping Revolutionaries have caused his business income to be down by 70% over the past year. In Tsim Sha Tsui, a fashion store worker said that the Shopping Revolutionaries have caused her revenue to be down by 20% because their pointless actions are disturbing peace and order.

(Oriental Daily) September 26, 2015. (Wen Wei Po) September 27, 2015. (Oriental Daily) September 27, 2015.

At around 930pm, about 30 to 40 Shopping Revolutionaries reached the Legislative Council. The Federation of Students and Scholarism were holding an 8-hour long seminar there, featuring social activists, scholars and Occupy Central founder Chan Kin-man. During the early afternoon there were about 20 to 30 people in the audience.

By the evening, the audience grew to 60 to 70 persons, most of whom are middle-aged persons with very few young persons. The two groups met up, the student groups applauded them, but the Shopping Revolutionaries said "We are not welcomed here" and went ahead to Government Headquarters. There they tossed balls at paper dolls of government officials. The Shopping Revolutionaries demanded that Civic Plaza to be re-opened to the public. They also assured the police that they were too fatigued to scale the wall and do so themselves.

Afterwards Federation of Students secretary-general Law37 and Scholarism member Agnes Chow explained to the press that it is not that they did not welcome the Shopping Revolutionaries but rather they couldn't get anywhere with them. Later Law and Chow went over to Government Headquarters to kiss and make up, but the Shopping Revolutionaries cursed them out with foul language. It was a very awkward situation.

(Hong Kong Free Press) September 27, 2015.

Around 40 Gau Wu protesters marched from Mong Kok to Admiralty on Saturday night to commemorate the anniversary of pro-democracy Occupy protests. Jordan Chan, one of the organisers, told HKFP that more people usually come out to protest on Saturdays, and we did not want to clash with commemoration events by other organisations on September 27 or 28.

The rally started at around 7pm. Protesters chanted: Remember our goal [of true democracy], walk hand in hand, we will be back in Admiralty together! along the route. The protesters moved on to Tsim Sha Tsui and boarded the Star Ferry to Central.

Demonstrators said they intended to use the slogan retake the Civic Square, which was stormed on the same day last year an event that kickstarted the 79-day Occupy protests. The group, however, had previously told police that they did not intend to storm the square in an application letter for the events approval.

Outside the legislature, protesters urged the government to reopen the square, calling it Admiralty Prison as it was fenced-off and guarded. It belongs to the Hong Kong people, it was built with our tax money, we have the right to get inside to protest, a protester surnamed Chin said, This government only knows how to destroy things but not use them in the right way.

Coloured balls were then thrown at effigies of China Liaison Director Zhang Xiaoming, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen in protest. The officials were depicted as prisoners, in reference to the protesters calling Civic Square a prison.


The Gau Wu protesters started to gather in Mong Kok nightly after the pro-democracy Occupy protest camps were cleared in Mong Kok in November last year. The movement was nicknames Gau Wu  Mandarin for shopping as protesters claimed they were in Mong Kok to shop. It followed a call from Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, urging people to help small businesses in Mong Kok affected by Occupy, after the protests were cleared.


(Apple Daily) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0stVAwyXY24 News report

(SocREC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRWDHG_Kn8M Speeches in front of Government Headquarters. Law37 visits them.

(Resistance Live Media) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-l1dZBWL4M Marching down Canton Road to Star Ferry to Admiralty.

(SpeakoutHK) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND6t_PxB7As Shopkeeprs criticize the Shopping Revolutionaries.

Internet comments:

- This is "Captain America" Andy Yung with a  yellow umbrella. He did not bring his British Dragon/Lion flag for Hong Kong independence, probably because they won't allow him to carry it onto the Star Ferry.

- Andy Yung is wearing a "Reject Fake Suffrage" t-shirt. Cable TV once interviewed him:
(YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXryhmJcRcA).

2:14 (interviewer)  What are the three barriers set up by the National People's Congress?
2:16 (Andy)  The three barriers?  I don't know how to describe the details.  But ... I actually ... how shall I say? ... that is, I don't care what barriers were set up by them.  But I ultimately want to obtain the right to genuinely elect the Chief Executive by one-person-one-vote.  That is, there has to be civil nomination.

That is to say, he has memorized a bunch of keywords but has no idea what they mean when taken together.

- I wonder what the purpose is. Do you think that this 20-person-strong march is going bring this "genuine universal suffrage" thing any closer? No one would realistically think so. So why are they doing this? Because they feel good. Twenty years later, there just may be a "genuine universal suffrage" in spite of their efforts, and then they will move on to protest something else. This will never end, because their pleasure is to show up every night and yell something or the other.

- They started out tonight at 710pm. These Shopping Revolutionaries normally begin their "shopping" expedition around 10pm, after most shops are closed. During Occupy Mong Kok, the occupying force at least had the decency of turning down the volume after 10pm. These Shopping Revolutionaries are the opposite, because they begin their work after 10pm.
- They choose the 10pm start time in order to maximize impact on local residents and minimize impact on local businesses. They are Shopping Revolutionaries and their mission is to stimulate the local economy.
- They know to leave when they feel that they are not welcomed? Is this a joke? Do they think that the shopkeepers and commercial drivers welcome them?

- I saw this photo:

Where do they find these people? Is that Lord Voldemort in the middle? If they are leading a revolution, then I'm not following.
- They fit right in with the high-income, high-education and young-age profile of Yellow Ribbons.

- (RTHK) I understand that Law37 wants the best of both words. When asked about the poor attendance at these seminars, Law37 told the media that the audience size does not matter and the important thing is the exchange between the speakers and the audience. After all, this is a seminar and not a mass mobilization to pressure the government. He said that the believes that most people are staying at home to let the meaning of Umbrella Movement "sink in."

(Ming Pao) No End To HKU Crisis. September 24, 2015.

On September 29 (Tuesday), the HKU University Council is expected to vote on the appointment of the Pro Vice-chancellor of Academic Staffing and Resources. The Alumni Concern Group has made many other efforts, but so far has only gotten the support of about 8 of the 21 council members. The pro-establishment side has 12 council members. It is estimated that the person recommended by the committee headed by HKU President Peter Mathieson (namely former Law School dean Johannes Chan) will be voted down by the University Council. Some HKU senior staffers are worried that the appointment decision will only mean that the crisis is just beginning instead of stopping.

According to the private communication from one relatively open-minded university council member, many council members either don't dare or are unwilling to vote for Johannes Chan's appointment. The main reason is that the Beijing authorities have expressed their opposition through the official media. So if they vote for the appointment, Hong Kong University may be subject to retaliation. The current frequent academic exchanges and cooperation will be hit, business and government subsidies will fall, and then HKU will be surpassed by other local universities within a few years.

But this council member also privately admitted to close friends that even if the university council does "the right thing" this time to vote down Johannes Chan's appointment, it does not mean that the central government or the Hong Kong SAR government will forget the past and spare them. From now on, the appointments of the Pro Vice-Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor and even the extension of the contract for the President will need the approval of the governments before the pro-establishment members of the University Council will vote to approve. In the face of such huge political pressures, the administrative autonomy of the Hong Kong University and academic self-determination are likely unsustainable.


(Wen Wei Po) September 25, 2015.

In February this year, former Ming Pao chief editor Kevin Lau reported that the HKU selection committee unanimously recommended Johannes Lau as the pro vice-chancellor for academic staffing and resources. In July this year, Lau reported that Arthur Li got a middleman to "persuade" Johannes Chan to withdraw and this caused the students to riot. One time after another, all these were shown to be lies. Yesterday Kevin Lau offered yet another expos. How credible is it? Maybe Kevin Lau does not know that he is "crying wolf," but Ming Pao placed his article in the corner area and also did not provide much follow-up reportage.

The Lau article yesterday is self-contradictory and deceptive. Lau said that many council members "either dare not or are unwilling" to vote for Johannes Chan's promotion. This creates the impression that the council members are being pressured. But if you parse the language carefully, you will notice that both "dare not vote for" and "are unwilling" are grouped together. "Dare not vote for" may be construed as "being pressured", but "unwilling to vote for" clearly means that the voter does not approve of Chan's character or thinks that Chan is unqualified for the pro vice-chancellor.

The former is supportive, the latter is oppositional. So how can Kevin Lau's sophistry grouped the two together. Even those who opposed Chan are said to be worried that HKU will face retaliation? Did Kevin Lau deceive even himself to think nobody would think that Chan lacked academic leadership, or was involved in the "secret donations" affair so that his integrity is in doubt?

Kevin Lau said that "if the appointment is approved, HKU may be subject to retaliation." Let us suppose that this is true. Next Kevin Lau said that "even if the appointment is vetoed, it does not mean that the central government and the Hong Kong SAR government will spare HKU." One does not know whether to laugh or cry? No matter whether Johannes Chan is appointed or not, HKU will face retaliation. Such being the case, the council members have no exit. So if they genuinely support Johannes Chan, how could they "not dare" vote for him?

 By this point, the smart readers will see that Kevin Lau is running out of tricks. He wanted to use "facing retaliation" to inflame emotions. But the careful reader will remember that in the previous episodes, Kevin Lau was saying that the central government "actively attacked", "attempted persuasion" and "applied pressure." But now that the vote is coming, they have done nothing except for some articles published in the official media. Meanwhile the only thing is that the council members got worried by thinking on their own. Did someone forget what he lied about previously?

Finally, let us look at Kevin Lau's "imagination." He claimed that "some people are worried" that if the appointment is approved, then HKU will be "retaliated against," with lesser government subsidies so that it will be surpassed by other universities. If the appointment is vetoed, HKU will still be "retaliated against" and lose its independence and autonomy, its president Mathieson will want to leave, scholars won't come to HKU, HKU will be ruled by the pro-establishment camp ... any reasonable person will have to laugh at his slippery slope argument. Even if Kevin Lau has no understanding about the government subsidy system, the most direct question should be: Is HKU going to sink faster if Johannes Chan who mishandled the donations and failed in academic leadership were appointed? Or not appointed?

(Wen Wei Po) September 25, 2015.

The appointment of the pro vice chancellor ought to have been handled by the University Council with full authority. Instead, the pro-democracy camp applied pressure on the council on many occasions to appoint Johannes Chan, who was involved in illegal contributions during the Occupy Central period. Yesterday former Ming Pao chief editor Kevin Lau wrote another essay about how an open-minded council member said that "many council members either dare not or are unwilling to vote for the appointment of Johannes Chan. They were worried that HKU may be "retaliated against" in the form of reduced exchanges and cooperation with the mainland and "even reductions in government subsidies." This is alarming but Kevin Lau offered no evidence whatsoever. The essay then contradicted itself by saying that even if Johannes Chan is not appointed, that doesn't mean that the central government or the Hong Kong SAR government will stop.

Our reporter has made inquiries with the various council members about Kevin Lau's essay. They said that they did see anything like that. The "relatively open-minded" council member Man Cheuk-fei said that he does not know what other council members are thinking, but he himself hadn't seen the phenomenon of what Kevin Lau was saying. He pointed out: "The voting is by secret balloting, so that the council members shouldn't feel much pressure." Another council member condemned Kevin Lau's assertions as being preposterous, emphasizing that the council members are learned and principled individuals who won't be influenced by others. He said that he did not come under any pressure.

(Wen Wei Po) September 25, 2015.

Educational Policy Concern Group chairman Cheung Man-bing said that if Kevin Lau has any evidence, he should produce them, or else it is unfair to everybody. He said that the voting is done by secret ballots, and there is no way to know how the 20 plus council members individually voted afterwards.

Hong Kong Federation of Education Workers chairman Wong Kwun-yu said that Kevin Lau was obviously manufacturing opinion in order to intimidate the council members: "He asserts that all those who won't vote for Johannes Chan were coerced, and all those who cast the NAY vote either capitulated or were gutless. In the final analysis, he wanted them to vote for Johannes Chan. Why couldn't he may it blunter and say: "Unless you vote for Johannes Chan, HKU will sink"? He needs to poll one council member at a time to see if this is true, or else he is just saying whatever he wants to say." Wong said that a news worker should not be publishing speculations as fact. He wondered if Kevin Lau is taken advantage of his job at Ming Pao to manufacture opinion, for that would be wrong.

(HKG Pao) September 25, 2015.

Recently, the HKU Alumni Concern Group sent out a team of lobbyists to individually persuade the HKU Council members to vote for Johannes Chan as pro vice-chancellor. They reminded the council members that they must support Chan or else they will bear be guilty of a "political crime" with unforeseeable consequences. This amounted to political intimidation, and some council members found it to be most annoying.

The HKU Alumni Concern Group and other Johannes Chan have frequently said over the past several months that the government or the China Liaison Office have been reaching out to the council members. But the council members have not been contacted by any central government or related persons. Instead, they are being lobbied by the HKU Alumni Concern Group. So who is really interfering with the autonomy of the university?

The lobbyists tell the council members that if Johannes Chan gets appointed, they will at most listen to a few days of criticisms from the pro-establishment camp and it will all blow over with their reputations intact. But if Johannes Chan does not get appointed, they will have to face the wrath of the administrators, staff members, students and alumni with unforeseeable consequences which not even the university can bear. This type of lobbying is clearly a threat to the council members. The lobbyists even positioned the appointment of Johannes Chan as the battle to defend the 100-year-old reputation of HKU. They said that if Johannes Chan is not appointed, then the whole world will believe that HKU has lost its autonomy and is obeying Beijing on everything.

A council member reached by the lobbyists wondered, Does opposing the appointment of Johannes Chan mean that the central government is exercising political control? But who is really politicizing the whole thing here? As council members, they don't have any political powers behind them. Therefore the lobbyists are insulting them and their independence with this kind of talk. The lobbyists kept wanting the council members to take sides. This is tremendously annoying and not conducive for the council members making a reasoned decision. Another council member said that a soon-to-retire council member was told by the lobbyist to think about the pros and cons and avoid "losing his reputation in his last years of life."

The lobbyists completely failed to mention Johannes Chan's lack of academic accomplishments and involvement in the secret donations scandal, while insulting their characters with this kind of talk.

(The Initium) September 22, 2015.

He said that he is known as Fire.

Pale, thin, black t-shirt and black pants, so that he can hide easily in the darkness. Two large earrings hang down from his ear lobes. It is not hard to notice that the ear lobe piercings are almost 2cm long.

He is good-looking and sometimes want to look handsome. He is an amateur artistic bicyclist. Hong Kong is not a big place. He is like a small-town boy. He said that he comes from Tai Po, he love the place, he knows it so well that he can walk around with his eyes closed. Strictly speaking, he has never left there. He grew up there. He graduated from secondary school and got all his jobs about the Tai Po Centre area. He has make milk tea, sold Internet access, sold electronics, sold clothes ... he loves to sell mobile phone most of all. That is his current job, which pays a base salary of only $10,000. When customers come in, he doesn't have to hard-sell them. He plans to save more than one hundred thousand dollars in a couple of year and open his own mobile phone store.

It was a late summer night at the end of August. After getting off work at 10pm, Fire came with a low-slung bicycle to the Waterfront Park, Tai Po. This is different from the normal artistic bicycle, because it is painted black like a ghost warplane. He built it up himself, and it is better than brand name models. It costs him one month's salary.

I met Fire in mid-October 2014. It was late night in Mong Kok when the police and demonstrators were both taking a break during a lull. He and many other resisters took off their gear and sat down wearily by the roadside to rest.

When I spoke to Fire, he was polite and friend. He and many others who stayed to defend in Mong Kok consider themselves Valiant Ones for resisting the police and the unjust system. The mainstream opinion classified them as "troublemakers" or as fully-armored masked "moles" sent in by the Chinese Communists to radicalize the Movement.

"The glory of the Admiralty was gained with our blood. Never mind that, because it is alright by me. But to say that the Valiant Ones are saboteurs? I was hit and I had to get treatment at the hospital. Am I a mole?"

That was one year ago, and we are now by the balustrade of the Waterfront Park and not in Mong Kok anymore. But Fire is still angry.

"Peace, Reason, Non-violence, Non-foul language?" He snorted. Although we were standing several meters apart, I could still see the glint in this eyes.

"The government saw through us. They ignored us completely. Those 'peace, reason, non-violence and non-foul language' people eventually sat there and got arrested." He said: "They are celebrities so nothing happens to them. We are nobodies. We have to earn a living. We can't afford to sit down and get arrested."

This is the most controversial aspect of the masked Valiant Ones: They choose to use radical methods to clash with the police while criticizing the more moderate persons. To many people, they are missing the willingness to accept the legal responsibility in civil disobedience.

"If all those Valiant Ones who are willing to resist are arrested, who is left to resist?" Fire doesn't understand why staying behind to be arrested should be "responsible civil disobedience."

Fire did not think that he was playing around during the Umbrella Movement last year. He was using his blood, sweat and tears to resist for 74 days. He used his body, not his morality, to resist. That is the logic of his movement.

Do you know what the fuck is resistance? Do you know what the fuck is valor? While I was tear-gassed and clubbed, where the fuck were you leftist retards? Seventy-four days. I gave up my job for seventy-four fucking days. I stayed to defend Mong Kok. I went to to Admiralty for a couple of days, but I left because your bunch of dickheads were holding a singing competition on the Grand Stage!


To stand in the front row holding a wooden shield, do you know how it feels?

Let me tell you. I was fucking scared. It was fucking hard to take. Do you know?

The front row protects the back row. The front row is the most important. I am not a military man. Facing a group of undisciplined disciplinary force, I had no idea what to do. I only knew that if one person takes it, everybody else is better off. I was clubbed several dozen times. Several dozen times. I know that I am rough and I am accustomed to frequent injuries in practicing artistic bicycling. But I can be hurt and I feel pain. What about everyone else?

He had nowhere else to explain. He wrote his thoughts on his Facebook. Only 31 persons pressed "Like."

On the evening of September 28 last year, Fire saw the tear-gas in Admiralty on television. He remembered that his younger sister was there. He asked his boss for time off and immediately rushed over to Admiralty. Like many other persons, he said: "I want to protect the students."

In truth, Fire was born in 1994 and therefore younger than many of the students. But he has entered society for six years already: "I am a grown-up, so of course I have to protect the students. I know a lot more than Joshua Wong and them about things that they cannot see in school."

He and his artistic bicycling friends went to Admiralty. At 11pm that night, the Federation of Students and the Occupy Central trio said on Facebook that the police had used rubber bullets and they called on citizens to withdraw. Fire was astonished at the scene: "There were more than a hundred thousand of us. The situation was great. How can we withdraw?" He was angry, he thought that the movement leaders were abandoning those stay remind.

Fire was not yet born on June 4th 1989. He bet that the Communists won't shoot this time. It was like betting on show-hand. It is not that he was unafraid, but there was nothing to be afraid of when he is at the bottom. "My life isn't worth much. Let's see who has more guts."

Unlike those Hongkongers who carried the scares of June 4th, Fire's judgment is simple and direct, just like many of the young people that I have encountered in the Umbrella Movement.  On the morning after September 28th, a 17-year-old tanned first-year university student with short dyed blonde hair said calmly and firmly to me: "If we retreat because of the bullets, the government will do so in all future demonstrators. So what is the difference with the previous demonstration marches? Hong Kong can never be changed."

The crowds did not disperse. Thus began the unprecedented 79 days of the Occupy Movement in Hong Kong.

In a mere five days, Fire thought that he was not a fellow traveler with the movement leaders in Admiralty.

On the night of September 28, some of the Admiralty resisters drifted to Causeway Bay and then to Mong Kok and Tsim Sha Tsui in Kowloon. For a long period of time afterwards, there were three Occupy areas in Admiralty, Mong Kok and Causeway Bay.

The Occupy Mong area is centered at the intersection Nathan Road and Argyle Street. It is a shopping area, and also where prostitutes, pimps and gangsters mix around. During the 2014 Occupy Movement, it obtained a new identify: The symbol of valiant resistance in Hong Kong. Fire found his belongingness there.


Like many Occupy Movement participants, Fire set up a daily schedule: He gets off work at 10pm and he takes the minibus to Mong Kok. He stays until 6pm, walk 5 minutes over to the Mong Kok East Station to take the first train back to Tai Po. He showers, sleeps and goes to work at noon. He did that for 74 days. "If it wasn't for the clearance, I could continue to Occupy." He said proudly.

Compared to the utopian Harcourt village in Admiralty: tents, study rooms, bountiful supplies, music concerts, artistic creations, tidy public restrooms, Mong Kok was not a comfortable place for staying.

In the earlier days, the Mong Kok intersection became a spot for citizens to articulate their ideas: Yellow Ribbons, Blue Ribbons, citizens, mainlanders took turns to air their complaints. The triads and the Blue Ribbons often act violently. The police cleared the site by force. Each time, Mong Kok looked like it would die but it was always resilient and bounced back. There were even statutes of Lord Guan and a Jesus Christ altar. However, the gods of the east and the west could not stop the feces, the vermin and the curses to rain down from above ...

"If there wasn't Mong Kok, I would not have stayed behind. I don't belong to Admiralty." Although Fire seldom got any good sleep during the 74 days in Mong Kok, he didn't mind. "I am accustomed to living in uncomfortable conditions."

Fire grew up in public housing. His parents who sold fish balls paid $1,000 a month to rent a public housing apartment with two bedrooms and one living room totaling 300 square feet. His family of five lives there. He is lucky because he would have to wait ten years if he were single.

At this time, he shares a room with his sister while his elder brother sleeps in the living room. "Hong Kong housing is too expensive. There is no way to afford it. All the resources of this government are given over the middle-class and the wealthy, and none to us." He has calculated that he needs to earn $20,000 a month before he can think about buying a house. Right now, he only makes half that amount. "My hourly salary is $40. A meal costs $40. It is impossible for me to move outside."

In Fire's mind, the carefree university students ought to stay in Admiralty. They are civilized and polite, they make the people of Hong Kong proud and the world praises them. There is no excuse for the government. He accepts that those glories are not his. If Admiralty is Light, then Mong Kok is Shadow. He belongs to Hong Kong's shadows. There is no happiness and calmness. His world is the unstable and chaotic Mong Kok.

Given that there is not much hope, he has thought about moving to Taiwan. "But when I consider that Taiwan will ultimately become China's and no different from Hong Kong, I changed my mind."

FIre thought that the double-no pregnant women, the parallel traders and the individual-permit mainlanders are stealing Hong Kong's resources, so that young people like himself are squeezed with nowhere to go. "There is no reason why the young of Hong Kong should bear the burden." He said that this was another reason why he resisted. "We are not just going this for 'genuine universal suffrage'. We are also fighting for the simple basic life that we want all along."

I got to know Fire two days after the re-taking of Mong Kok.

On the early morning of October 17, 2014, about 800 police officers came to Mong Kok to "dismantle obstacles." About 100 demonstrators staying there were cleared off, and traffic resumed at the intersection of Nathan Road and Argyle Street. That evening, several thousand citizens got off work to attempt to re-occupy the location. After a battle with pepper spray and baton, the resisters broke through the police line and re-took the intersection. They called it "the re-taking of Mong Kok."

Such battles were not rare in Mong Kok. Many resistsers were injured. I asked these young men why they would "rather die than retreat"? Why were willing to stand in the front row to face the violence? During the interviewing, I got to know Fire.

At the time, Fire and his partners were fatigued after facing off against the police. He was smoking a Mild Seven and sitting on the ground to rest. He used plastic bottles and silicone floor coverings as protective devices on his forearms and lower legs, like a robot cop.

Since the moment when the students charged into Civic Plaza, the Occupy people's equipment were upgraded with each battle. At first, they wore plastic wrap, umbrellas and raincoats to protect against the pepper spray. Eventually, they had fully equipped helmets, gas masks, shields and body armor. They started with holding up their hands when confronting the police, now they go full tilt.

Fire's fighting evolved over the 74 days.

When the police baton arrives, he is scared. But he was filled with the sense of resisting with his body. When the police baton falls, he raises his hand to ward it off. He remembered that it was a dull pain without bleeding. It was different from ear piercing and tattooing.

"The pain of being by the police was nothing." Fire said lightly. For him, the ear piercing ritual to join the artistic bicycling group was far more painful. For him, the piercing of the ear, the infection and the subsequent healing to create a 2-cm long hold was a growing-up ritual. He was not an adult, and therefore can protect the students as a Valiant One, such as Mong Kok was protecting Admiralty.

Tattoos, bicycle crashes, ear piercing, resistance. Fire got his sense of existence through pain. Fighting the state apparatus seems to be the only way for him to do something for his homeland -- he is not an intellectual, he is not a leader, he can't offer explanations, he can only use resistance and defense to show that he was present, even if it was all futile.

But the true hurt did not come from the flesh. Instead it was about not being understood.

To those who opposed the Occupy Movement, the Occupy Mong Kok area is the root of all evil, being filled with "Golden Forum young men who were incited." To many who supported the Occupy Movement, Mong Kok is a trouble-making spot where violence and clashes abound, thus causing the Movement to lose the moral high ground and public popular support. It may even be a conspiracy to destroy the Occupy Movement.

"These Valiant Ones carry out Hit-and-Run every time. The anarchists and flash mobs do not take on any responsibility. They go to Mong Kok to make trouble. Strategically speaking, it makes no sense to occupy Mong Kok." Long Hair (Leung Kwok-hung) is a representative figure of the preceding generation of resisters and he told me that.

Fire's self-sacrifice was deprecated and not praised. Fire felt deeply betrayed. He emphasized repeatedly that he did so to protect the students and Hong Kong, and that he is not a person incapable of independent thinking.

"Last July 1st, 510,000 persons marched in the streets. Was that any use? At Admiralty, they hold singing contests for Vast Sea Boundless Skies from morning to night but they shouldn't smear us." In this eyes, the Hong Kong democrats toiled thirty years with nothing to show, and that prove the old-style method of resistance does not work.

Mong Kok and Admiralty stand for two different routes of resistance, and they split up due to differences in real life. When the masked young men charged into the Legislative Council and broke the glass doors, there was a furious storm that led to an internal splitting of the movement. The pan-democratic legislative councilors unanimously condemned the act because it destroyed the image of "Love and Peace" of the Umbrella Movement.

Long Hair (Leung Kwok-hung) thought that the Valiant Ones failed because these political rookies used their very limited political experience to analyze the resistance movement, and thereby forgot that the most important political strategy is to win the support of those who are previously indifferent: "Success cannot be accomplished by a small number of individuals taking direct action. The direct action must grow into larger and larger actions."

But Fire's reasoning is: "The Grand Stage wants to gain the popular support of the wealthy middle-class. But the middle-class will only give some talk and never take to the streets, thus betraying us young people who are stilling to stay behind to defend."

Before the Occupy Movement ended, there was a rift between Admiralty and Mong Kok. This became an underlying factor in the internal divisions of the Hong Kong democracy movement after 79 days of the Occupy Movement.

December 11. Early morning on the day when Admiralty was to be cleared, Fire came with his equipment to Admiralty. He imagined that this would be the final battle. But the atmosphere in Admiralty was serene, with people hugging and bidding farewell to each other and taking commemorative photos.

"I can't accept sitting down and being carried away. That would be surrendering. It applies no pressure whatsoever on the government. There is no bargaining chip whatsoever." So he left.

He remembered watching the live broadcast the next day when the politicians sat down on the front row to be carried away. He was angry. "Putting on a show!" he said. To him, these resisters were sitting down and waiting their turn to be arrested. With the high degree of media coverage, they didn't have to worry about being beaten up. They have lawyers to help them all the way. They become heroes. But this is the logic of survival for a working class person like himself.

But Fire's reasoning is sometimes self-contradictory. He is sometimes angry, sometimes carefree. He is disappointed, but also hopeful. "When these Hong Kong students came out, they give us hope. We need leaders. I am willing to trust one more time, but it should not make us regret."

No matter what, Mong Kok changed Fire.

If it were not for those 74 dark nights, Fire would never care about politics. Everyday, he would go work at the mobile phone store. When he gets off work, he will go out and have fun. He would be a Tai Po young man who dreams of earning $20,000 a month and establishing a family.

He is spending the same type of life now, he goes down to Mong Kok often to have fun but he doesn't feel the same way. As he walks on Sai Yeung Choi Street South, Shanghai Street, Nathan Road, Shan Tung Street and the back streets and alleys, he can clearly remember that he came down here prepared to be hit last year. He remembered saving someone at some spot, or the marvelous camaraderie with his fellow warriors. These are the emotions that Mong Kok evoke in him.

"I never imagined that I would be like that. But I feel very proud." Fire thought that he could tell his grandchildren some day that their grandfather once shed blood to defend Hong Kong. He felt that for the first time, he made history and became part of Hong Kong's destiny.

As we said goodbye in the Waterfront Park, Fire yanked his bicycle into the air in a move that took 3 years to perfect. When he got back down on the ground, he sped away into the darkness of the night. He did not give me any reply, just like the Mong Kok that has vanished.

(HKG Pao) The True Message Behind "Broken Umbrellas, Broken People". By Robert Chow. September 23, 2015.

Today is September 23. In five days, it will be September 28. On that day last year, Occupy Central began. 79 days later, it ended in total failure.

Over the past several days, the media have started reporting on recollections and memories about what it was like one year ago and how it looks one year later.

Once again, the Occupy Central trio, the former Federation of Students leaders and the minor characters emerge to share their memories. If we look carefully, we see that even though they try hard to look positive, they nevertheless seemed disconsolate as well as worried over the potential legal consequences.

If you knew that before, why do it then?

Many of those 2 million Hong Kong citizens who suffered from Occupy Central and joined the signature campaign may find it incomprehensible why the media limelight is still shining on these criminals?

If you say "The media are like that", you will just make people angrier! So why not look at the true message?

They are blaming each other, they can't say "We screwed up" and they say that "it was someone else's fault, with the worst screw-up being so-and-so." This showed the quality of those involved in Occupy Central! Most importantly, do you see anyone standing up to defend them?

The foreign forces and the financier-agents have vanished completely or are hiding. Are they showing that they "are not acquainted with those gentlemen and ladies"?

That is the most important message! A bunch of nincompoops screwed up and have lost the confidence of the financiers. So how can they ever come back?

And do you hear any popular demand for the Occupy Central Trio, the pan-democratic legislative councilors who raised the yellow umbrellas high and proud once upon a time and the so-called student leaders who have been hauled off the stage to come out once again to lead the troops and raise the yellow umbrellas to finish the job? It would seem that even the Civil Human Rights Front is pondering whether bringing these people out front may draw the largest public response --- in the form of boos!

How did it come to this? The reason is very simple -- they are no longer regarded as leaders. Today, the people of Hong Kong are not done with their anger. Therefore the Democratic Party, Civic Party, the Labour Party and the ADPL legislative councilors who exploited the situation last year have all draw their lines and beat a quick retreat. When there are no advantages, politicians always bail out for such is their nature. The District Council elections are coming up in November. Do you think that the legislative councilors will bring out the yellow umbrellas that they are hiding inside their homes to remind the voters about what they did?

Obviously, the Yellow Ribbon radio stations and Internet media will strongly promote this anniversary. But could the actual consequence be to bring these models up further so that they fall harder in court?

How do people feel? Rather than be angry, we should just watch how they look and act now compared to their elation on year ago. Then we realize now that their "broken umbrellas, broken people" is just the start.

So do you understand better now? Do you feel better now? Is it time to have a drink now?"

(Wen Wei Po) September 24, 2015.

In an earlier interview with Apple Daily, Jimmy Lai said that the Federation of Students/Scholarism were very arrogant when they refused to retreat. Yesterday, in the latest interview with Apple Daily, Jimmy Lai said that the problem was that "nobody was planning, nobody was making the arrangements ... at the time, it was the young kids at the Federation of Students who did this, they let the young kids make the decisions ... but because nobody was really in charge, the kids at the Federation of Students took charge. You cannot ask for too much."

On the same day, the interview with Joseph Zen said that he had differences of opinion with the young people of the Occupy Movement. Zen proposed a "retreat" but he was stopped because "they don't want to listen to that, they will boo you." In earlier October, he proposed a 7-party platform but nobody listened. Zen said that "if you want to communicate with the students, they show up late and they are also sleepy." Zen said that the marshals and supplies were allocated by the Occupy Central trio but the students were not grateful. "They thought that they were in charge, they got carried away, they frequently made mistakes, it was chaotic." Although Occupy Central was a disaster, Zen still thinks that the Occupy Central Trio are the "best choice for the next wave of the movement." "I have a lot of confidence in them. They are very rational. But the Federation of Students will have to be re-organized first."

Occupy Central Trio's Chan Kin-man was interviewed on radio. He said that Occupy Central failed because there wasn't a second dialogue with the government. "After the students met with the government officials the first time, they got a lot of citizen support. That made them ambitious and they turned down a second dialogue with the government. In truth, the time after the first dialogue would have been the right moment to retreat and then use the resignation of legislative councilors to trigger a de facto referendum."

Occupy Central Trio's Chu Yiu-ming said that the Occupy Central movement because they did not withdraw in time. "Society at large believes that the movement has failed, and the action ultimately led the citizens into a 'dead end.' If we knew when to push forward and when to pull back, the power of the people would be better used."

Occupy Central Trio's Benny Tai said that Occupy Central did not destroy the spirit of rule-of-law in Hong Kong because there is no rampant street crime right now. Many citizens broke the law because they want to get democracy. "Although I don't approve of the students escalating Occupy Central action, we can't blame the students."

Next week at the anniversary of Occupy Central, the Occupy Central Trio plan to hold a ceremony in which they will hold umbrellas and stand still silently. Benny Tai said that as long as the social problems are unresolved, there is always the possibility of an Umbrella Movement II or Umbrella Movement III in Hong Kong, although the format is still undetermined at this time. "This is the time to rest and recuperate. Everybody should take a break and give some thought. Therefore, this is not the right moment to re-boot the Occupy Movement. The organizers next time should set up a joint decision-making organization."

Former Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow denied that that the refusal of the students to withdraw was the principal reason why the Occupy Movement failed. "That's because there was never a best moment to withdraw. Withdrawing at any time would have divided the masses into halves. The problem is whether it is bearable to have the masses divided." "It is very cheap criticism" to say that the Federation of Students caused the Occupy Movement to fail.

The pan-democrats, the Occupy Central Trio, the Federation of Students/Scholarism and civil groups set up a 5-party decision-making platform, but Alex Chow said that that it was no help towards unity. Instead, the escalation, the withdrawal and the surrender were decided and carried out individually. That was because the 5-party platform did not had mutual trust. "At the time, everybody thought that everybody else had their own political calculations, such as the political parties angling for the elections ..." The entire movement could not reverse its top-down hierarchical structure and became alienated from the masses and engaged in mutual recrimination. This responsibility was collective, because it was a "joint enterprise."

(Passion Times) September 23, 2015.

Benny Tai said that he has been thinking about the road to democracy over the past year. He is basically hopeful and optimistic about the future. He emphasized that the citizens joined the movement in order to fight for genuine universal suffrage and did not willfully break the law. At this time, street crime is not rampant. Tai said that as long as the government does not respond to the citizens' demand for genuine universal suffrage, there will be another wave of the Umbrella Movement. He says that it is necessary to examine the inadequacies of the past movement, and discuss the format of the resistance next time.

Chan Kin-man said that the students might have been somewhat over-ambitious, but the government must be held partially responsible because they did not deal with the constitutional reform issue for 2017 as promised. After the Occupy Movement, Localism has risen which will give the Beijing authorities an excuse to use even harsher methods against Hong Kong. Some young people believe in "using force to stop tyranny" and that also causes Beijing to intervene more so. In turn, that interference is going to cause more reactions. Therefore, the Beijing government ought to reflect itself. Chan says that it is hard to render a verdict on the Occupy Movement at this time, and it will take next year's Legislative Council election results to tell.

Chu Yiu-ming criticized the government for creating social conflicts in a way that is like burying bombs. He said that there is a sense of failure because the movement ended in a clearance. He thought that the demonstrators should have withdrawn on their own, showing that they can advance and withdraw at will. He thought that the best moment to withdraw was right after the Federation of Students met with Chief Secretary Carrie Lam and others. But the students refused to have a second dialogue, and that was the biggest mistake.

(EJInsight) September 23, 2015.

Pro-democracy groups are planning a silent protest to mark the first anniversary of last years protests. A series of commemorations is planned for Sept. 28 when the 79-day occupation of major Hong Hong streets began in 2014, Apple Daily reports.

Civil Human Rights Front, Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) and other groups said in a joint statement Tuesday that there is no turning back for the democracy movement. They said they have no regrets despite the failure of the movement to achieve its objectives. Also, they called on Hong Kong people to turn up on Monday with the same fervor as they did during last years protests. They want Hongkongers to reflect on the movement and ensure it will last, a member of Scholarism was quoted as saying. The activists plan to use Lennon Wall in Admiralty as a backdrop for a show of force, complete with yellow umbrellas and banners symbols of the street protests. They will stand in silence for 15 minutes starting at 5:28 p.m. to coincide with the first police action on the protesters in which tear gas and pepper spray were used.

The co-founders of Occupy Central, the civil disobedience movement which played a key role in the protests, will attend. Cardinal Joseph Zen will say an outdoor mass near the public entrance to the Legislative Council building.

A campaign against political persecution will be launched to support activists who are facing police charges and raise funds for their defense.

Meanwhile, Scholarism, HKFS and the Chinese University of Hong Kong student union will host a public forum on democracy from Tuesday until next Wednesday.

(Wen Wei Po) September 26, 2015.

Former Federation of Students deputy secretary-general Lester Shum said that when the five-party platform was first established, the media regarded it as the decision-making group for the Occupy Movement. But the Occupy people did not think this way. The government chose to have a dialogue with the Federation of Students, which were not elected. That caused certain Occupy demonstrators to be unhappy and increased the internal rifts.

Shum said this was a historical problem. As in other past movements, the decision-making model of Occupy is "not transparent to a certain extent." This may indeed draw more people to participate, but the systems cannot deal with many of the disagreements, from whence sprung distrust. Therefore, any self-examination should not be focused on specific individuals but on the system itself so that future movements will not repeat the same mistake.

Shum suggested that the Occupy Movement failed because the Labour Party which was supposed to organize labor strikes and the Professional Teachers Union which was supposed to organize school strikes failed to come through. He said that there were no large-scale strikes so that the wheels of society rolled on smoothly, and that means there was no leverage against the government. With no cards left to play, the Federation of Students had to take unusual steps like trying to go to Beijing.

(Sing Tao) September 26, 2015.

Joseph Zen said on radio that the Occupy Central Trio did a lot of work. Without the three promoting Love and Peace in Occupy Central, the movement may have ended in a bloody manner. He also said that the student occupation of Civic Plaza was successful because it drew a lot of attention. He said that frankly there won't be immediate democratic results, but the prospects of genuine universal suffrage are better now than before because Hong Kong has changed.

When he advised the students to go home, he was not saying that they had lost. Instead, he meant to tell them that they had already won because the government has lost its mind and resorted to tear gas. So this was not a defeat. Well, maybe a lot of imperfect things happened later, but they did not take away this victory. But he said that it would have been better to end earlier.

(Oriental Daily) September 27, 2015.

At the City Forum, Occupy Central trio member Chan Kin-man was told by an audience member to accept his legal responsibility. But Chan said that the Occupy Movement was led by the students. The audience downstage called him out for "shirking his responsibility." Chan explained that in Hong Kong, one cannot just go to jail if one feels like. A year ago, the government and the citizens wanted the students to negotiate and that makes them the ones in charge. Chan said that he only wished that he had more responsibilities.

(Hong Kong Free Press) Interview: Occupy was a protesters dream but not good for Hong Kong Allan Zeman. September 28, 2015.

Zeman calls the pro-democracy Occupy movement last year a protesters dream. Occupy Central was the first time students were able to come out and get together [to] made a statement. People from all walks of life in Hong Kong joined in, anyone with a problem joined in, because it was a protesters dream. By that, he said, he meant that the movement was able to carry on for so long, that one could just go out to protest to make their point heard, and choose from different camps and options, from Central to Causeway Bay.

I think it really made China realise the problems that do exist, especially for young people the high property prices, the shortage of land, the different problems they face on a daily basis that they need to be addressed. Especially when youre at that age when youre very idealistic every generation has gone through it It was again a misunderstanding between the older and younger generation, and the so-called establishment so many students were crying out to be heard.

Zeman said that the protesters were making a good and peaceful statement unlike some countries social movements, but thinks that on the whole the movement did not do Hong Kong a favour. It just, a bit, carried on too far and went on for too long. The professors had an idea that people joined in, and then they lost control, nobody had control. The problem you have with mob rule is that nobody controls the mob. And thats exactly what happened there were so many factions and groups and Occupy Central just lost its impetus. Originally it was just a short period of making a statement, and it would have been a lot more effective, than carrying it on for too long. It just kept going on without ending and some students, some people, thought they could just move in here, and it was fun.

He also said it had an effect on the economy. Obviously Occupy Central was not a good thing for Hong Kong, especially for the commercial world. Number one, it caused a lot of hardshipthe roads were blocked off, it caused a lot of problems getting home [and] getting to work in the morning, and in that respect it really inconvenienced a lot of local people. Second thing I didnt like about it is that, while I respect the reasons, it brought Hong Kong into the world limelight in a negative way. Many media had a way to turn the story around to fit what theyre used to They were expecting people to be fighting and they couldnt believe how peaceful it was, but some reports coming out of here they didnt understand Hong Kong.

Somebody sitting in New York in business that wants to invest here or come here thinks this is totally unstable. This was not the case of what was really happening, and it gets portrayed in a way that was wrong, and in fact it hurts the whole economy, it hurts everyone, because if people stay away jobs will suffer and business will decline And then of course they take young leaders who have their opinions and put them on the cover of TIME Magazine it just makes Hong Kong look like we have revolutionaries here and that it was not a safe place to come, and people just go elsewhere.

(Oriental Daily) September 29, 2015.

On September 28, the five members of the Hong Kong Federation of Students who met with the government officials in October last year were interviewed. After that meeting, they tried to push for the legislative councilors to resign and trigger a de facto referendum. Then they laid siege to Government Headquarters. In mid-December, the Occupy areas were cleared by the police. At each stage, they appeared to have a good hand to play.

Yesterday former deputy secretary-general Lester Shum said that he felt things were not going right during the early glory days in early October. "We had nothing left except for the ability to call for action. However, we couldn't really call for many things." Of course, a school strike and a business strike would be the most powerful actions, as well as other non-cooperation actions. However, none of these could be carried out across all the social strata.

Former executive committee member Yvonne Leung admitted that "they made many wrong decisions." But she insisted that it is okay as long as they don't regret it. She said that many people around her got injured and paid heavily.

Former permanent secretary Eason Chung said that reporters kept asking how when decisions are right or wrong and who is responsible. This made many people reluctant to tell their side of the story. This became very frustrating.

Former secretary-general Alex Chow said that he kept blaming and negating himself, including whether he was lacking in ability and/or judgment so that the whole movement was losing its direction.

Nathan Law said that he did not want to think about past events in detail. He said that the people around him and dynamic and idealistic and have returned to normal lives one year later. But it seemed that these five students are probably even more lost now than a year ago.

(Hong Kong Free Press) Interview: Occupy was a protesters dream but not good for Hong Kong Allan Zeman. September 28, 2015.

Zeman calls the pro-democracy Occupy movement last year a protesters dream. Occupy Central was the first time students were able to come out and get together [to] made a statement. People from all walks of life in Hong Kong joined in, anyone with a problem joined in, because it was a protesters dream. By that, he said, he meant that the movement was able to carry on for so long, that one could just go out to protest to make their point heard, and choose from different camps and options, from Central to Causeway Bay.

I think it really made China realise the problems that do exist, especially for young people the high property prices, the shortage of land, the different problems they face on a daily basis that they need to be addressed. Especially when youre at that age when youre very idealistic every generation has gone through it It was again a misunderstanding between the older and younger generation, and the so-called establishment so many students were crying out to be heard.

Zeman said that the protesters were making a good and peaceful statement unlike some countries social movements, but thinks that on the whole the movement did not do Hong Kong a favour. It just, a bit, carried on too far and went on for too long. The professors had an idea that people joined in, and then they lost control, nobody had control. The problem you have with mob rule is that nobody controls the mob. And thats exactly what happened there were so many factions and groups and Occupy Central just lost its impetus. Originally it was just a short period of making a statement, and it would have been a lot more effective, than carrying it on for too long. It just kept going on without ending and some students, some people, thought they could just move in here, and it was fun.

He also said it had an effect on the economy. Obviously Occupy Central was not a good thing for Hong Kong, especially for the commercial world. Number one, it caused a lot of hardshipthe roads were blocked off, it caused a lot of problems getting home [and] getting to work in the morning, and in that respect it really inconvenienced a lot of local people. Second thing I didnt like about it is that, while I respect the reasons, it brought Hong Kong into the world limelight in a negative way. Many media had a way to turn the story around to fit what theyre used to They were expecting people to be fighting and they couldnt believe how peaceful it was, but some reports coming out of here they didnt understand Hong Kong.

Somebody sitting in New York in business that wants to invest here or come here thinks this is totally unstable. This was not the case of what was really happening, and it gets portrayed in a way that was wrong, and in fact it hurts the whole economy, it hurts everyone, because if people stay away jobs will suffer and business will decline And then of course they take young leaders who have their opinions and put them on the cover of TIME Magazine it just makes Hong Kong look like we have revolutionaries here and that it was not a safe place to come, and people just go elsewhere.

(Oriental Daily) September 29, 2015.

On September 28, the five members of the Hong Kong Federation of Students who met with the government officials in October last year were interviewed. After that meeting, they tried to push for the legislative councilors to resign and trigger a de facto referendum. Then they laid siege to Government Headquarters. In mid-December, the Occupy areas were cleared by the police. At each stage, they appeared to have a good hand to play.

Yesterday former deputy secretary-general Lester Shum said that he felt things were not going right during the early glory days in early October. "We had nothing left except for the ability to call for action. However, we couldn't really call for many things." Of course, a school strike and a business strike would be the most powerful actions, as well as other non-cooperation actions. However, none of these could be carried out across all the social strata.

Former executive committee member Yvonne Leung admitted that "they made many wrong decisions." But she insisted that it is okay as long as they don't regret it. She said that many people around her got injured and paid heavily.

Former permanent secretary Eason Chung said that reporters kept asking how when decisions are right or wrong and who is responsible. This made many people reluctant to tell their side of the story. This became very frustrating.

Former secretary-general Alex Chow said that he kept blaming and negating himself, including whether he was lacking in ability and/or judgment so that the whole movement was losing its direction.

Current secretary-general Nathan Law said that he did not want to think about past events in detail. He said that the people around him and dynamic and idealistic and have returned to normal lives one year later. But it seemed that these five students are probably even more lost now than a year ago.

(Hong Kong Free Press) Interview: "We are our biggest enemies," says student leader Alex Chow. October 2, 2015.

A year after the Occupy movement, Hong Kong remains divided on how the event should be viewed, though more than 1,000 people showed up for the commemoration events at Admiralty on September 28. Others condemn those who look back on the memories fondly, calling this a self-indulgence in failure and saying that there was nothing worth celebrating. Alex Chow, one of the Occupy student leaders and former secretary-general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, refuses to label the movement a failure.

I remember I was quite depressed and frustrated back in early September 2014, Hong Kong was like a dead city and we didnt know how to deal with the White Paper. Before the tear gas, you wouldnt think that Hong Kong people were capable of doing something like thisa community was born. People really enjoyed going to Admiralty, because they had built a community and reimagined the space. I think it unlocked a lot of ideas we had about what a community could be like. I think these are achievements, he said.

Instead of just trapping ourselves thinking only about the August 31 decision and backing ourselves into a dead-end where were at a loss of what to do when they refuse to give us the political reforms we want theres also other things like [a sense of community] that came out of the movement. People dont talk about this so much any more.

Of course, this isnt the only thing we should focus on there are limitations too but now it seems like people like to deem the entire thing a failure. I think that this is still pretty damn encouraging, the fact that so many of us came out onto the streets. Chow said that one of the moments that touched him the most during the 79-day movement was when he saw, after being released from the police centre at Wong Chuk Hang, that crowds of people had poured into Harcourt Road in Admiralty. This unique personality it deserves to be articulated and praised. Its a foundation that we need to build on during our fight of resistance.

Chow, however, admits that even after the movement, more needs to be done. Hong Kong people need tactical empowerment. The Occupy movement empowered people, but then it seemed like we didnt really know what to do next. I think if we have a winning streak even with the smaller issues and slowly build our energy up, we can later tackle the bigger problems and not just be completely defeated when the difficulty level goes up. Now it seems like weve lost with the most important issue and then no one is really coming out to take the initiative to tackle the smaller ones in a different way.

What tactics did the social activist have in mind? First of all, there has to be a good foundation established in society, and secondly such localised campaigns should pave the way for discussion on issues such as universal suffrage after there is stronger political power and unity among the citizens. We need to be a stronger force of resistance against the government, Chow said.

With the District Council elections coming up, Chow said that there needs to be more participation in local community affairs to strengthen civil society and reshape politics. Our past democratic movements were always focused on fighting for universal suffrage for Chief Executive and Legislative Council elections. But under these circumstances the social landscape is overlooked. From things such as how the land is used to how the community is designed, its all up to the government or District Councillors to handle. I think there needs to be a breakthrough.

A lot of people are quite detached when it comes to elections theyre like, what does this have to do with me? We have this misconception that democracy is only about elections, and most people doesnt feel an immediate connection between that and their lives. Ultimately, democracy has to tie back to ones own district or community, and the immediate problems that one faces in life say lead in water, lack of recreational space, or urban redevelopment. Theres a lot of problems in the community, but we take it for granted that its like that, and we need to change that mentality and get creative.

Look at To Kwa Wan there are so many areas there that will undergo redevelopment, and it could hypothetically get destroyed by anyone. Places like that and Tai Po actually have a lot of space for development of resistance ideas. I remember that there were weird slogans that came out of Tai Po during the last elections like Hong Kongs Tainan or something but its this sort of imagination that we need, otherwise well be stuck in reality and box ourselves up.

District politics isnt the only area where Chow is calling for more creativity. Chow also reflected on the fact that during the Occupy movement, the only real act of civil disobedience the protesters had was blocking the road. But if we have only one tactic, its quite weak and the government cant really feel our resistance. They also have different ways of stopping you, such as using police, triads, their own pressure groups, legal injunctions. I think the most effective method is to strike it doesnt really happen in Hong Kong. Even after tear gas was deployed last year, there wasnt a strike when it comes to the businesses the students did, but only partially. I believe that we need more experience and creativity when it comes to methods of resistance.

When asked about his opinion on what the next step is for Hong Kong, Chow believes in a bottom-up approach. The Hong Kong [citizens] charter the idea of people coming together to draft a plan and then have the plan endorsed by a referendum it could give us a clearer picture of the change we want for Hong Kong in the future, not just with democratic reforms but also socially and economically.

I think we are our biggest enemies, when it comes to Hong Kongs development and future. We focus a lot on the self we dont appreciate others. We dont cooperate with each other and theres a lot of mistrust. I think all of us need to take a step back and look at this vicious cycle were in. Its quite spiritual, but also quite practical. We have to realise that even with people we dont agree with on certain things, theyre acting this way because they really care about Hong Kong and theyre suffering.

Chow said that he has been learning how to achieve inner peace through studying Buddhism. I dont want to be overtaken by emotions when I make decisions I want to have a clear head. When emotions overburden you, they could have destructive consequences.

Chow, who still has two courses to go before he graduates with a Bachelor of Arts in Comparative Literature at the University of Hong Kong, wants to pursue a postgraduate degree in cultural studies overseas. He said that there needs to be people who look at Hong Kong from a different perspective. How we decipher Hong Kongs past also determines how we understand our problems today. Im interested in a post-colonial reading of Hong Kong. I think I want to be a scholar who takes part in social movementsI dont think Ill be running for office.

Internet comments:

- So what is the scoreboard in the blame game?

Occupy Central Trio member Benny Tai says that he doesn't blame the students, although he thought that the students were wrong to escalate. Thus, he blames the students obliquely.

Occupy Central Trio member Chan Kin-man says that the students may have been over-ambitious, but it is too still early to have a verdict. Thus, he blames the students obliquely.

Occupy Central Trio member Chu Yiu-ming says that the students should have retreated after their first dialogue with government officials. Thus, he blames the students directly.

Jimmy Lai says that the students were arrogant pricks who had no idea what they were doing, and that grown-ups should be taking charge instead. Thus, he blames the students directly.

Joseph Zen thought that the students were unorganized and chaotic. Thus, he blames the students directly.

The former Federation of Students secretary-general Alex Chow said that there was never a best moment for retreat, because any retreat would have split the movement. He said that it is "very cheap" to criticize the students.

The former Federation of Students deputy secretary-general Lester Shum said that the decision-making system was defective and that the Labour Party/Professional Teachers Union failed to deliver large-scale labor/school strikes.

In summary, it is always somebody else's fault and never mine.

- Oh, wait, didn't they have a five-party platform? Who has gone missing? Certainly the Civil Human Rights Front and other civil groups always insist that they are there to assist and not to lead, so it can't be their fault and they won't issue any post-mortem analyses. But the missing elephant in the house is the pan-democrats (political parties, legislative councilors and politicians).

Do you remember the yellow umbrella show in the Legislative Council?
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgBpCMpD5Cw

The pan-democrats have completely vanished from view at this time. Nobody has shown up to share their thoughts on what went wrong or what is to be done. Nobody has promised to show up at any commemorative ceremony. It is as if they don't know those Occupy Central people.


As Alex Chow noted, everyone has his political calculations. In the case of politicians, it is first and foremost about elections. If you don't have an elected seat, you are nobody. If you have an elected seat, power and money flows from it.

In the past, the rule-of-thumb is that the electorate is divided into 60% pro-democracy and 40% pro-establishment. Occupy Central has pushed 20% of the moderate pro-democracy camp over to the pro-establishment side. Of the remaining 40%, 10% will go to the radical parties and 30% to the traditional pan-democratic base. That means serious trouble for the pan-democrats. They won't be able to win the 10% radical voters by any means. For example, on November 29 2014, Fernando Cheung (Labour Party), Helen Wong (Democratic Party) and Leung Yiu-chung (Neighbourhood and Worker's Service Centre) went down to Occupy Mong Kok area and were roundly boo'ed: "Who asked you to come down here?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkYMS4-grnU ). So they must try to win the moderates back by pretending that they had nothing to do with Occupy Central.

But the Internet has memories: Photo of pan-democrats with "Unite to support Occupy Central"

- When people are leaders of a mass movement, they are supposed to have empathy with what the masses are feeling. What do the masses think about Occupy Central? Look at Mong Kok first:

(Oriental Daily) November 1, 2014.

In Mong Kok, the New Town Mall and Mong Kok Centre are right next to the occupied area. Normally, they are filled with people, but now the shop owners are losing their shirts ... Yesterday our reporter went to the two shopping malls in the evening. Normally, Friday evening is the golden rush hour. On this evening, there were about 6 potential customers on the third floor of New Town Mall and twenty people on the whole floor in Mong Kok Centre.  Miss Lau who runs a fashion store on the third floor of New Town said that her business fell by 90%s in October. Miss Wong said that people see the chaos outside the street and won't come into the mall. Sometimes people come upstairs for safety when street fights break out. ... The shop owner named Apple said that October is supposed to be a busy month averaging three to four thousand dollars in revenue a day, but now she only made several hundred dollars a day.

The leaders of Occupy Central have not uttered a word about the small businesses which suffered economic losses during that time. Nothing whatsoever.
- To say something sympathetic to the small business operators would be to admit that Occupy was flawed, and then the 10% radicals would say that you are a traitor. But actually shutting up would mean losing a lot more votes.

- I was talking to a female friend and I asked her about how Occupy Central affected her (if at all). She began to curse: "I live in Ma On Shan, and I take the bus every morning to go to work in Admiralty. Because they occupied Causeway Bay, the bus had to make a detour. Because they occupied Admiralty, the bus stopped somewhere in Wanchai, except the location of the terminal stop was different almost every day. It was total chaos because nobody knew what was going on. After I got off wherever the bus let me off, I had to walk to the office. I have arthritic knees, and all that walking really hurts. My normal door-to-door bus ride was about one hour. During Occupy Central, the trip took two hours."  None of the Occupy Central leaders have ever uttered a sincere word of apology to people such as my friend. That is why she will never vote for a pan-democrat again.
- To say that the sufferings of common folks need to be considered is the talk of "leftist retards." According to the Valiant Warriors, the rest of the Hong Kong population are just pigs to be led to feed wherever whenever.

- Benny Tai said that rule-of-law has not been impact, because street crime is by no means rampant. Who are these people then?

Or this compilation of violent incidents https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDbx6CMlrbc

- On November 19, 2014, this was where public opinion stood:

(HKU POP - PopCon Survey on Occupy Movement)

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

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

13.8%: Continue
79.2%: Stop

Unfortunately, the students who were the nominal leaders were incapable of stopping Occupy Central. Simply put, if they said STOP, then the (4.4% + 6.1%) would be crying BETRAYAL! That 10.5% would have gone on their own way to "valiantly resist with force." However, if they just lumber on with Occupy Central, they would risk more people getting sick and tired of a seemingly pointless task, because the central government seems perfectly happy with how things were turning out. That is what Alex Chow was talking about. In the end, the Federation of Students called for an escalation to lay siege to Government Headquarters, a move that they knew would fail but it gave them the reason to exit afterwards.

But the point is not to analyze the past. The point is to realize that Occupy Central must not and should not be repeated, because (1) it is unpopular and alienates more people as time goes by; and (2) it has no discernible impact on the central government with respect to the demands of the demonstrators. The first time was a tragedy for Occupy Central; if there is a second time, it would be a farce.

- Lester Shum points to the organizational problems as the underlying factor. He said that they were not democratic enough and made decisions that were not always transparent to the followers. Look, if they want to run a democracy and they put up to vote on: Should we withdraw? If all 60% of the pan-democrats voted, it would be 50% moderates/traditionalists for and 10% radicals against. But the 10% radicals won't accept the outcome. They will simply continue to Occupy. There will be no motivation for the government to negotiate with the students or the Occupy Central Trio or the pan-democratic political parties again because their decisions mean nothing to the radicals. And the radicals are the ones who are chanting "Bring down the Communist Party!"

- Joseph Zen is alone to say that Occupy Central is a success and not a failure. He reasoned that because the movement made the government lose its mind and used tear gas against the demonstrators, it was successful in showing the true nature of this government. Fine, a logical extension would be: If the movement escalated and made the government use live rounds and kill 200 students, it would be even more successful. And it is never too late, because the students can always go and toss petrol bombs at the China Liaison Office today.

 - In the HKFP interview, Alex Chow is once again chanting his mantra of district politics.  He has totally forgotten how it went when they tried it:

Reaching Out To Local Communities - Part 1
Reaching Out To Local Communities - Part 2
Reaching Out To Local Communities - Part 3
Reaching Out To Local Communities - Part 4

Here is my advice to Alex Chow: Get lost! Go overseas to study Buddhism, as you promised! This is sincere advice because your face is recognizable as one of those responsible for the debacle known as Occupy Central/Umbrella Revolution. You were a failure in all aspects, including objective definitions, strategizing, organizing, building coalitions, negotiations, etc. If you get involved in a local community project, you will be a negative asset and you will torpedo that project upon announcement. Let some fresh face without your type of baggage try it, okay?

(Wen Wei Po) September 23, 2015.

To use unlawful methods? Or to use violent methods? Which way makes more sentence. Yesterday, the Baptist University Student Union held a Civil Disobedience vs. Using Force To Stop Tyranny forum. They invited Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong and former Hong Kong Federation of Students deputy secretary-general Lester Shum to attend. The audience numbered less than one hundred, with many of them being middle-aged folks. Although both speakers are regarded as opposed to the government and responsible for disturbing social order and peace, they attacked each other over the effectiveness of their respective method.

Ray Wong began by promoting the idea of violence. He advocated that the Hong Kong citizens must start an "armed revolution." He said that force is only exercised in reaction to the police. Therefore it is pure "resistance." He said that "the highest noble force" is intended only to make the other side "yield" and thus "put a stop to the conflict." Even if it is unable to stop the police, it will at least raise the cost for law enforcement.

Ray Wong explained how "armed revolution" will be carried out. He said that the Hong Kong police force has about 30,000. When Occupy Central first began, the number of demonstrators is several times that of the police. They absolutely had the numbers. However, the number of people showing up today to resist is a lot less. Therefore each resister will have to amplify their power many times in order to overwhelm the police. He said that there was not need to respect the legal system in Hong Kong. "Only by carrying out armed revolution can the government be changed."

Meanwhile Lester Shum said that "he is not opposed to violence in principle." But he repeatedly raised doubts about the support level for Ray Wong and his ideas. Wong rebutted that "civil disobedience" is just lying down on the ground waiting to be carried away, and has delivered no results.


SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra9YAKDAbV8 Part 1
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZNXqc3f7Iw Part 2

Internet comments:

- Let me ask one more time: Who is happiest when fellow pro-democracy activists go at each other's throat? Answer: The Chinese Communist Party, of course.
- And that is why you need to keep donating money to the Hong Kong Alliance to Support Patriotic Democratic Movements in China. Even though they haven't achieved a thing for 26 years, you can't criticize them because that would make the Chinese Communists very happy.

- Ray Wong wants to increase the cost of law enforcement. Fuck! The Hong Kong Police is paid for by Hong Kong taxpayers. If the Police had to get an extra $500 million for overtime pay, we are the ones who have to pay for it. [Note: Ray Wong is jobless and pays no taxes, so he doesn't mind.]

- Currently Ray Wong's "armed revolution" actions are carried out by just a few dozen people. So he says that each revolutionary must amplify his power by many times in order to reach the same level as the 30,000 police officers. I know of a certain serum (Super Soldier Serum) that will do just that:

- Ray Wong was criticized for split personality. On one hand, he insists that he and his group Hong Kong Indigenous have been at the frontline of all major battles and therefore experienced to lead. On the other hand, he will apologize for having made many mistakes due to inexperience, because experience is acquired through practice. What is for certain is that he and Hong Kong Indigenous have no experience in "armed revolution" or "armed insurrection". If an armed revolution were to happen today and he finds himself in the frontline (as he insists he always will be), he wouldn't have a clue about what to do. You must be a fool to follow Ray Wong.

- Ray Wong has got the analysis wrong in many ways.

Ray Wong thinks that the enemy is the Hong Kong Police force which numbers 30,000 and then he plays a numbers game. On the first day of the  Umbrella Revolution, 120,000 were reported to be present in Admiralty. He thinks 120,000 will be enough to overwhelm 30,000, because it is 4-against-1 combat. This may be true if you are playing tug-of-war.

Quantitatively, if you name your time and place, the Hong Kong Police cannot field 30,000 persons. The Police have to work in shift, so some people patrol during the day and others during the night. The Police have set duties that must be covered (e.g. maintaining security at the airport). That was why during the days when clearance was near, the Police were reported to have 7,000 officers on standby and they worked 14 hours per day. So you have to worry about fewer police officers than Ray Wong thinks.

Qualitatively, the issue isn't about fielding 120,000 warriors against 3,500 police officers. You can go back to the siege of Government Headquarters:

Eventually, the demonstrators swarmed the entire roadway in front of the Chief Executive's Office. At that point, the police line was backed up with the police cars parked right behind them. They had nowhere to retreat now. Or so it seemed. It was at that moment (circa 1:30am) that a Blue Team (Special Tactical Squad STS) of about 100 police officers was unleashed in a flying wedge that drove through the demonstrators' front line and scattered them. From then on, it was just a chaotic retreat. (see TVB News https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7j9hoiPPKA ).

At 7am, about 100 or so Blue Team members suddenly hurdled the metal barricades strung together by the demonstrators and advanced towards the slowly retreating crowd. Meanwhile, it could be seen from the corner of the eye that another 100 or so Blue Team members sprinted down the left side into Tamar Park and then swung right to come out on the right side of the demonstrators. This caused the demonstrators to retreat quickly in disarray. The police did not make many arrests which they could have. They wanted the demonstrators to move on. Since there was daylight by now, the police could see where the demonstrators were. The police herded the demonstrators down to the main Admiralty camp. (see INT News Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTmjsnBHmL4 ).

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

Has Ray Wong address the simpler issue of how to deal with the 100 Special Tactical Team members (="Blue Smurfs")?  Show us how you can solve the "Blue Smurfs" and maybe people will come out again. Right now people have no confidence in Ray Wong and Hong Kong Indigenous, or any other tough-talking revolutionaries. If Ray Wong doesn't like Lester Shum's type of "civil disobedience" (lie down on the ground and wait to be carried away), then there isn't much to like about Ray Wong's "armed revolution" either (surround Mong Kok Police Station, chant slogans and toss garbage cans onto Prince Edward Road West to block vehicular traffic).

Also Ray Wong does not address the level of force that the Hong Kong Police is employing. Basically, the tenet is that the police will use a level of force appropriate to the situation such that they continue to maintain control. So if the revolutionaries are unarmed and take actions such as chanting slogans, rattling metal barricades but not physically attacking police officers, the police will respond with batons and pepper spray (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfUTqQmF_vU ). But if the revolutionaries escalate, the police will also escalate to maintain control. If the revolutionaries use batons, the police may fire rubber bullets. If the revolutionaries use butcher knives, sharpened steel pipes, baseball bats and spears to cause injuries, the police may fire Remington shotguns. If the revolutionaries toss petrol bombs, the police may fire live rounds or even use hidden snipers. Ray Wong has no experience in dealing with the consequences of escalation. The police are probably hoping that he would escalate.

Hong Kong police officers are armed with pistols. In the well-known Lung Wo Road incident in which three police officers were surrounded by dozens of demonstrators and photojournalists for many minutes, the police only used their batons. Had the unarmed revolutionaries escalated at that moment (e.g. use rods to hit the police), the policemen might have pulled out their pistols in self-defense.

The Hong Kong Police made one mistake in firing the 87 teargas canisters on September 28. Anywhere else in the world this is just international standard and no one would give a blink (see, for example, the Hungarian police using tear gas against Syrian refugees (including women and children) recently)). Only in Hong Kong do some people think that this is the end of the civilized world. The Hong Kong Police made the mistake because they did the same in 1966 and it was okay (see SCMP archive photo):

- That's a lot of verbiage. But a revolution is not inviting guests to dinner. If Ray Wong wants an armed revolution, he and his lackeys can just pick up machetes, sharpened steel pipes, axes and spears, then charge into the police station and kill everybody inside, then declare the establishment of the Republic of Hong Kong. Let's get it over with once and for all, one way or the other (most likely the other) instead of puttering around with theoretical debates.
- Well, Ray Wong stated clearly that his idea of "armed revolution" is to use violence to intimidate the enemy to surrender and thus to put an end to the conflict, not to kill them all.
- Ah, I totally get it. In other words, you are saying that Ray Wong is a pussy.

- If the Hong Kong Police should melt away in defeat, Article 18 of the Basic Law kicks in:

Article 18

The laws in force in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be this Law, the laws previously in force in Hong Kong as provided for in Article 8 of this Law, and the laws enacted by the legislature of the Region.

National laws shall not be applied in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region except for those listed in Annex III to this Law. The laws listed therein shall be applied locally by way of promulgation or legislation by the Region.

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress may add to or delete from the list of laws in Annex III after consulting its Committee for the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the government of the Region. Laws listed in Annex III to this Law shall be confined to those relating to defence and foreign affairs as well as other matters outside the limits of the autonomy of the Region as specified by this Law.

In the event that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress decides to declare a state of war or, by reason of turmoil within the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region which endangers national unity or security and is beyond the control of the government of the Region, decides that the Region is in a state of emergency, the Central People's Government may issue an order applying the relevant national laws in the Region.

That means the Central Government can declare martial law, send in the People's Liberation Army and impose a curfew indefinitely. Those found on the streets during curfew hours will be shot on sight. Ray Wong would be arrested unless he gets asylum in a foreign consulate.

- If the Chinese Communists really want to sent the PLA in and replace One Country Two Systems/Basic Law with martial law, they couldn't get a better enabler than Ray Wong. With enemies like these, who needs friends?
- You worry too much. Occupy Central Trio member Chan Kin-man has assured us that the Chinese Communists will collapse on their own soon. So Hong Kong needn't worry about any PLA, martial law or whatever.

- If Ray Wong's "armed revolution" fails and the PLA marches in, he'll just shrug his shoulders and say, "It was worth a try. At least we've got a civic awakening of the young people. It is certainly better than sitting around and doing nothing."

(Oriental Daily, Oriental Daily) September 21, 2015.

Ever since the police cleared the Occupy Mong Kok area last November, Shopping Revolutionary members have gathered almost nightly on Sai Yeung Choi Street South to yell and quarrel with shopkeepers and passersby.

On the day before yesterday, the Shopping Revolutionaries announced beforehand that they would celebrate the first 300 days of the Shopping Revolution last night at 8pm on Sai Yeung Choi Street South.

The event was preceded by a forum organized by People Power featuring Tam Tak-chi. At around 745pm, a 51-year-old woman who was taking mobile phone photos of People Power's Tam Tak-chi giving a speech claimed to be punched by a 56-year-old man such that her mobile telephone hit the corner of her eye and caused an injury.

The man was surrounded by a large number of Yellow Ribbons. The police came and took the man onto a police van. The injured woman was taken to the hospital by ambulance.

Meanwhile, Andy "Captain America" was waving his British colonial dragon-lion flag for Hong Kong independence.

When the People Power forum ended, it was the turn for the Shopping Revolutionaries. They brought in a large "I want genuine universal suffrage" banner and they posted posters making fun of government officials.

At around 10pm, the one hundred or so Shopping Revolutionaries raised their umbrellas and punched some yellow balloons. Then they began to march from Sai Yeung Choi Street South to Nathan Road, led by a woman who said that she accepts neither China nor its people and who held a Republic of China flag. They were shadowed by a large number of police who wanted to make sure that these marchers do not charge onto the roadway to block traffic. During this period, there were clashes between the Shopping Revolutionaries and dissidents. The police took away four persons, including Ronald Leung Kam-shing (North District Parallel Imports Concern Group), the under-aged "Chalk Girl" who was arrested for drawing graffiti outside Government Headquarters and two other men. The four were identified by a man who claimed to have been injured by them. The rest of the demonstrators then proceeded to surround the Mong Kok Police Station.

The Shopping Revolutionaries announced that on September 26, they will march from Mong Kok to Tsim Sha Tsui, take the ferry across the harbor and return to Admiralty. In addition, on September 28, which is exactly one year after the police fired tear gas, they will be in Admiralty to watch the moon and eat moon cakes.

(Apple Daily) September 21, 2015.

About 50 persons gathered as usual on Sai Yeung Choi Street South last night. They said that they will continue to do so until they get genuine universal suffrage. At around 11pm, an obese man wearing a white t-shirt claimed to have been assaulted by Shopping Revolution regular Leung Kam-shing. The man was bleeding in the head. But Leung told our reporter that he never touched the man. Leung was taken onto a police van. According to information, another man and a woman ("Chalk Girl") were also take away. The Shopping Revolutionaries then called for everybody to go down to the Mong Kok Police Station to show support.

(Wen Wei Po) September 21, 2015.

About 20 Shopping Revolutionaries held a street forum. They raised banners for "I want genuine universal suffrage" and "Persist to the very end", and they held yellow umbrellas. The members took turn to tell everybody about how they feel over the past year. There were many civilian spectators and police observers.

Loyalty Alliance member Ah Man was present as an observer. The Shopping Revolutionaries tried to provoke him, but Ah Man held his arms akimbo and declined to react.

The forum ended after 10pm. The demonstrators proceeded from Sai Yeung Choi Street South and walked up Portland Street in order to demonstrate at the Mong Kok Police Station. Suddenly somebody shouted "Assault!" A man wearing a white t-shirt claimed to have been assaulted by three of the demonstrators. The demonstrators were in an uproar on Argyle Street. The police removed three demonstrators and the man in the white t-shirt to investigate.

When the demonstrators arrived at the Mong Kok Police Station, they conducted a countdown to commemorate the 87 tear gas canisters. But that led to an internal squabble because the Localsits objected to any celebration of the anniversary of Occupy Central. The Localists and the Shopping Revolutionaries exchanged a lot of obscenities.

(Oriental Daily with video) September 21, 2015.

At 450am, the three men and one woman were released. The four were arrested for "assault causing actual bodily harm." The 15-year-old girl was also charged with criminal destruction of property. In addition, the 59-year-old man was found with Part 1 Poison on his person and he will also be charged with possession of Part 1 Poison (note: Part 1 Poison are typically prescription drugs that that must have a prescription signed by a doctor and then sold by a licensed pharmacy. The reason is that the drugs may be dangerous to certain persons in certain conditions (e.g. pregnant women). An example is codeine which is sometimes used as a recreational drug.)


SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOwxNQ7nNyM More photographers than either police or demonstrators. Followed by march to Mong Kok Police Station.

SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isKHwsI52ZI Buffet meal for the participants. Countdown from 87 and down. Singsong.

Internet comments:

- They are running a human flesh search on this guy:

They believe that he may be a Blue Ribbon who previously participated in the assault on Yellow Ribbons.

But that is not germane to the present case.

- The Yellow Ribbons characterize themselves as being young and having better education and higher income. But take a look at this photo of the Shopping Revolutionaries outside the Mong Kok Police Station. They look like a bunch of regular uncles and aunties?

- (Coconuts Hong Kong) January 19, 2015.

A 14-year-old girl who was arrested for chalking flowers on Lennon Wall and faced being taken into care will be allowed to stay with her family, a court ruled today.

City authorities had been seeking a "care and protection" order for the teenager, who was sent to a children's home after being caught scribbling on the wall at the Admiralty protest site in last month. Although she was later allowed to return to her father on bail and under curfew, the case sparked fears authorities are carrying out a clampdown on protesters after the end of two months of rallies for free leadership elections.

"After considering the facts and based on suggestions made by social workers, there is no need to make such an order now," Hong Kong magistrate Winnie Lau said today.

Prominent pro-democracy veteran Martin Lee, who represented the girl, said the teenager "should be happy today." The girl herself was not available for comment.

If the Chalk Girl was allowed to stay with her family, there had to be certain "good behavior" conditions. To be out there late at night in Mong Kok "commit assault with actual injuries inflicted" and "cause criminal destruction of property" is going to violate the conditions. So this may not be the end of the story for the Chalk Girl.

P.S. The "criminal damage of property" refers to the charge that she yanked at the strap on someone's backpack until it broke. This is not like breaking the glass door at the Legislative Council to cause $570,000 in repair costs.

- Noted from various Facebook posts:

- At around 630pm, a man assaulted a woman outside the Chung Shun Building on Sai Yeung Choi Street South and caused an injury on her left eye. The attacker went inside a McDonald's. He was detained by citizens and handed over to the police. The woman was sent by ambulance to the hospital.

- The Shopping Revolutionaries insisted the police to interrogate the man in their presence, but the police took the man down to the police station to assist in their investigation. Why? It was impossible to ask any questions when there are a dozen obscenity-screaming people surrounding you.  What were they saying? "Why the fuck do you need to ask any fucking questions!?" "Put the handcuffs on him, he is a criminal" "Eat shit, Evil Police!" "You are going to fucking release him?"
The policeman said: "We are conducting a preliminary investigation. I never said that I was going to release him. I never said that I was going to release me. If you keep up with this, I am going to charge you with obstructing police business."

- Here is an added detail about the attack outside the Chung Sun Building. The man and the woman may be acquainted with each other, so that the cause of the attack is now uncertain.

- At around 900pm, the Blue Ribbon guy known as "Magnifying Glass" showed up to watch the proceedings.

- At around 930pm, the Blue Ribbon guy known as "Ah Man" showed up. The Shopping Revolutionaries greeted him and asked him when he is going to jump off the roof. Ah Man smirked and did not react. The police eventually escorted him to leave through the MTR subway.

- At around 1000pm, a Shopping Revolutionary took a video of the Blue Ribbon guy named "Magnifying Glass" congregating with several other men. They appear to be getting paid by somebody for their activities, although other interpretations are possible.

- At around 1030pm, the Blue Ribbon guy nicknamed "Magnifying Glass" approached the Shopping Revolutionaries to "resolve a previous misunderstanding." As the Shopping Revolutionaries argued with him, a large group of Blue Ribbons charged up to attack the demonstrators. Many police officers came and separated the two groups. One of the Blue Ribbons wearing a white t-shirt said that he was assaulted by the demonstrators. The police asked him to identify his attackers. A woman directed him to make the identification. With the help of this woman, the man identified Leung Kam-shing, the "Chalk Girl", Sam and Peter. The police put the four onto a police van down to the police station to assist in the investigation. Other Shopping Revolutionaries followed down to the Mong Kok Police Station and demanded to know why those four Shopping Revolutionaries were taken away whereas the Blue Ribbons who attacked the Shopping Revolutionaries were not. The police said that there was no proof that the four did not attack the man, that the man had identified these four as the attackers, so they had to bring everybody down to the police station to sort things out.

- At around 1155pm, one group of citizens was getting ready to sing in order to celebrate the 300th day of the Shopping Revolution.

Other citizens objected because there is no reason to celebrate the arrest of the four brave warriors tonight. Both sides exchanged opinions.
"Is it alright for us to commemorate the tear gas?"
"If you are afraid, you should eat shit! You are fucking useless!"
"Is it alright for us to commemorate the tear gas?"
"Alright, I'll stand here."
"Is it alright for us to commemorate the tear gas?"
"Do I have to ask your fucking permission to do what I want?"
"Is it necessary to be so overbearing?"
"Why do I have to fucking ask you? Who the fuck are you? You eat shit! You Hot Dogs (=Civic Passion) eat shit! Why do I have to fucking ask you?"
Then Hong Kong Indigenous convener Ray Wong Toy-yeung led the citizens present to chant: "We demand to get a reasonable explanation! We demand to get a reasonable explanation!" and then finally "Down with the Communist Party! Down with the Communist Party!"

- It is said that People Party are the puppet masters behind the Shopping Revolutionaries on Sai Yeung Choi Street South pedestrian mall. Therefore, the events were organized tonight as a People Power showcase for Tam Tak-chi in his quest for Legislative/District Council seats at 5pm, followed by the Shopping Revolutionary 300th day ceremonies at 8pm. However, the script got broken when a Blue Ribbon was assaulted afterwards. With four persons taken down to the police station, Hong Kong Indigenous members showed up and took over the show. They seemed better experienced in laying siege to the Police Station and obtaining legal help for detainees.
- But where does the bit about "Down with the Communist Party!" come from? There were about 70 persons present at the time, and this may be fine with them. But if Hong Kong Indigenous should harbor ambitions for the Legislative/District Council elections, then this is negative (and unnecessarily so) baggage.

- At 0045am, a woman explained what has happened so far. There are three men and one girl inside the police station. The person who claimed to be assaulted by the four is undergoing a medical examination at the hospital. Legal representatives have arrived and are filing the relevant papers. She said that those who have to go to school or work can leave first. However, some of those present cursed her out with obscenities for telling people to disperse.

- At around 1am, one demonstrators had an epileptic fit. The police went to offer assistance. The individual recovered afterwards.

(Apple Daily, with video) July 19, 2015.

At the Hong Kong Bookfair, Yazhou Zhoukan organized a forum titled: <Hong Kong: The Games Inside and Outside The Umbrella> and invited writer Chris Wat Wing-yin and others to speak. Wat said that the Occupy Movement "attracted many mental patients to come out." Wat also said that people are basically bad but they become good because of the law. "When you know that the police are standing on the side, you wouldn't cross the street against the light; but if there are no police around and you don't see any cars, you may cross the street. This is the hidden leaning to break the law." She also thought that the Occupy Movement opened up Pandora's Box so as to bring out all the hidden criminal intent out into the open. She used herself as an example: "I tend to think that I am a very normal person. During these 79 days of Occupy Central, I really thought about parking wherever I wanted, because I thought that the police would be too busy elsewhere to issue a parking ticket to me."

(Apple Daily) September 19, 2015.

Recently the Internet user known as Lau Ma Che had an encounter with Joshua Wong Chi-fung in the MTR (see #323). Lau now says on Facebook that he intends to ambush Joshua Wong again on Sunday at the City Forum in Victoria Park. He said: "Joshua Wong, you fucking fool, I am issuing an official declaration of war now."

Last evening Joshua Wong replied on Facebook: "You took a photo of yourself carrying a Yellow Ribbon umbrella in Mong Kok, now you go around and criticize the Occupy Movement for affecting grandpas and grandmas. At the time when you made a video to criticize me, you were actually in the Occupy Movement." Joshua Wong then quoted writer Chris Wat Wing-yin: "The Occupy Movement attracted many mental patients to come out." Joshua Wong said that Chris Wat "has seen through many things in the world." Joshua Wong also said that he was not scheduled to attend the City Forum anyway.

Who are the more famous "Mental Cases of the Umbrella Revolution"? Below are some obvious candidates:

Andy ("Captain America) Yung Wai-yip (originally posted at #016)

 (YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=750pjPpQHsM)  This is a compilation of videos showing the exploits of the character known as Captain America in the occupied Mong Kok area.

0:00  In the beginning, Captain America is posing for fans when a young woman with a faked shrill voice goes after him in a very sarcastic manner.
0:10  Female: Thank you for promoting freedom in Hong Kong.  Thanks a lot.  The Chinese government thanks you.
0:18  Female: Take off the helmet.  Do not wear a helmet.

The second clip starts with CY Leung's insinuation about foreign interference in the Umbrella movement, and then shows Captain America manning the barricades.  Then the same young woman confronts Captain America once more.
1:05 Female: How is Raymond Wong doing now?  How are the finances?  No money?  I think you know him.  Get some more Avengers.  Get a few more.  You are just one.  You can't do it alone.
1:34 Female: You use illegal methods to prevent others from legally doing what they would like to do.  That is wrong, Captain America!  You should go back to America to do these things.  The American government will support you.  This is China here.  America and China are different worlds.
1:55 Captain America: (inaudible, but seemingly in Cantonese)
1:58 Female:  What are you saying?  Why don't you say clearly what your want?
2:00 Another male bystander: He is speaking in English.  You don't understand.  You need an interpreter.
2:04 Female: It isn't English.  It's English.  Damn.
2:18 Female: What is best about Hong Kong?  The best thing about Hong Kong is the rule of law.  It is fully developed/perfected.  What you are doing is destroying the rule of law.
2:37 Female: You explain.  You explain to the camera.  I will post it on the Internet.  Speak quickly.  I have just taken a lot of film.  I am out of memory space.  I am going to give you five seconds.  Start.  I am giving you five seconds to prepare.
2:40  Captain America: (inaudible)
3:05  Female: The thing I asked you to explain previously.  You didn't explain it.

The third video is taken at the demonstrators' main tent.
3:26  Female: Do not go to work.  Do not go to school.  Dissolve the Legislative Council.  You are hiding your face.  This is known as wanting to show off your bravery but nevertheless wearing a helmet for reasons of personal safety.
Captain America walks away.

The fourth video is taken afar while Captain America has his helmet off.  Thus, he is identified.

Now that the face of Captain America has been revealed, another video was found with apparently the same man waving a British flag.
4:34 Unseen male voice: Fuck your mother, you dog slave!  You go back to England.  You go back to England and eat shit!  Dog slave!  Fuck you, that's right!  Fuck your mother!  Fuck you!
4:59 A little old lady comes up to struggle with the demonstrator.  He pushes her away, and a mob of people rushes up.  A man says, "He hit the grandma!"

The sixth video was taken on October 24 by television station TVB.
5:50  It showed some people trying to dismantle the barricades that were erected by the demonstrators.  Captain America slammed an old man with his signature shield.  The old man fell to the ground in shock.  Captain America was arrested by the police and escorted away with a full phalanx of 30 police officers through a riotous mob of photojournalists, each wanting to take their potential prize-winning photograph.  It is odd that he was led away with the shield still in hand.  Isn't that supposed to be a deadly assault weapon (just go and watch the Captain America movie trailers on YouTube)?
(newspaper photo)
7:09  (caption)  Apple Daily showed how Captain America was taken away by 30 police officers, but they did not show how he shoved the old man to the ground with his shield.  Thus, Apple Daily continues to conceal all the unpleasant dark aspects of Occupy Central and prettify the violence.  TVB's news channel showed the relevant parts of the video, but TVB did not show the part about how the old man got up and continued to dismantle the barricades.

This story will not end here.  Captain America will post bail and be back to occupy Mong Kok very soon.  We will be seeing how Captain America continues to spread America's message in Mong Kok ...

Addendum: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKWJMeOHZrY Interview with digital radio station dbc:

0:01 (Interviewer) I see that your shield is completely chipped.
0:04 (Andy) The shield has undergone some clashes
0:05 (Interviewer) Why did you choose this shield as a tool?|
0:10 (Andy) Eh ... actually ... we ... this shield. Eh. I did not choose the style. Besides ... I thought that it looked good. In addition, the shield ... when I went to the store to make a purchase, they did not have any other shield. This was the only shield.
0:26 (Interviewer) Are you worried that you would be accused of being a foreign power because you are holding the Captain America shield?
0:28 (Andy) Eh ... I am not afraid. I obtained this shield as a defensive tool. It is not meant to deliberately show myself off.
0:46 (Andy) I fuck your mother!
0:46 (Policeman) I have issued an warning to you. Okay? I hope that you follow the arrangement by the police. You are charging the police defensive line.
0:51 (Andy) I didn't.
0:52 (Policeman) You did.
0:54 (Andy) Okay.
0:54 (Policeman) We'll bring you to a safe place so that you can leave.
0:55 (Andy) Okay.
0:58 (Policeman) So this is what you are going to do.
1:02 (Andy) Then he took me aside. He issued a verbal warning to me. He said that I charged at the police defensive line by the HSBC Bank. Eh ... then he mentioned the unlawful assembly ... eh ... Actually, everybody is in the unlawful assembly. He told me not to show up at scene again. "You leave." That's it. I thought that it went through the left ear and exited through the right ear. The Movement continues ...

Addendum: Cable TV has a special segment that includes Captain America (YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXryhmJcRcA). At 2:14, the interviewer quizzes Captain America on his understanding of issues related to the election process.

0:24 (VO)  After the police took away his Captain America uniform and shield, Andy says that he has only these equipment left.
0:27 (Andy) The helmet must be worn.  It is very important to protect the head. 
0:33 (VO)  He usually works as a lifeguard.  He is currently out on bail, and is waiting for the investigation to end on suspicion of having committed physical assault.  He is continuing to spend full-time on the Occupy movement.
0:38 (Andy's grandmother)  Don't put that thing on.  That ribbon.
0:43 (Andy)  This movement has been open and transparent from start to end.  What is there to be afraid of being filmed?
0:46 (Andy's grandmother)  Of course, I don't want him to go out.  It is outright dangerous.  Then you have to go to prison.  You are being prosecuted.  How are you going to get a job when you get out?  I think he basically does not know what he doing.  Maybe he was persuaded.  Maybe he got to know some friends.  This is a chance to become famous.  You have enough fun.  I feel very helpless.  Obviously I feel extremely bad.
1:57 (Andy)  How are you?  How are you?
2:00 (woman)  You look handsome.
2:02 (Andy) Thank you, thank you.  It is not about being famous.  It is genuinely about giving my effort to this movement.  To fight for Hong Kong civil rights.
2:14 (interviewer)  What are the three barriers set up by the National People's Congress?
2:16 (Andy)  The three barriers?  I don't know how to describe the details.  But ... I actually ... how shall I say? ... that is, I don't care what barriers were set up by them.  But I ultimately want to obtain the right to genuinely elect the Chief Executive by one-person-one-vote.  That is, there has to be civil nomination.
(2:35) (VO)  It is still unknown whether they will be able to attain their ideals.  But they have already "pocketed" something during this month. 
(2:40) (Andy)  More friends.  More courage.  Even if there are many policemen surrounding us from behind, I am not facing them alone.  A large group of supporters are facing them.

(SCMP) Police claim Occupy protesters wearing costumes are hiding from the law   October 26, 2014.

Chief Superintendent Steve Hui Chun-tak made the remark at yesterday's daily press conference. "Some were dressed in different costumes, concealing their own identities as if they were going to a carnival. However, the fact remains that this is an unlawful assembly which has affected many people."

His comments came 24 hours after a man dressed as fictional character Captain America was arrested during a disturbance in Mong Kok. Highlighting the physical confrontations that have become routine at the Mong Kok Occupy site, Hui criticised "selfish" participants acting contrary to the principles of civil disobedience by not showing "a willingness to accept the legal consequences of their actions".

However, for Andy Yung Wai-yib - the man behind the Captain America costume, who has been released on bail - dressing up is a way to protect himself and to provide a comic buffer between protesters and troublemakers. It was his way of bringing creativity and peace to the civil-disobedience movement, he said.

Yung, a lifeguard, was arrested on Friday. An anti-Occupy protester who was trying to clear some of the barricades fell down as Yung tried to keep him away, he said. He returned to the protest site on Friday afternoon wearing his normal clothes, because his costume had been confiscated by the police.

"I usually come by in my costume in the afternoon and evening when incidents are known to flare up. It helps in defusing some of the arguments, which could turn violent," said Yung, 30. The chief superintendent, however, said costume wearers created more chaos than peace. Yung said: "I'll be more low-key now, and will just sit with the rest of the Occupiers." He won't be buying a replacement outfit any time soon, he said, but he will continue to support the movement.

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) November 19, 2014

At around 4pm, the 30-year-old man who calls himself Captain America and wears helmet/armor was walking down Argyle Street and Portland Street when he was hit with a hard object from behind. He called the police for assistance.

The police arrived at the scene and suspected that the attacker was a bespectacled man pushing an old woman in a wheelchair at the time. According to this man, Captain America went by, kicked the wheelchair and uttered an obscenity. The police did not make any arrests.

Addendum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxcaI_zMmHk 20-minute-long interview.

Addendum (Oriental Daily) January 11, 2015.

The Justice Alliance and the Alliance in Support of Our Police Force set up a street booth in support of legislation that criminalizes insulting the police. Captain America showed up with a British flag. He was cursed out by ten or so persons. They called him a Chinese traitor. The police maintained order. In face of the angry crowd, Captain America ultimately folded his British flag and left under police escort.

Addendum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73dWlMucTzw At an Alliance To Support Our Police rally on January 25 2015, Captain America showed up with a Hong Kong independence Dragon-Lion flag. But he was outnumbered. A man threatened to set the flag on fire with a lighter, so Captain America quickly left the scene.

Addendum (Oriental Daily with video) January 30, 2015. See also Bastille Post https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I81SMNqQPQ.

The lifeguard Andy Yung Wai-yip was charged with two common assaults against anti-Occupy taxi drivers who were trying to clear the road obstructions on October 24 and November 3 2014 respectively. Yesterday, he was allowed to post a $2,000 bind-over order and put on probation for 12 months. In addition, he has to compensate the two victims $500 each. According to the prosecutor, the defendant wore body armor at a sensitive time and caused uneasiness among people. Therefore, the prosecutor asked to confiscate his equipment. After consideration, the judge decided to confiscate only his Captain America shield.

Internet comments:

- Amazing! Only twelve months probation for two common assaults. Meanwhile the guy who picked up $161,500 dollars that fell from an armored car got 5 months' jail time. This society is out of whack.

- He doesn't need to go to jail. He is suffering from bipolar disorder and belongs in the Castle Peak Psychiatric Hospital.

- The next time you see this guy in the street (for example, at the February 1st Civil Human Rights Front march, he says that he is bringing his Hong Kong independence flag), you can provoke him. If he punches you, he goes directly to jail for violation of his good behavior probation terms.

- What happens to Captain America when his shield is confiscated?

- How come Thor, Iron Man and The Hulk didn't show up at courtside to give him support?

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) March 1, 2015.

Captain America also showed up in full armor, including helmet, goggles, armor plate, knee guards, elbow guards and gloves. He said that he wanted to participate in the march, but he got off at Yuen Long Station instead of the Long Ping Station. But as soon as he stepped out on the platform, he was attacked by three middle-aged men without cause. Eventually he arrived at Long Ping station. He said that the full armor was used to protect himself and that he did not intend to attack other persons.


Addendum: (YouTube) Letv: The autistic Paralympics swimmer Andy Yung from Hong Kong.

Addendum: (Apple Daily) 14:39 March 15, 2015

Captain America Andy Yung was walking on the overpass from Sheung Shui Plaza to the MTR station when he was intercepted by police officers and searched. He said: "I knew that they want to deliberately harass me, because more than a dozen uniformed police officers came to search me." He said that he expected to be searched and therefore he won't bring any dangerous materials on him.

Internet comment: When you dress up like a robber, it is a wonder if the police didn't stop and search you.

Eric ("The Painter") Poon Won-tong (originally posted at #285)

(Sing Pao) June 30, 2015.

27-year-old Eric Poon (nickname "Hexagonal wrench") has been arrested by the police. Poon is suspected of having accosted a girl under the age of 16 and offered to show her some paintings. Then he kissed her against her will. The girl lodged a complaint with the police.

(Wen Wei Po) July 1, 2015.

Eric Poon showing his form with spitting, cursing and making obscene gestures

On June 11 2015, a fourteen-year-old girl was molested by a man under the pretext of showing her some paintings. Her mother learned what happened and filed a police complaint on June 25. According to the court records, a man with the same name (Poon Won-tong) was found guilty of raping/molesting a 14-year-old girl in Tuen Mun in June 2006 on three separate occasions (in a parking garage platform, a restroom for handicapped persons in a recreational area and in a parking garage stairwell). At the time, the defense claimed that the defendant had previously sustained an injury to his brain and therefore he has sub-normal intelligence.

(The Sun) July 14, 2007. A 14-year-old runaway girl was raped/molested thrice by a young man named Poon Won-tong on three occasions, once on a table tennis table for the public in Shan King Estate parking garage, once in a public restroom for physically handicapped persons in Yeung King leisure park and once in the stairwell of the Shan King Estate parking garage. On the first occasion, the defendant tied up the girl and raped her on top of the table tennis table. On the third occasion, the man forced the girl to commit fellatio. On one occasion, there was a under-aged male who watched the rape while fondling the girl. The defense claims that the defendant is mentally retarded due to brain damage.

(Apple Daily) July 14, 2007. According to the defense lawyer, the defendant dropped out of secondary school Form 3. His parents got divorced last year. Last October, the defendant was taken to mainland China to live with his maternal uncle to learn interior decoration. After the police contacted his father over this case, the father went to mainland China and took the defendant back to Hong Kong to turn himself in to the police. According to the prosecution, the defendant and the victim agreed to run away on June 6. On the same day, he took her to the platform in the Shan King Estate parking garage and asked for sexual intercourse. She refused. He used a towel to tie her hands up and carried her onto the table tennis table to rape her. Afterwards, the defendant took her into the public restroom for physically handicapped persons in the Yeung King Road leisure park. At the time, a 14-year-old boy asked to be allowed to watch. So the defendant removed the victim's clothes, used a towel to tie her hands up and raped her. On the same day, the defendant woke the victim up in the parking garage stairwell and forced her to engage in fellatio.

(Oriental Daily) July 29, 2015. At 3pm on May 21, the defendant Eric Poon got into an argument with a worker on the fourth floor of the Fa Yuen Street Public Library. The worker asked Poon to be quiet, but the Poon said: "If you don't know who I am, I will tell someone to beat you to death." The defendant was found guilty of criminal intimidation and sentenced to three months in jail.

Video: Eric Poon looking for a one-to-one fight at the Mong Kok Public Library.
0:55 Poon: You shut up!  Leave!
1:05 The other man who is a head shorter than Poon: Leave? How can I leave? You are blocking my way!
1:07 Poon: Leave! Fuck your mother! Are you scared? Let's have a one-to-one fight!

(Wen Wei Po) August 1, 2015. On January 3, 2015, Eric Poon is suspected of injuring a male pedestrian named Law inside Hollywood Plaza (Mong Kok). Poon has been charged with one count of common assault.

(Oriental Daily) August 15, 2015. The trial of Eric Poon on charges of sexually molesting a female minor will be held on October 5. The defendant Eric Poon pleaded not guilty. The prosecutor said that there will be four witnesses. Because the victim is a minor who was sexually assaulted, she will testify by video conference. The prosecutor said that the defendant is serving three months of jail sentence for criminal intimidation while still awaiting trial for three other cases. Since the defendant had been known to skip bail before, the prosecutor asked that the defendant not be allowed to bailed out. The magistrate ruled that the defendant will be detained until the trial.

(Oriental Daily) September 24, 2015. Eric Poon filed an appeal on his 3 months jail sentence for criminal intimidation. He was not represented by a lawyer. He said that the original magistrate was wrong to accept the testimony of the victim, because when Poon said "Brothers", he was only referring to ordinary citizens and not triad members. In addition, that testimony diverges from that of another librarian. He said that the case was trivial and therefore should not have ended up in a jail term.

Poon said that he has been a street artist for more than a decade, and he sometimes took part in the Occupy Movement. Therefore, he has become a semi-celebrity. Since entering jail over this case, he has been beaten by correction officer and inmates on an almost daily basis. He was frequently whether he was paid to join Occupy Central. This has caused his fragile mind to suffer immensely. Therefore he asked the judge to release him immediately.

The judge said that the Occupy Movement is unconnected to the present case. Poon had to demonstrate how the prosecutor failed to accuse him of a crime without reasonable doubt. Furthermore, this was not Poon's first offense because he has multiple criminal records/jail sentences since 2012 including assault, criminal damage of property, possession of weapons of assault, etc. The judge denied the appeal.

Here is a collection of YouTube videos on Eric Poon:

Video: Eric Poon lying down on the ground and being interviewed by Simon Ng. He equates the 87 tear gas canisters in Admiralty with the June 4th 1989 incident. The closing comments: "What is your name?" "Eric" "Everybody please support Eric and donate more money."

Video: Unidentified man punched Eric Poon in the eye with a straight right during an attempted clearance of Mong Kok by individuals in civilian clothes.

Video: eetv interviewed Eric Poon about being injured on his eye previously. "It was around 3:50pm on October 22. I was over there by the intersection of Dundas Street and Nathan Road. A group of people who claimed that they were bailiffs ... they claimed themselves ... that is to say, they are fakes. They dismantled our roadblocks. About ten of them. There were more of us than them." "If there were more of you, then how did you end up bleeding in your eye?" "We wanted to pull the iron barricades back.  Then there was was a Green Ribbon who wore grey sunshades. He held scissors. He cut up our stuff to take away. I pushed him. After I pushed him, I scratched his eyeglasses because I had longer arms. I wanted him to show his face. He was displeased. He hit me and broke the left side of my eyeglasses. That was right in front of the police. The police didn't care." "Did you ask for police assistance?" "Yes, then we went down to the police station. The police released him immediately. I saw it. My friends saw it."

Video: Eric Poon and Ng Ting Pong expounding on the finer points of democracy in Occupy Mong Kok area.

Video: Eric Poon has a confrontation with a Hong Kong Broadband salesman outside Hollywood Plaza on Sai Yeung Choi Street South, Mong Kok

Video: Eric Poon quarrels with an unidentified man holding a camera. He begins with showing off his middle finger and "What the fuck! You know!" in English. He said that he was injured. "All the newspaper front pages covered the story." The unidentified man asked: "What has this got to do with us?" Poon said: "Of course, it has to do with you people. You work for C.Y. Your mother!" The man asked: "This has to do with me. You answer me first." Poon said: "Yes, it's got to do with you. Fuck your mother! Dickhead! Use your brain! You are giving us post-80's a bad name!" The man said, "Thank you for your valuable opinion." Poon said: "Valuable opinion? Your mother and your father will both die and go to hell!" The man said: "Oh, so you are the one can decide. I fully understand." Poon said: "This is what your father CY Leung and Xi Jinping said." The man said: "If my father were CY Leung or Xi Jinping, I wouldn't have to stand here." Poon said, "Yes, you stand here because you get paid. Two hundreds dollars a day. I know." The man said: "Not as much as what you get, not as much as what you get." Poon said: "I earn my own money." The unidentified man (sarcastically): "Oh, I understand!" Poon said: "I paint, you dickhead! Have you ever painted? Fuck your mother!"

Video: Eric Poon using a megaphone to scream obscenities

Video: Eric Poon rambles on with a speech on Occupied Nathan Road in the first 1:38 of this video. He is discussing the major incident that took place on August 4, 2014.  The newspapers did not report on this matter. In summary, Poon went down to Mong Kok to cause trouble and the police arrested him. Two other speakers are a scriptwriter who is reading a script and a housewife who has to get on welfare because her husband has cancer. They have occupied Nathan Road because of these personal issues.

Video: Eric Poon bullies a woman as he slaps her hard in the head. When others tried to get him to stop, he said: "Shut up! It's family business!" The woman said: "I really did not borrow any money." But Poon said: "No? You stole my money until there's only 24 dollars left." A person came up to intercede but Poon pointed two fingers at him and said: "None of your business. It's a personal matter." Although there were many Yellow Umbrellas around, nobody stopped Poon who eventually left on his own.

Video: Occupy Mong Kok was cleared on November 25, 2014. At 1:23, Eric Poon uses a mini-megaphone to speak incoherently as the audience looked perplexed while the police looked bemused.

Ava Chan ("The Cross-dressing Guy) Mei-kay (originally posted at #040)

(Oriental Daily) 4:50am, November 16, 2014

In the early hours of morning, there was another clash between civilians and police. The police used pepper spray at one point. A demonstrator claimed to have been injured in the head after being clubbed by the police. According to Ah Kay, who is an MTR worker and has stayed in Mong Kok for for many times, at the time, she was staying behind the barricades and did not take part in the rush against the police. But three police officers accused her of tossing a helmet, dragged her out and used batons to club her head. She was dragged along the ground for at least 2 meters, causing multiple injuries on her body.

After being treated at the emergency station, Ah Kay had to call an ambulance for further treatment. She declined to be taken down to the hospital. She showed her injuries to reporters, including scratches on her forehead and arms and a broken frame on her eyeglasses. She also lost her shoes during the confusion, and she had to borrow shoes from a friend to wear.

In the Apple Daily news video report ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tj1PWaLN8Dk ), the relevant action starts at around 1:55.

(VO)  "A man was suspected of being hit in the head by the police and pulled down to the ground, and then dragged on the ground for four meters before being subdued."

(Male voice) Two police came up and said that I tossed an object. They dragged me out, and use police batons to bash my head.

There is another long video of the same incident http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6XMMM5rfGM . The relevant action starts at around 3:16 when the police pushed forward and eventually gang-tackled somebody.

(Sing Tao) 5:55am November 7, 2014

Ah Kay dressed as a female and claimed to be 23 years old and has been staying with Occupy Mong Kok since the first day. Since she is qualified as a medical emergency worker, she has helped to protect other female demonstrators. She claimed that she works as an MTR operations officers and has used her vacation days and leave-of-absence to work for Occupy Mong Kok.

At around 2am, Ah Kay pointed at her wounds that were bandaged by volunteers and showed reporters the scratch marks on her arms. She recalled how she was dragged out of the demonstration zone by the police, pushed to the ground, kicked and hit on the head with police batons. Her eyeglasses were smashed. She insisted that she did not throw a safety helmet. She complained about police violence.

At around 7am, Ah Kay complained that her head injuries were hurting. She felt cold and was vomiting. An ambulance was summoned. Emergency workers treated her and then covered her up in an aluminum blanket and took her to the hospital for further treatment. According to the Hospital Authority, they treated four persons from the Occupy areas last night. All of them are male, none female.

The public is interested about whether Ah Kay is male or female when she is on the job for the MTR. This newspaper queried the MTR. The MTR spokesperson said that, under normal circumstances, they will not confirm whether or not someone is an employee of theirs. Thus, the MTR declined to answer our question.

(Passion Times) The demonstrator Ah Kay narrates how he was assaulted by the police, his version completely different from that of Police Public Relations Bureau Senior Superintendent Kong Man-keung. November 7, 2014.

Ah Kay told our newspaper something different from Kong's statement. Ah Kay said that he was injured by police batons. He was also kicked wildly by policemen. Ah Kay said that he went to get a medical examination, and all he told the police was "I have nothing to say."

0:43 (Ah Kay) I was by the road block in the rear to keep guard. I had to look after the other girls. I had received the directive that there would be some chaos. For our safety, I told them to come in and we locked the place up. Then, for no apparent reason, a group of policemen rushed over. Two policemen dragged me outside. They said that I had tossed a helmet. But there was no helmet near me. Nothing whatsoever. Many people witnessed it, some took videos to show that I did not fight back. They pulled me over the table, then they piled on me on the ground. They held my head down. They hit me once on the head with a baton. They held me down on the ground. They held my legs down. They kicked me here ten to twenty times. They dragged me into the road. They dragged me over to the metal barricade. Then another group of policemen took me over further over to that location. That was it.

(Oriental Daily) November 8, 2014

The "Occupy Mong Kok girl" was bashed in the head turned out to be a cross-dressing liar. After the series of clashes in Mong Kok, "she" claimed to be Ms. Chan, wanted to be called Ah Kay and claimed that she worked as an MTR operations officer. As a result, "she" became an Internet celebrity. "She" also accused uniformed police officers of dragging her on the ground two meters out of the tent, punching her, kicking her and bashing her head with police batons.

It turned out that Ah Kay is a cross-dressing man named "Brother Ka-chun" who has a prior record of fraud. He is an unemployed young man. He told the police that he was actually injured by unknown individuals with hard objects, not by police officers. His mother disclosed that her son told her that he had gone to Macau, so she was unaware that he was in Occupy Mong Kok. She only found out after some relatives/friends told her that her son was injured in Mong Kok.

This "Occupy Mong Kok liar" has a family name of Lian, he is 23 years old and his identity card marks his gender as male. Early morning on the day before yesterday, he told the media that his name was Ah Kay, his family name was Chan, he was of mixed Chinese-Taiwanese-Japanese mixed blood, he worked as an MTR operations officer, he was an IVE student, he was using his vacation time to work on Occupy Mong Kok and he was in charge for the road block group. He said about the head-bashing: "I was dragged out of the tent by the police on the ground for about two meters. During that time, policemen bashed me with batons, kicked and punched me for more than ten times. They picked me up and threw me down on the ground again. I had difficulty breathing." Although he dressed in a feminine manner, reporters were suspicious about his voice and gender identity. However, he insisted that he was a girl.

At around 6am that morning, Ah Kay felt ill and was sent to Kwong Wah Hospital. As the police got ready to take down his statement, he claimed that he was injured by unknown persons with hard objects and he refused to make a statement to the police. He left the hospital on his own. However, his identity has been revealed after his media exposure. He is presently unemployed. In 2009, he was suspected of defrauding people by pretending to be a movie star scout. His mother claimed that her son told her previously that he was going to Macau with some friends and then lost contact. Yesterday, a relative/friend was watching television and told her son was injured in Mong Kok. She said that he son dropped out of school at the Form 2 level. She was giving him HKD 60 in spending money per day. When asked why her son likes to cross-dress, the mother huffed and said, "He is crazy all the time."

Yesterday, our reporter located Ah Kay again. He explained that he was a hermaphrodite. He was said that he declined to make a statement to the police due to concerns about privacy.

According to Police Public Relations Bureau Senior Superintendent Kong Man-keung, a demonstrator claimed to have been in the head by the police and kicked more than ten times. When the police at the scene tried to learn what happened, this demonstrator said that he was assaulted by unknown plainclothes persons with unidentified hard objects, and not as he claimed on camera of being assaulted by the police. This man was sent to the hospital, after which he indicated that he would not provide any information and he did not file any complaints. The man left before undergoing a medical examination. The case would be followed by the Mong Kok Crime Investigation square as a case of "an assault that caused actual injuries."

(Wen Wei Po) November 8, 2014

... According to an Internet user at the "Salute the Hong Kong police" page, this demonstrator at first "deceived the reporters by claiming to be female, and also lied about not being 18 years old yet." He even claimed to be an MTR worker. But MTR does not hire anyone under 18 years old or with tattoos on their arms, so the lie was exposed already.

When the demonstrator registered at the hospital, he not only refused to show his identity card but he publicly stated "I did not bring my identity card" while holding the said card in his hand. He was rude to the hospital workers. He claimed that he was 23 years old and he claimed to be unemployed. After registering, he refused to undergo medical examination or make a statement to the police. He changed his story and said that he was knocked down by unidentified persons during the chaos. He was declined to let the hospital workers remove the bandage on his head so that they could inspect his wounds.

According to what this Internet user said about what eyewitnesses at the emergency room saw and hear, this demonstrator had his lies exposed and he changed his story to: "I took money from Occupy Central to smear the police" and "I received $3,000 in wages from Civic Passion." The demonstrator also said that all the relevant information involves "personal privacy and therefore the police and hospital staff must not disclose this to the outside." But those in the emergency room "could hear it too."

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) December 31, 2014.

At around 3pm on December 31, a person dressed as a female had an argument with another individual over a box lunch outside the Legislative Council building entrance for legislators. The person got very excited and used his head to ram and kicked the metal door. The security guards summoned the police who came and arrested him for criminal destruction of property. The police were skeptical about the identity of the person, who claimed to be a trans-sexual. The person was wearing a bra at the time but changed back into male clothing and was taken down to the police station.

According to information, the 23-year-old man named Lian had a prior fraud record in 2009 for posing as a movie scout. He was previously injured in the Occupy Mong Kok area and lied about what happened. After the clearance of Mong Kok, Lian moved over to the Tim Mei Road tent city.


Oriental Daily (February 15, 2015) On this afternoon, Internet users came to join the "Defend Sha Tin, oppose parallel traders" Action. Some of the demonstrators got very excited and yelled at anyone hauling luggage because they must be parallel traders, a cosmetics shop near the Yata Department Store in Sha Tin had lowered its gates, so some of the customers were trapped inside. Meanwhile a Ms. Chan hauling a luggage was identified by the demonstrators as a parallel trader and they surrounded her and cursed her out. In the struggle, she was also accused of pushing the Mong Kok cross-dressing guy Ah Kay down on the ground. Afterwards, Ms. Chan told our reporter that she is a Hongkonger who went to Yata to buy her family's Lunar New Year items. She said that the demonstrators were out of line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvs2ZHZVdm8 Video posted by SocREC reporter Ava Chan, who happens to be Ah Kay now working as a reporter using a pseudonym. This title of this report says that a reporter was pushed by two female mainlanders.

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) May 22, 2015

24-year-old unemployed man Chan Mei-kay appeared in Eastern Court today to answer a charge of criminal destruction of property. The defendant showed up in court wearing a short pink skirt. The hearing was postponed to July 3rd.

Video: Bastille Post (July 3, 2015)

Addendum: (TMHK) Interview with Chan Mei-kay on a Mong Kok police station attack incident, in which he gives a confused account of whether he is a Yellow Ribbon or a Blue Ribbon.

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) August 28, 2015.

Yesterday the defendant Chan Mei-kay pleaded guilty to one count of criminal property damage at the Eastern Court. The defense claimed that the 24-year-old defendant works for an Internet media outlet. At the time of the incident, the defendant was gathering news and not challenging the authorities. The defense also claimed that the defendant realized that he had mental and behavioral problems when he was 7 years old, and has been taking medication and visiting doctors since. In June this year, he was hospitalized. The defendant said that he wanted to do good journalistic. This incident took place in a moment of rashness. He pleaded for leniency. The defendant has two prior records for different crimes. The defendant was not cross-dressing on this day.

The prosecutor said that the repair for the steel door cost $35,000 and wanted damage awards. The magistrate said that the prosecutor failed to produce a receipt and instructed him to seek civil damages instead. Sentencing will take place on September 11, 2015.

Addendum: (Oriental Daily) September 11, 2015.

The defendant Chan Mei-kay had previously pleaded guilty to one count of criminal damage of property. The defense said that the defendant was found to have mental and behavioral problems since age 7 and has been under medication since. The defendant committed this act in a moment of rashness, and hopes for a lenient sentence. The magistrate sentenced him to 15 months of probation.

As Chan left the courthouse, he was assaulted by four individuals, including regular demonstrator "Captain America" Yung Wai-yip. These people held two bottles of wine and yellow umbrellas. One of them was a woman who said that Chan's hair is filthy and therefore pulled her wig off and tossed it on the ground. The four then cheered. Chan had to flee back to the courthouse. Chan said that he has gender identification problems and he begged the media not to call him 'The Cross-dressing Guy." He wanted everybody to let him me. He emphasized that all reporters should be neutral, without choosing to be either Yellow Ribbon or Blue Ribbon. He said that he reserved the right to hold his attackers accountable.

P.S. Chan told the Oriental Daily that he does not want to be called "The Cross-dressing Guy." Oriental Daily's published report has the title "Cross-dressing male reporter sentenced to probation for Legco property damage."

Addendum: (evchk.wikia.com) http://evchk.wikia.com/wiki/%E7%B7%B4%E5%AE%B6%E4%BF%8A

A compilation of incidents involving the individual named Lian Ka-chun who has many more aliases.

- In 2008, an Internet user named Tang Ka-man claimed to run an Internet radio station and wanted singers to submit songs to play. In 2009, the person running that radio station was sentenced to one year of probation on two counts of fraud. The individual threatened to commit suicide when exposed. He changed his user name to "The person who is going to be committing suicide soon." Internet users said that he must be trying to use potato chips to slit his wrist. The address posted by Tang Ka-man matches the address of the individual in this case.

- In 2009, the individual was wearing a Kowloon-Canton Railway era uniform on the MTR West Rail Line. The uniform was company property. When Kowloon-Canton Railway merged into the MTR, all employees were supposed to turn in their uniforms. This uniform belonged to the father of the individual. The father did not turn in his uniform when he left KCR. On the particular day, the individual wore his father's uniform and was stopped. He had to take off his uniform and left wearing an undershirt.

- In May 2009, a person pretending to be 17-ear-old singer Renee Lee went out to have cyber-sex with others. A Golden Forum user pretended to be interested and identified this individual to be the perpetrator because they have the same address. The real Renee Lee condemned the individual as a pervert.

- In June 2011, he helped out at a bus wrecking yard, and ended up stealing 17 license plates and $1,700 in cash. The owner let the individual in because he had a MTR employee pass. The owner made the individual the stolen property and did not press charges. The individual then told the Internet website evchk.wikia to remove the information on that case because he has already filed a police report. However, he was unable to provide a police file number. He forwarded an audio tape, but the policeman on the telephone call was telling him to file a civil lawsuit because the police do not handle libel cases.

- In early 2015, the individual joined the SocREC group as the reporter named "Chan Wang Ava." He claimed to be a Japanese-Taiwanese MTR senior manager who lived at Tim Mei Road. He was appointed the Legislative Council reporter for SocREC. However, he kept violating Legco regulations by staying overnight and hogging work space. He kept losing emotional control, ramming his head against the wall, using foul language against the police and yelling that he was going to commit suicide. Some SocREC reporters demanded that he produce proof of identity, but he refused. Some SocREC  reporters demanded that he resign, but the person in charge of SocREC refused on the ground that personal conduct was not relevant to job performance. As a result, more than half of the SocREC reporters resigned.

Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee

(East Week) Issue #583.

It has been more than one month since the Occupy Movement got started. Some people describe the Occupy Admiralty area as "Utopia." The Occupy Causeway Bay area is so quiet that it tends to be forgotten. But the Occupy Mong Kok area is volatile, with bloodshed and large-scale clashes possible at any moment.

Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee last night climbed on the barricades and did the zombie jump

Our reporter observed the Occupy Mong Kok area for many days. There were plenty of homeless people, marginal young people and mental patients hanging around. Their idiosyncratic behaviors were truly astonishing. There is a supply station across the Bank Centre at which a vicious-looking, foul-mouthed woman took charge. When someone takes more supplies than necessary, she was would curse out: "Everybody is allowed only one bottle of water. If you take more than one bottle, I'll fucking beat you up." She not only likes to scold people, but she is also emotionally unstable especially in the presence of persons with different opinions.

Yan How Yee kissing a duckie in front of her personal tent on top of the Mong Kok MTR Nelson Street entrance

(Oriental Daily with video)October 24, 2014.

Last night around 7pm, a woman wearing a yellow/green jacket jumped around like a possessed zombie with a yellow sticker saying "I want genuine universal suffrage" hanging down in front of her head. This angered some Occupy Mong Kok members because they felt that she disrespected the movement.

(The Sun) October 26, 2014.

Yesterday morning at 8am, there was a quarrel between a Food and Hygiene Department contractor and an old woman scavenging for cardboard paper. 25-year-old Yan How Yee in yellow joined the quarrel together with a 38-year-old woman named Lau in white. The woman in yellow and the woman in white went from verbal jousting into physical tussling onto the roadway. The woman in white yelled: "Aren't you a volunteer? Do the volunteers transcend all authorities? Are the volunteers allowed to beat people up?" The woman in yellow was more agile and jumped onto the roof of the MTR station entrance and cursed back. The police arrested both women for fighting.  Both women claimed to be injured.

(Oriental Daily with video) October 30, 2014.

Last night a middle-aged man came down to the Occupy Mong Kok area to look for his daughter. There he found his daughter and the two had a loud quarrel in the streets, including pushing and shoving. Afterwards, the daughter Yan How Yee told the press that she was touched by the television news report about the police using tear gas to disperse demonstrators and therefore she volunteered to work in Occupy Mong Kok.

25-year-old Yan How Yee is a single parent with a one-year-old son. Since September 30, she has left her son in the care of her parents and elder brother and gone to live in the Occupy Mong Kok tent city, going home to visit her son for only two hours a day. Yan How Yee said that she understands that her parents are worried about her personal safety. She is sorry for neglecting to care for her son.

(Oriental Daily) October 31, 2014.

25-year-old single mother Yan How Yee is a part-time restaurant waitress. Since last September 30, she has abandoned her family and her work to become an Occupier. She quarrels with anti-Occupy people almost every day, she has been taken down to the police station and she has been quite noticeable. Her father has come down to Mong Kok numerous times to persuade to return home, but she refused. At 7pm on the day before yesterday, her father came again and argued in the street until the daughter fled. The father left angrily.

Daughter and father quarrel in the street

Yan How Yee reflected: "I must first say 'Sorry' to my father, my mother and my elder brother. I stay here all night and I neglect to care for my son. I cause my family members to worry about me. They are worried that I could be arrested. If something happens to me, then there is no one to look after my son. I did not give birth to my son so that he can become an orphan. I fully understand why my family is upset at me." She said that she has found her existential value and meaning in the Occupy Mong Kok area.

(Tai Kung Pao) December 31, 2015.

According to the father of Yan How Yee, when Mong Kok got occupied, she was "very scared" and refused to step outside her home. After she saw the call to action on the Internet, she completely changed. For the past twenty plus days of Occupy Mong Kok, "She didn't care for her son. She didn't care for anything. I don't know what happened."

Many Internet users criticize her failings as a mother. "It has gotten to the point where Occupy Central is even closer to her than her son or parents." "Occupy Central is an evil cult." "This single parent seemed to have been recruited into an evil cult ... she abandoned her son and family."

(Oriental Daily) November 11, 2015.

Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok") How Yee brought her 20-month-old son to keep watch with her at the supply station.

(Oriental Daily) November 13, 2015.

At around 11am, Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee used a handcart to remove wool blankets and other materiels from the Nelson Street materiel station to the top of the MTR subway station entrance. Other Occupy Mong Kok volunteers immediately pointed out that the materiels are still needed by people, but Yan argued that the materiels may be spoiled or destroyed during the upcoming clearance. She said excitedly: "I am not taking it for myself!" The police had to come in to mediate.

(Oriental Daily with video) November 15, 2015.

A dozen or so anti-Occupy people held a Peace Forum at 3pm in the Occupy Mong Kok area. Shortly afterwards, they began a shouting match with the pro-Occupy people who were about 5 meters away. There were about 50 people on each side. The Occupy people used a megaphone to yell obscene language. The anti-Occupy people played mainland music on the mobile phone. So the Occupy people played Beyond's Vast Skies and Boundless Sea on the mobile phone amplified by the megaphone. Finally, Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee grabbed the microphone and sang along. So this forum somehow turned into a musical concert. The police watched from afar.

(Oriental Daily with bleeped video) November 20, 2015.

At around 11am, a female mainland tourist walked by a scaffold on Nathan Road near Shan Tung Street, and quarreled with construction workers over the obstruction of the pedestrian path. Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee heard the commotion and rushed over to "assist" the construction workers. She cursed out the mainlander and used a siren against her. The female mainlander fled inside a jewelry store. Police came over to mediate.

Video: Phoenix TV

(Oriental Daily with video) November 21, 2015.

Yesterday Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee declared that she was donating about 200 corkscrews used to open red wine and beer bottles. She tossed the corkscrews on the ground and invited the pedestrians and other Occupy Mong Kong people to take them. When asked for the reason, Yan said: "It is the Red Wine Festival time! Of course, we have to open up red wine to celebrate!" The police came and asked questions, but took no further action.

(Oriental Daily with video) November 22, 2015.

The distribution of the corkscrews has caught internal turmoil within the Occupy Mong Kok community. Yesterday, some individuals took advantage of the absence of Yan How Yee and removed more than 300 corkscrews, place them in a black plastic bag and discarded the bag on the street. For safety reasons, the police have removed the bag and its contents. They asked the owner of the corkscrews to contact them.

(Oriental Daily with video) November 21, 2015.

At around noon, Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee returned to her materiel station outside Bank Centre and found it ransacked, with one sofa and other materials missing. There were cigarette butts and empty beer cans on the ground. The police were summoned. According to Yan How Yee, she was booed yesterday by a group of Occupy Mong Kok persons after she handed out wine-bottle corkscrews and so she went home to rest. When she returned, this was what she found. She also said that there were eyewitnesses to the process. She asked the police to send in the Organized Crime and Triad Bureau to investigate.

Yan How Yee told the reporters that she felt being targeted and therefore she has decided to withdraw from the Occupy Mong Kok movement effective immediately.

(Oriental Daily) November 22, 2015.

There was a primary school boy who ran away from home. At first, he slept under the Hung Hom overpass. Then he drifted over to Mong Kok because he can find food and shelter there. Thus, he became a member of Occupy Mong Kok. During this period, he was taken by a man to stay over in an apartment. When the anxious family members located him in the Occupy Mong Kok area, they learned that he was touched in the genitals twice. The police arrested a suspect who works for a gay volunteer group.

This case of sexual molestation explains at least two issues. Firstly, the Occupy areas have provided perfect food-and-shelter for homeless people. For those who want to skip school, work or family, this is paradise with magnetic attractions. Secondly, the Occupy area is perfect for those with ulterior motives, such as for predators, drug abusers, thieves, voyeurs, rapists, pedophiles, etc.

Honestly, the Occupy Central Trio's Benny Tai and Chan Kin-man have retreated from the frontline because they want to keep their job. The only people who can still hold on are definitely those who don't have to work for a living. These include Scholarism/Federation of Students heroes who receive government subsidies and who apparently don't have to show up for classes, do homework or take exams; opposition politicians who get paid $90,000 a month by the government but spend their time causing trouble; a lifeguard who fakes a work-related injury and goes on paid medical leave in order to work full-time as Jimmy Lai's personal bodyguard; the Goddess of Gambling Tsui Tsui who claimed that her entire personal assets were stolen from her Occupy tent; the white-haired old lady who gets paid to act as a human shield; ... There are all manners of modern knaves and weirdoes.

Among these people, the well-known Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee deserves a special mention. She is a single mother with an infant son and elderly parents. Called by the spirit of genuine universal suffrage, she abandoned her son and her family to become the new Goddess of Democracy. But it is incomprehensible how such an individual who gave herself to the streets for the sake of Hong Kong's future could be targeted by other Occupy Mong Kok denizens and forced to withdraw. This is a huge loss for the Occupy Movement as well as the grand project of Hong Kong democracy.

(Oriental Daily) December 28, 2015.

Several dozen Shopping Revolutionaries gathered as usual after 10pm last night outside the Hollywood Plaza on Sai Yeung Choi Street South (Mong Kok). A number of Blue Ribbons were gathered there too. A large number of police officers were present to prevent the two groups from charging onto the roadway and to maintain order.

Yan ("Occupy Mong Kok woman") How Yee claimed to feel ill and sat down on the sidewalk, then charged onto the roadway and refused to leave. After several minutes, Yan How Yee claimed to be ill and the police called an ambulance to take her to the hospital.

Other flashes-in-the pan with no staying power:

- Video of a man talking with the voices inside his head in Occupy Mong Kok.

- Students doing the Zombie Jump

- Occupy Mong Kok fighting for genuine universal suffrage on Nathan Road in Occupy Mong Kok zone:

(Oriental Daily) September 16, 2015.

September 28 will be the anniversary of Occupy Central. So far, there is no indication of any commemorative activity within the pan-democratic camp, nor any sign of re-Occupy. So far, only Scholarism and the Federation of Students appear to be holding a large symposium which the pan-democratic legislators and other civil groups are not participating. Could it be that the approaching District Council elections is causing the pan-democrats to separate themselves from Occupy Central and other post-Umbrella groups? And those who are still facing charges of illegal activities during Occupy Central now have to be on their best behavior?

The Civil Human Rights Front met with Scholarism/Federation of Students on September 15. They said that many civil groups are interested in holding commemorative events which the Civil Human Rights Front will plan and publicize. However, there is no consensus yet on the specific activities. Scholarism/Federation of Students want to hold a series of civil lectures by university professors mainly on the class boycotts, civil society, etc. However, they don't have any concrete plans on the day of September 28th.

(HKG Pao) September 19, 2015. (Wen Wei Po) September 18, 2015.

On September 12 (Saturday) at the regular Shopping Revolution on Sai Yeung Choi Street South (Mong Kok), Tam Tak-chi (People Power) got on a ladder and used a megaphone to announce to the people that he wants to start the action of "Do not forget our original intentions, return to Admiralty" on September 28th. At 5:58pm this coming September 28, I call for 1,000 persons to walk out onto Gloucester Road (Admiralty) and sit down for 87 minutes." The 87 minutes is in reference to the 87 tear gas canisters fired by the Hong Kong Police last year on September 28th.

Tam Tak-chi also pointed out that his statement may be guilty of "incitement of unlawful assembly." Tam promised to the supporters: "If you only sit down on the ground, the police can't beat you up because they don't have cause. They can only carry you off one at a time."

On the Facebook of Tam Tak-chi (People Power), he has a promotional poster: "People Power, resist, never give up! Please join our actions: 9.28 return to Admiralty; 10.1 fireworks resistance!"

For most of the political parties interested in the District Council elections, Occupy Central is a loser of a cause. Therefore they couldn't stay far away enough from any September 28 commemorative activity. People Power has only one incumbent district councilor. In each district, one and only one councilor is elected based upon the highest number of votes. Therefore People Power does not have any realistic chance of winner any district council seats. Tam Tak-chi is only interested in getting name recognition for himself in preparation for next year's Legislative Council which is based upon proportionate representation (for example, the top six vote-getters in Kowloon West will get Legco seats) so that it is possible to get in with less than 10% of the votes.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAoPL-8gd1A September 18 Tam Tak-chi on Sai Yeung Choi Street South (Mong Kok)

(Oriental Daily) September 20, 2015.

At around 10am, the police received a report about a banner on the pedestrian overpass from Harcourt Road to Government Headquarters. They got there and found a 15 meters by 2 meters yellow banner with the words "I want genuine universal suffrage" with many water bottles dangling from the bottom. The police determined that the banner posed an immediate danger to car drivers (i.e. the banner or the bottles may fall down onto passing vehicles). Therefore, the banner was removed.

Internet comments:

- The vertical banner was horizontally place, so that you have to turn your head 90 degrees to read the words. This means that this was leftover originally intended to be hung from a tall spot (e.g. Lion Rock), but now someone is emptying the warehouse after it sat there unused for months.
- Well, its use consists of hanging there for a couple of hours and then removed, kept for a while and destroyed ultimately when no one shows up to claim (=admit to an illegal act).

- In Cantonese, "to speak sideways" means "to have your say carry the day by force against all reasoning." That's about right here.
- In Cantonese, "to sleep sideways" means "to be dead." That's about right here too, because "genuine universal suffrage" is dead.

- The banner indeed commemorates Occupy Central. It reminds us that the entire Occupy Central was completely fruitless with nothing whatsoever accomplished. Of course, they say that there had been a civil awakening among young people. That is just selfish and narcissistic, just like hanging these banners. They serve no purpose other than make those involved feel good about themselves.

- Thanks to these clowns, we didn't get any universal suffrage, genuine or otherwise. Instead we got exactly the same 1,200-person election committee just as before for the foreseeable future.

- Hey, I have a better banner for them: "Dead chicken trying to kick off the pot lid." The image is that of a cooked chicken still trying to kick off the pot lid and hope to live. This saying is used to refer to people who are still in denial even when the game is over.

(Ming Pao) September 27, 2015.

The Civil Human Rights Front made clear at its press conference today that there is no plan to stay around after the commemorative activities. They said that they will have several dozen marshals on duty to maintain order. On September 28, the Blue Ribbons will be in Tamar Park while the Yellow Ribbons will be at the Legislative Council and Lennon Wall.

When the Civil Human Rights Front held their meeting, they did not discuss the possibility that someone might dash onto the road. Even if People Power's Tam Tak-chi called for such action, the response seems cool. This means that the likelihood is low. But if someone should attempt that, the Civil Human Rights Front won't be able to stop them. However, they can disown the action and dissociate themselves from the perpetrators.

An Umbrella Soldier (someone from the Umbrella Movement planning to run in the elections) told us: "There is a high risk of conflict, because the crowd is its largest size." If there should be clashes, people will be reminded of their fear of the Occupy Central and thus impact their election chances.

In addition, Cyd Ho said that the pan-democrats will not take charge of the 9.28 activities, because their role in last year's Occupy Movement was merely supplementary. Some civil groups are critical of the pan-democrats for this attitude. But one pan-democrat sighed and wished that the civil groups would sympathize with the fact that the all-important district elections are coming up, and there should be a division of labor whereby the civil groups organized the activities while the pan-democrats concentrate on the district elections. This pan-democrat says that all the pan-democratic legislators will be present on September 28.

Internet comments:

- Why is Occupy Central a loser of a cause in winner-take-all elections? Tam Tak-chi posed this question on his Facebook:

Remember the four demands of the students?

(1) Civil nomination of the Chief Executive/elimination of the functional constituencies in the Legislative Council
(2) Rescinding the August 31st resolution of the National People's Congress Standing Committee
(3) Resignation of Chief Executive CY Leung, and the political reform trio of Carrie Lam, Rimsky Yuen and Raymond Tam
(4) Open Civic Plaza to the public

I won't blame you if you should think: "What is the fucking use? None of these demands were realized." But I point out that would be because you are callous and indifferent in shoving your own responsibility lightly onto others. Such is the tragedy of our era.

Well, everybody knows that the four demands got nowhere. That is a fact. The first question is: Why? There are many possible answers. First and foremost, the Occupy Central principals were nincompoops. Second choice is the method which inflicts hurt on common folks without affecting the governments. In any case, what people want is a realistic assessment of what went wrong, what to avoid and what alternatives can be used in the future. People do not want the same nincompoops to repeat the same method and accomplish nothing again while accumulating even more ill will. The pan-democrats don't want to be identified as the nincompoops in charge of a failed method. Here, Tam Tak-chi says that he will go where no one else dares to go by repeating the same miserable failure.

- At least Tam Tak-chi has tacitly acknowledged that a long-term Occupy is no longer possible today. He can Occupy for 87 minutes, but not for 87 days. Long-term Occupy is only good at building public resentment while accomplishing nothing. Short-term (=87 minutes) Occupy can generate good media coverage for an aspiring radical politician such as Tam Tak-chi while accomplishing nothing else.
- Incitement of and participation in unlawful assembly may lead to a jail term of 3 months or more, which excludes the miscreant from running for Legislative Council. Therefore, Tam Tak-chi will word his incitement speeches carefully and watch from the sidewalk while the fools who listened to him get arrested.

- Here is an invitation to the 300th day banquet for the Shopping Revolution, meeting as usual at 8pm, September 19, 2015 outside Broadway Cinema, Sai Yeung Choi Street South, Mong Kok. The Shopping Revolution is a very-short-term Occupy, inheriting the characteristic of building public resentment and accomplishing nothing.

The event promoters called it off without much ado "because there were too many police." At the time, they were harassing the Chiu Luen Minibuses.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqg4zWbUBH8

- A number of Blue Ribbon groups have filed an application for a no-objection from the police to march on September 28 from Chater Garden to Government Headquarters from 2:30pm to 6:00pm. They said: "If we don't take up this space for this time period, the Yellow Ribbons may Occupy it again and then September 28 becomes the totem pole for continual chaos in Hong Kong; so let us block their evil plot!"

(EJInsight) When a young man confronted Joshua Wong on an MTR train. September 16, 2015.

If he was just aiming for some fresh attention from the online community, Lau Chun-hin has succeeded in his mission, even though he wouldnt be totally happy about the viewer response. The 19-year-old online video enthusiast, who uses the nick name Lau Ma-che, uploaded a new clip on his Facebook page Tuesday, showing a chance encounter with student activist Joshua Wong on an MTR train.

In the video which has gone viral, Lau confronts Wong in a packed rail compartment and asks him how feels about his actions during last years Occupy Movement. Does he not regret that peoples daily lives were affected due to the street blockades, the student activist is asked, among other questions. When Wong doesnt respond, Lau says he would take it as a signal that Wong is accepting the blame.

Another topic raised was the allegation that Wongs actions were influenced by some foreign forces. Wong remains silent but tells Lau to put away his mobile phone and stop filming. Lau doesnt heed the request, opting to continue the video interrogation.

Now some fellow passengers get annoyed and tell Lau to stop his activities. You are disturbing me. Can you keep quiet? one man says, while another complains that Wong is causing obstruction on the train.

Lau later posted the video online, saying he felt threatened by some passengers. He claimed that he came across Wong by accident on the train and seized the chance to ask him some questions about the Occupy protests.

Wong later posted his own message online, saying that he chose not to respond to the questioner on the train as he believed it was the best thing to do under the circumstance. If had made any comments, it would have only excited Lau further, Wong wrote, suggesting that Lau was merely seeking some attention.

Meanwhile, several netizens have slammed Lau for his conduct, describing his actions as stupid among other things, Apple Daily reported.

According to some details that emerged on Lau, he was asked to join a reform center in 2013 after he admitted making an online video in which threatened a probation officer. It is also said that he had been sent to a psychiatric hospital five times. Lau does not belong to any anti-Occupy groups. In fact, he posted last year a picture of himself holding a yellow umbrella at an Occupy site. He said in a previous interview that he intends to create a buzz on the internet in order to draw in more viewers for his videos.

(SCMP) Moment YouTuber confronts Hong Kong Occupy Central leader Joshua Wong on packed MTR train (and angry passengers tell him to stop). September 16, 2015.

A video showing a teenage YouTuber confronting Scholarism leader Joshua Wong Chi-fung in a busy MTR train compartment and then be greeted by curses and swears from other passengers has gone viral. The five-minute clip was filmed by 19-year-old Lau Chun-hin, known online where his videos typically attract several thousand views by his nickname Lau Ma Che.

The film begins with Lau slipping through a crowd of passengers in a packed MTR compartment to reach Wong after apparently spotting him by chance. Lau demands the student leader explain how he feels about last years Occupy Central protests, saying Wong did not respect Hongkongers.

When Wong asks Lau to stop filming, saying he was causing a disturbance to other passengers, Lau continues: Oh, now you are afraid of obstructing others. So when you occupied Mong Kok and Central at that time you were not obstructing others? If you think you were disturbing others at that time, why you did things to hurt others? Did you receive any advantage? Lau questions the 18-year-old student activist.

Wong keeps nodding his head but remains silent. Lau then says: I have wanted to speak for Hongkongers for a long time. I dont care how high your moral values are. I feel that when you hurt others, affect others, then you are wrong.

An angry male passenger joins the conversation at this point, telling Lau: So how about you now? You are now filming us. Which station do you want to get off? You are disturbing me. Can you be quiet? the man says. Another male passenger complains that Lau is obstructing him: You take all the space here. What are you doing here? All of us have to give way to you. As the first man gets off the train, a third man approaches to confront Lau with swear words. Are you taking a picture of me? If my photo is put onto the internet I will hunt you down, he warns.

Laus film has been viewed almost 160,000 times on YouTube since being uploaded yesterday. While it has earned fewer than 1,000 likes, more than 5,000 users have given him the thumbs down.

Some YouTube users described Laus video as a stupid, pointless work in which he only aimed to seek attention. They also said Lau had breached MTR by-laws by causing a nuisance to other passengers. Such a moron. The questions asked are all stupid, said user Cheuk yinh Yeung. Stupid Lau Ma Che. I used to support you ... But this time you are just too stupid, another called lun xo said.

Lau was ordered by a court to attend a reform centre in 2013 after he admitted making an online video in which he threatened a probation officer. This took place while he was serving a probation term for making another video in which he intimidated a girl. Lau told the court at the time he wanted to develop a career in the entertainment industry.

(YouTube) Lau Ma-che versus Joshua Wong + Foul-mouthed uncles. The whole world is shocked!

0:10 (Male voice)  Wong Chi-fung. Where is Wong Chi-fung?
0:25 (Lau) Mr. Wong Chi-fung, can you tell us about how you feel about Occupy Central? Mr. Wong Chi-fung, I am ...
0:29 (Wong) Can you put your phone down?
0:32 (Lau) I want to interview you about how you feel about Occupy Central?
0:36 (Male voice) Hey, there are senior citizens here. Do you know? Can  you shut your phone off?
0:39 (Lau) Because I feel that you really don't respect the people of Hong Kong. That is, if you don't respect people, there is no possibility to expect them to respect you back. I think that your actions during Occupy Central affected the livelihoods of the people of Hong Kong. The lives of old ladies. They can't get any peace and quiet at night. Here I want to see if you have any explanations.
1:01 (Wong) I don't want to say anything in the MTR car. There are other citizens around ... everybody is ...
1:03 (Lau) So now you are worried about interfering with other citizens. But back then when you occupied Mong Kong by force, you occupied Central by force, that was not interfering with citizens? That is, a lot of commutation ... you affected other people in going to school, going to work ... they were affected a great deal. Why do you think that people are affected at this moment? If this moment is affecting people, why back then did you so many things that hurt others? Did you get any benefits? Can you tell us? You won't respond? A silent admission? Yes, that was a silent admission. I have always wanted to ask you. Today I came across you here. I want to ask you why you did those things. I don't care how noble your ideas were, or what your demands on Hong Kong are. I feel that you hurt people, you affected people and that is wrong.
1:56 (Male voice from unseen speaker) What about you now? You are affecting us. Do you know? Where do you want to get off? Where do you want to get off?
2:00 (Lau) Get off?
2:00 (Male voice) Which stop? You are affecting me. Do you know?
2:05 (Lau) Millions of people in Hong Kong were affected.
2:06 (Male voice) Why don't you get off the train and talk? Where are you getting off?
2:10 (Lau) We get off, we get off.
2:12 (Male voice) When are you getting off?
2:13 (Lau) Getting off right now.
2:21 (Male voice) When you take your photos, you better not take a photo of me.
2:21 (Lau) I won't take your photo.
2:22 (Male voice) You are acting as if you are high and noble, buddy.
2:27 (Lau) I am not pretending to be high and noble.
2:24 (Male voice) You are taking photos.
2:25 (Lau) Is that not allowed?
2:27 (Male voice) Yes, that is not allowed. What do you want to do? What do you want to do?
2:34 (Lau) Call the police.
2:35 (Male voice) Call the police! That's even better. Development zone. You are affecting me. Do you know? You are affecting me. Can you shut up, alright? If you want to express yourself, get off the car and express yourself. Do you know? You are affecting people.
2:45 (Lau) Yes, yes.
2:49 (Male voice) Kid, please make way. I am getting off.
2:58 (Male voice) The two of you should get off the train and discuss at your leisure. You should take him with you and discuss at your leisure.
3:00 (Lau) He won't get off with me.
3:01 (Male voice) You get off. He'll get off together with you. You can call the police. You can do whatever you want. Do you know? You say that people were affected. You are affecting us. Do you know? Make way. We are getting off.
3:12 (Lau) We are getting off.
3:13 (Male voice) Move over a bit.
3:14 (Lau) There is no need to be so rough.
3:16 (Male voice) Not being rough. Just deliberately talking louder.
3:16 (Lau) Is that so?
3:18 (Male voice) Yes.
3:19 (Lau) Speaking loudly is rude, right?
3:21 (Male voice) Whatever you say.
3:24 (Male voice) I think that you are somewhat cockeyed. Is that right?
3:25 (Lau) Yes. I am cockeyed.
3:27 (Male voice) I can see that.
3:28 (Male voice) Feeble-minded.
3:29 (Male voice) No, don't say that about people. You are making something out of nothing.
3:32 (Male voice) You have read a lot of books.
3:34 (Male voice) But the brain has gone to rot.
3:37 (Lau) Hong Kong has a lot of such people who are making things so bad in Hong Kong.
3:40 (Male voice) You film at your leisure, fool! (exits)
3:46 (Man in black t-shirt approaching while pointing his finger) You took my photo!
3:47 (Lau) When did I take a photo of you? I didn't take a photo of you. What do you want?
3:48 (Man in black t-shirt ) Huh!
3:49 (Lau) I didn't film you. You call the police.
3:52 (Man in black t-shirt ) Call what the police for what? Show me your camera.
3:53 (Lau) You call the police.
3:52 (Man in black t-shirt ) You took a photo of me.
3:54 (Lau) I'll call the police.
3:56 (Man in black t-shirt ) You call the police immediately.
3:58 (Lau) What do you want?  You tell me.
3:59 (Man in black t-shirt ) I ask you if you took a photo of me.
4:01 (Lau) I didn't take a photo of you. You are not qualified to appear on my video.
4:03 (Man in black t-shirt ) I fuck your mother!
4:06 (Lau) Please come over. Will the citizens help by calling the police? You are threatening me.
4:17 (Man in black t-shirt ) What is your family name?
4:18 (Lau) My family name is Lau.
4:19 (Man in black t-shirt) Fuck your mother! This is fucking giving your ancestors a bad name!
4:22 (Lau) How is this affecting my ancestors? You are giving all the Chinese people a bad name.
4:28 (Man in black t-shirt) Fucking what Chinese?
4:29 (Lau) You are not Chinese?
4:32 (Man in black t-shirt) I ask you, Fucking what Chinese?
4:33 (Lau) Are you Chinese? That's all you have to say.
4:34 (Lau) I am calling the police now.
4:36 (Man in black t-shirt) Please call the police.
4:37 (Lau) Many people have taken videos. You are threatening me.
4:39 (Man in black-t-shirt) Are you stupid? Don't fucking go outside then. Beat you up?
4:45 (Lau) I'm so fucking scared. (smiles)
4:50 (Lau) You come up nearer and I'll call the police.
4:54 (Man in black t-shirt) You are fucking crazy.
4:55 (Lau) Yes, I'm fucking crazy. You're most normal.

Internet comments:

- This video has caught me in a dilemma. If I share it, it would be giving publicity to this dickhead. If I don't share it, it would be tolerating and abetting this bastard. This dickhead/bastard is such a fucking nuisance.

- This was an ambush setup. Previously, Lau Ma-che had posted onto YouTube his anti-Yellow Ribbon sentiments. In the Joshua Wong encounter, Wong was already on the train when Lau entered with the camera running. He had to know that Wong would be in that particular subway car at that moment. So someone was following Wong and telling him how to make the intercept.

Of course, this was just the sort of thing that Joshua Wong would do to ambush government officials (see, for example, #215), using information most likely provided by the Apple Daily news team.

- Public figures can be harassed anywhere in Hong Kong, because of FREEDOM DEMOCRACY HUMAN RIGHTS UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE RULE OF LAW. For more examples, see #21. As Voltaire said, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to harass people in public places." Joshua Wong has done any number of times before already. He could have given Lau Ma Che some tips about how to do this better (e.g. not be distracted by the uncles).

- In this ambush, the question was "I think that your actions during Occupy Central affected the livelihoods of the people of Hong Kong. The lives of old ladies. They can't get any peace and quiet at night. Here I want to see if you have any explanations."  This is a question that many people may want to ask, but only because they thought that the answer should be that it was wrong.

By now, it should be clear that Joshua Wong already has his own answer down pat. "In fighting for universal suffrage, it is unfortunate that some people had to suffer some minor inconveniences. However, such sacrifices are necessary because Hong Kong will be a lot better off in the long run. It is true that we accomplished zero results with respect to constitutional reform. But the sacrifices were worthwhile, because the Umbrella Revolution has proven to the Moment of Enlightenment for the young people of Hong Kong."

- A harder question for Joshua Wong would be: "Why did you tell the students to assault Government Headquarters on December 1 2014, while you sat in the Legco Building watching television and eating instant noodles?"

- The newspapers do not convey the depths to which Lau Ma-che (=The Horse Carriage) has plunged into. Ma-che is a famous YouTube person who has run through numerous user names because he keeps getting banned for various policy violations. Here are some favorites:

In 2012, he uploaded a video of himself wielding a chopper while naked. He claimed to have thrust the chopper up his anus, although the video does not show this detail.

Here is a video of him using a shoe to clobber himself in the head:

Here is a video of him issuing a threat to another Internet user named Shek Chi-heng:

- Post-race YouTube report from Lau Che Ma. At 1:50, Lau said: "I apologize to all those people who were on the MTR subway that day as well as all those who watched the video. I want to say sorry, because it is very disrespectful to film people in that manner. It was affecting people. But why did I apply this method to Joshua Wong? I want to apply the Joshua Wong-method to the shit-eating dog Joshua Wong. He makes mistakes but he would never admit them. Fuck your mother! I am imitating you now! You say that you don't want to affect people. You eat shit! How many Hong Kong people did you affect back then? Today you say that you are worried about affecting old ladies on the subway? Nobody believes what you say ... "

- Post-race Facebook post from Joshua Wong: "With respect to people like these, I think that it is better to keep your cool. The greater your response, the more he will harass you, because such people are attention-seeking. Here I wonder whether any Blue Ribbon websites (such as SpeakoutHK or NewsHK) will 'report' this story (which I think has no news value) and then spin along the line of "Joshua Wong is like a rat scurrying across the street chased by everybody, ha ha!"? It is quite pathetic if the pro-establishment media could stoop so low as to get a mental patient Lau Ma Che to attack a student with dissident views."

- When the guy is standing in front of you, you cower speechlessly. When you get home, you use Facebook to call the guy mentally disturbed. Isn't that the definition of a coward?

- I am curious about the man in the black Harley-Davidson t-shirt. He looks more like a bodyguard for Joshua Wong. Who is paying him to do that? Let's see if he is present the next time that Joshua Wong makes a public appearance.

- The follow-up video of the Lau Ma Che video has the man in the black t-shirt fleeing from Lau and his cameraperson. With a bodyguard like this, who needs assassins?

- So many commentators deplored Lau Ma Che for disturbing people on the MTR train. Really? Where were you when when the Yellow Ribbon people with V-masks were yelling on the MTR train because they want their genuine universal suffrage?

Or how about Scholarism disturbing the playing of the National Anthem last October 1st?
- The essence of Lau Ma Che's many points is about the double standards maintained by Joshua Wong. In the United States of Amerika, they have iokiyar. In Hong Kong, we've got iokirayr (it's okay if you're Yellow Ribbon).

(EJInsight) CityU leaps in latest QS world university rankings. September 15, 2015.

Four Hong Kong universities are among the worlds top 60 institutes of higher learning, according to the latest survey by the British education company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). The City University of Hong Kong (CityU) made a huge leap, jumping to the 51st place from 57th a year ago. The University of Science and Technology ranks 28th this year, the highest in the territory, while the Chinese University of Hong Kong is No. 51 on the list. The University of Hong Kong (HKU) now ranks 30th this year, down from 28th place last year.

According to QS, Hong Kong is at the heart of Asia and is a doorstep away from mainland China. English is widely used in the citys highly internationalized universities, which is one of the reasons why a number of local universities have made to the list, Ming Pao Daily quoted the QS report as saying.

When asked whether HKUs ranking will be affected by the recent turmoil over academic freedom in the university, QS said the incident did not have much effect on the ranking this year. However, instability in the internal or political environment of a university may affect its ranking in the long term. For example, if a number of significant scholars are forced to leave their posts for political reasons, that would certainly affect the ranking, QS said. Earlier this month Times Higher Education published an article entitled Unsafe harbour? Academic freedom in Hong Kong, which said Beijing mouthpieces in the territory have been attacking prominent pro-democracy scholars, who are now paying the price for politically incorrect talk. For example, former CityU professor Joseph Cheng Yu-shek was being called a traitor for supporting last years Occupy protests. Johannes Chan Man-mun, former dean at the HKU faculty of law, was being blamed for the poor quality of research in his department. Benny Tai Yiu-ting, one of the three convenors of the Occupy Central movement, is an associate professor in the faculty.

(SCMP) Top of the class! Hong Kong University of Science and Technology rated city's number one in latest world rankings. September 15, 2015.

The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology has ranked top among the citys tertiary institutions, according to the latest QS World University Rankings. HKUST, which jumped from 40th last year to 28th this year, beat the University of Hong Kong, at 30th this time, to become the top institution in the city. They were the only two local universities that made the top 50.

The city is on a par with its regional rivals Singapore, Japan and South Korea which also have two top-50 institutions.

The QS World University Rankings, which have been setting league tables for universities worldwide since 2005, assess institutions through six criteria: academic reputation, employer reputation, student-to-faculty ratio, citations per faculty, international student ratio and international faculty ratio.

Chinese University, which was 46th last year, was pushed out of the top 50 this time, coming in at 51st. However, it shares a top-50 slot with HKU for academic reputation.

QS head of research Ben Sowter said the drop for the University of Hong Kong and Chinese University was due to a change in the way that citations per faculty were evaluated. There used to be a historical bias towards life sciences and medicine. Since CUHK and HKU both have medical schools, their results are slightly weaker than they would have been under our previous approach, Sowter told the South China Morning Post. The strengths of other Hong Kong institutions in engineering, technology and social sciences has been more equitably recognised.

The adjustment was seen to give a fairer evaluation to universities with a strong profile in areas producing less research, such as the arts, humanities and social sciences. Both HKU and CUHK had gained ground for attracting academics from other places and remained within the top 0.25 per cent of world universities, he added. Sowter said that Hong Kong had a lot of strengths in tertiary education, including geographic location at the heart of Asia, a highly international environment with a history of publishing in English and a capability to operate effectively across disciplines.

HKUST said it was very pleased with the improved rankings, which it felt could always be improved. An HKU spokesperson said the latest rankings would serve as a general reference for the university, and different university ranking systems should be viewed with a degree of ambivalence as ranking criteria and methodologies may vary and be revised from time to time. Chinese University noted that various league tables used different evaluation criteria and parameters, and thus produced different rankings. It said it continued to strive for excellence in teaching and research.

Internet comments:

- HKUST got to the top because of its nickname: "The University of Stress and Tension." Even mainlander students were driven to commit suicide due to the stress and tension.

- Yet another Hong Kong University victory to justify the path chosen by Johannes Chan, Benny Tai, Alex Chow, Yvonne Leung, Billy Fung and the Undergrad magazine. Here is a new school logo for them: "Tomorrow's wastrels"!

- From the movie Infernal Affairs 2: "When you join the triad, you expect to pay for it eventually."

- We are glad to see that in the event of Hong Kong University sliding down the tube into oblivion, Hong Kong can count on the University of Science and Technology to hold its head up high.
- On the Internet forums, Hong Kong University has a nickname of Shek Tong Tsui University. Once upon a time, Hong Kong University was simply the one and only internationally recognized university of Hong Kong. No more now. It is the one and only internationally and locally recognized only in the Shek Tong Tsui town of Hong Kong Island.

- The QS spokesperson explained that the rankings have changed because the weight of the school of medicine was reduced relative to engineering, technology and social sciences. UST does not even have a school of medicine, so it got zero points from there but nevertheless came out ahead in the overall score.

- The interesting point of comparison is less about HKU (#28 to #30) vs UST (#40 to #28). Rather it is the two rivals in Singapore. The National Singapore University went from #22 to #12, while the Nanyang Technological University went from #39 to #13. It is said that the People's Action Party did well in the recent elections because it felt "a sense of crisis" and responded accordingly. When you focus on HKU vs UST, it means that you don't have any sense of crisis.
- Once upon a time, Hong Kong University was tops in Asia. Today, even Tsinghua University is ahead at #25.
- Ever since the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, HKU was doomed to fail because it was forced to accept these low-quality mainland students, including offering them generous scholarships. HKU can improve its standing instantaneously by refusing to accept any more mainland students or scholars, and thus maintain the self-determination/autonomy that will ensure academic freedom.
- Go back to the historical data for HKU:
Do you spot the trend? Next year, HKU will be #32 or worse.

- Hong Kong University was willing to sacrifice a temporary drop in global ranking. It was worth it, as the courageous teachers (such as Benny Tai and Johannes Chan), staff (such as Robert Chung) and students (such as Alex Chow, Yvonne Leung and Billy Fung) gave up their scholarship and studies to fight for genuine universal suffrage in Hong Kong. In the long run, Hong Kong University and all of Hong Kong will come out ahead because of all the good things that will come out as a result of universal suffrage.
- We have to thank the HKU folks for their valiant efforts. As a result today, Hong Kong now has genuine universal suffrage in the form of 1,200 election committee members nominating and voting for our next Chief Executive in 2017. This is the same fucking thing that we had before the HKU folks started on their great struggle.

- HKU may be counting on its School of Medicine to prop its overall standing up, but not if the politicos have their way. Recently Civic Party legislator Alan Leong has accused School of Medicine professor Lo Chung-mau of "stopping the world from turning." Lo Chung-mau had just successfully performed the world's first double liver transplant. But Alan Leong wants him gone. Leong said: "I am very angry. They are ossified, they have been left behind my times. At 60 or 70 years old, they take pride in being 'successful' and want to impose their ways onto young people. They lack empathy. They don't try to understand what young people think. They only know how to criticize the method of expression of the young people and punish them for not obeying the authorities. They want to cling onto their social positions and they won't yield the way for young people. Society can only continue to progress if a new generation can replace the old generation."
- Yep, that's about right. Let's force Lo Chung-mau into retirement and let Billy Fung do the next double liver transplant.

- (HKG Pao) September 15, 2015.

September 28th will mark the anniversary of Occupy Central. On September 29th, the Hong Kong University Council will be meeting to vote on the Pro Vice Chancellor matter. According to information, the radical political parties People Power, Civic Passion and others will show up in large numbers to join Scholarism and the Hong Kong Federation of Students.

Legislative councilor Ip Kin-yuen says that Johannes Chan must be appointed Pro Vice Chancellor became he has become a symbol of self-determination/autonomy at the university. That is to say, Hong Kong University must be allowed to make its own decisions free of outside interference. Therefore, several hundred masked outsiders in black (none of whom were or are Hong Kong University students, teachers, staff members or alumni) will show up on campus to defend that freedom and valiantly force the University Council to vote their way. Nothing is most absurd; things can only be more absurd.

- Hong Kong Federation of Students secretary-general Nathan ("Law37") Law just boasted to the press that the Federation of Students helped out in the siege of the Hong Kong University Council members. Well, the Hong Kong University Student Union is not a member of the Federation of Students and Law37 is a student at Lingnan University. This is proof of outside interference of the autonomy/self-determination of Hong Kong University.

- (SpeakoutHK) The tortoise has caught up. By Chris Wat Wing-yin. September 13, 2015.

In England, schools usually start in mid-September. My daughter is a new student and has to report in earlier. She got together with the international students to greet the new academic year. She listened to advice and did not stick to Hongkongers. On the first day, she made friends with a German, an African and a mainland Chinese.

My daughter said that the mainland Chinese student kept speaking to her in English. She thought it strange and said in putonghua: "Actually, you can use putonghua because I can understand it." The mainland Chinese student was surprised and so they started speaking in Chinese.

On the second and third day, she made more friends. The teachers deliberately mixed persons from different nations. During meals, they did not segregate by place of origin. Oddly enough, when mainland students encounter Hong Kong students whether to eat or ask for directions, they still speak in English.

"I don't understand what they are saying?" said the Hong Kong student.

"You can't understand ..." The mainland Chinese student said.

The faces are similar, their nationalities are similar, and they want mutual support and understanding in an unfamiliar place. Nevertheless they speak in a foreign language.

Even more tragically, Hongkongers think that they come from a cosmopolitan and often make fun of the backwards mainlanders as a hare-versus-tortoise race. But they don't even realize now that the tortoise has caught up and passed them. My daughter said that the mainland Chinese students basically speak better than the Hong Kong students. Their pronunciation is quite proper. By contrast, our English clearly has a Hong Kong accent. So our English is worse than theirs and we are no good in putonghua either. We are neither east nor west. After one week in English, my daughter's greatest reflection is: "Hongkongers are in big trouble."

(EJinsight) September 14, 2015.

Netizens are tearing into an outspoken pro-Beijing columnist for calling Hong Kong people ignorant, dismissing her as a superficial patriot. Theyre accusing media veteran Chris Wat of hypocrisy after a Sept. 11 op-ed in Sky Post in which she compared Hongkongers to the ignorant hare in the Aesop fable.

She said Hongkongers dont understand that Hong Kong and China are not rivals. Wat cited her daughters experiences in Britain as an example of how Hongkongers and mainlanders use English to communicate instead of a Chinese language or dialect. She said Hongkongers speak English with a distinctive Hong Kong accent and cant communicate well in Mandarin. On the other hand, mainlanders are fluent in both Mandarin and English, she said.

Barrister David Tang accused Wat of using the article to brag that her daughter studies in Britain. In a blog post, Tang said Wat should have sent her daughter to China if she was a true patriot. In short, Wat is simply another superficial patriot, he said.

Netizens weighed in, saying Wat should not take her daughters views or experiences and apply them to the rest of Hong Kong. Some said Wat has no business discussing English proficiency if she really cares that much about Mandarin.

Internet comments:

- As to whether Wat should generalize from her daughter's experiences to the rest of Hong Kong, the Return Home Card episode made it clear that even The Best And The Brightest of Hongkongers are lacking/lagging in English and/or general knowledge. It is just that there is no sense of crisis here.
- The English Proficiency Index (EPI) should have given a sense of crisis, but people seemed to have recollection of that this time.
- Even if there is no crisis here, shouldn't we always better ourselves? If we merely live off past glories, we can only slide backwards.

- This is not a fair comparison. On one hand, let us suppose that 70,000 Hongkongers are studying overseas. That would be 7,000,000 / 70,000 = 100 (one out of 100 or 1%). On the other hand, let us suppose that 700,000 mainlanders are studying overseas. That would be 1,400,000,000 / 700,000 = 2,000 (one out of 2,000 or 0.05%). So it is no surprise that the top 0.05% of mainland students are better than the top 1% of Hong Kong students. An equitable comparison is 1%-vs-1% or 0.05%-vs-0.05%.
- But 0.05% of the Hong Kong population is just 7,000,000 x 0.05 / 100 = 3,500. Those 3,500 would be small specks in a sea of 700,000. Size does matter.

- The difference is that young Hongkongers are circling the wagons and want to localize at a time when everybody else wants to globalize. Instead of using their natural advantages in schooling on two languages (Chinese and English) and three dialects (Cantonese, putonghua and English), they prefer Cantonese, they are poor in English and they don't want to hear any putonghua or read any simplified characters anywhere.

(Marxists.org) Mao Zedong. A Single Spark Can Start A Prairie Fire. January 5, 1930. [This was a letter written by comrade Mao Tse-Tung in criticism of certain pessimistic views then existing in the Chinese Communist Party.]

... The subjective forces of the revolution have indeed been greatly weakened since the defeat of the revolution in 1927. The remaining forces are very small and those comrades who judge by appearances alone naturally feel pessimistic. But if we judge by essentials, it is quite another story. Here we can apply the old Chinese saying, "A single spark can start a prairie fire." In other words, our forces, although small at present, will grow very rapidly. In the conditions prevailing in China, their growth is not only possible but indeed inevitable, as the May 30th Movement and the Great Revolution which followed have fully proved. When we look at a thing, we must examine its essence and treat its appearance merely as an usher at the threshold, and once we cross the threshold, we must grasp the essence of the thing; this is the only reliable and scientific method of analysis ...

Any single incident could be that spark.

(Hong Kong Free Press) Red minibus drivers occupy Mong Kok in 3-hour standoff with police. September 10, 2015.

Around 20 red minibus drivers blocked off a junction with outside Langham Place in Mong Kok with their vehicles on Wednesday evening after discontent arose over a traffic ticket, sparking a three-hour standoff with the police. One minibus driver has been arrested and released on bail.

The incident kicked off at around 9pm at the minibus terminal on Shanghai Street. A minibus driver, 62, returned to his vehicle to find a police officer issuing a traffic ticket for violating traffic regulations. The driver then hopped in the vehicle and drove into the bus terminus and was said to have crossed double white lines on the road while doing so.

A senior police officer was about to issue another traffic ticket for dangerous driving when the driver suddenly drove the vehicle forward. The officer said that his right hand was hit. A number of drivers then blocked off parts of Shanghai Street with their vehicles in protest. Three out of four traffic lanes were taken over by red minibuses. Eyewitnesses told Apple Daily that they saw police being physically violent.

During the confrontation, a minibus driver was heard to shout, Occupy Nathan Road! Due to the stand-off, vehicles were unable turn into Shanghai Street from Argyle Street, causing a long line of traffic that extended towards Mong Kok Road.

The police and minibus drivers were able to reach a consensus at around midnight. Drivers moved their vehicles off the roads and traffic gradually returned to normal. The 62-year-old driver was arrested for driving dangerously and released on bail. Both the driver and police officer were sent to hospital.

Minibus drivers representatives will reportedly head to a meeting at the Mong Kok Police Station on Thursday afternoon to discuss the incident.

The incident came amid a series of police crackdowns on red minibuses in the neighbourhood. Some drivers were said to have repeatedly violated traffic regulations.

(EJinsight) Mong Kok minibus drivers in tense standoff with police. September 10, 2015.

Dozens of red minibuses and more than 100 people blocked three lanes of a major road in Mong Kok Wednesday night in support of a minibus driver who claimed he was attacked by a policeman after being accused of dangerous driving. The driver was moving the vehicle to a bus stand after being issued a parking ticket when the officer stopped him.

The alleged attack happened during an altercation in which the policeman accused the driver of reckless driving, according to Apple Daily. The officer claimed the minibus clipped him and injured his right arm. When other drivers arrived, they were warned by the officer not to interfere with a police matter.

About 30 of them drove their vehicles to the scene in protest, blocking three lanes of Shanghai Street, as dozens of people began to stream in. A tense standoff ensued after police reinforcements arrived and closed the street, creating a massive traffic jam in Argyle Street and Mong Kok Road. The drivers were later persuaded to return to a minibus station.

Driver representatives and the police are meeting Thursday to discuss the incident

Ling Chi-kung of the Public Light Bus General Association said red minibuses often park outside the bus stop near Langham Place but their drivers have seldom received parking tickets. The drivers might have thought they were being targeted by the police, triggering the confrontation, Ling said. He said the police should issue warnings before handing out parking tickets.

(SCMP) Occupy Nathan Road!: Minibus drivers bring Hong Kong traffic to a halt after an alleged altercation over a motoring offence. September 10, 2015.

Traffic in Mong Kok ground to a halt on Wednesday night as dozens of public minibuses blocked a busy road in protest against police law enforcement.

The clash was triggered when a driver of a red-topped minibus was pulled over for crossing continuous double white lines shortly before 9pm, near the minibus terminal at Langham Place shopping mall on Shanghai Street.

Other drivers were called in by radio and about 20 minibuses were soon blocking all three lanes of the road. Queues of vehicles were backed up along Mong Kok Road and nearby roads, while bus passengers were seen getting off and walking away.

In the subsequent fracas, both sides claimed to have sustained injuries. An officers arm was hurt by a moving minibus during an argument, a police spokesman said. He called for assistance and was taken to Kwong Wah Hospital, Yau Ma Tei for treatment. The driver of the minibus, who was later arrested, also requested treatment and was taken to the hospital.

Another minibus driver, who was part of the impromptu sit-in, said an officer had beaten a driver after issuing a ticket. A driver was given a ticket. He grumbled a bit. Then I saw the officer chasing him, slapping his vehicle and opening the door [of the minibus] and hitting him. I saw it And [the officer] also gave him a ticket for dangerous driving, he said. Another driver said: [The officer] gave chase before hitting the driver. Other minibus drivers at the site shouted: Occupy Nathan Road!

At about 11.30pm, the drivers agreed to move their vehicles and talk to the police.

Police on Thursday confirmed that a 62-year-old minibus driver was arrested for dangerous driving. The driver, who said he required medical assistance after being arrested, has been released on bail. He is due to report back in late September.

(SCMP) Don't blame Hong Kong minibus drivers for traffic offences - blame Mong Kok terminal design, says protest leader. September 10, 2015.

Minibus drivers have blamed the poor design of the Mong Kok terminus for parking offences at the site after dozens of drivers blocked a road with their vehicles on Wednesday in a protest over a policeman issuing a ticket.

Officers told a drivers' group why the enforcement action was necessary in an hour-long meeting yesterday that a police source described as "calm". Minibus group representatives refused to comment after the meeting.

The chairman of the Public Light Bus General Association, Ling Chi-keung, said the terminus at Langham Place was too small and had only one access point for both incoming and outgoing vehicles. This often forced drivers to wait outside for vehicles going the other way to pass. He said police could exercise their powers not to issue tickets for such minor offences.

The Transport Department said last night that no one in the minibus sector expressed a view during a government consultation in 2004 on moving the terminus to its current site.

Mong Kok district councillor Chris Ip Ngo-tung said the only long-term solution was to build a larger terminus. One possible site is in nearby Sai Yee Street, which is occupied by government offices that are to be relocated.

Traffic ground to a halt on Wednesday night as dozens of drivers blocked a section of Shanghai Street to protest over a driver being issued a ticket.

The clash was triggered when a driver of a red-top minibus was pulled over for crossing continuous double white lines shortly before 9pm, near the minibus terminal. Drivers said a ticket was issued to one driver. A police officer was injured during an argument.

Police today confirmed that a 62-year-old minibus driver was arrested for dangerous driving last night. The driver, who said he required medical assistance after being arrested, has been released on bail. He is due to report back in late September.

Ling said he hoped police could exercise discretionary powers not to issue tickets for minor traffic offences at the terminal. Because there is no space inside, the minibuses have to be parked outside, or wait at a nearby street corner, Ling said. I hope the police can be more tolerant, and use more warnings and appeals instead of issuing tickets. He said a drivers daily income was around HK$400 to HK$500 and a HK$320 ticket would take away a large part of it.

The Transport Department said that no one in the minibus sector expressed a view during a government consultation in 2004 on moving the terminus to its current site. Mong Kok district councillor Chris Ip Ngo-tung said the only long-term solution was to build a larger terminus. One possible site is in nearby Sai Yee Street, which is occupied by government offices that are to be relocated.

(EJinsight) Minibus drivers vow to cooperate after Occupy protest. September 11, 2015.

Protesting drivers pledged to cooperate with traffic enforcers after occupying three lanes of a major road in Mong Kok in support of a colleague who claimed he was attacked by a policeman. Dozens of minibuses and more than 100 people blocked Shanghai Street opposite Langham Place on Wednesday night after the arrest of the minibus driver who was issued tickets for illegal parking and dangerous driving. The drivers said police officers have started issuing them traffic violation tickets for parking their vehicles along the street. The drivers said they had been using a portion of the street as parking space while awaiting passengers because the Mong Kok terminus was not adequate.

A minibus driver surnamed Wong, who was arrested during a standoff with the policeman, said traffic officers issued tickets without giving them any verbal warning first. He said minibus drivers normally leave if they see that there are already too many vehicles parked in the area which could cause traffic jams.

During a two-hour meeting on Thursday, representatives of the drivers agreed to cooperate with the police in traffic enforcement.

The police force said in a press release that they will continue to enforce traffic rules to ensure smooth traffic flow on Shanghai Street. However, police officers will exercise flexibility and discretion depending on traffic conditions, manpower deployment and whether a location is a traffic black spot, the statement said.

Wong said the conflict was triggered by an incident on Wednesday, when a police officer hit him in the chest and refused to let him go. He said he is considering filing a complaint against the officer in question.

A driver surnamed Poon said the police raided their territory three days in a row instead of just asking them to leave the area, which was the previous practice. Another driver, surnamed Liu, captured the incident involving Wong and the police officer and uploaded the clip online. He said the officer in question was rude and arrogant and even threatened that he could do anything to the drivers.

Ming Pao reported that the policeman had the same identification number as the officer who was captured on video during the Occupy protest in Mong Kok last year ordering a hotel employee to kneel down after the latter complained that a police van had not switched off its engine.

(Oriental Daily) September 12, 2015.

On September 9, a video was uploaded to Facebook. The video is 2:23 long, showing a minibus driver being interviewed by the press. He said that they want to disperse now and then decide on the next steps. Suddenly a voice came out: "Do you trust the evil police? ... If you leave now, what chips do you have to bargain with them?" This questioner is "Four-eyed Brother" Cheng Kam-mun, who was mixed in with the reporters. The minibus driver immediately replied: "Why do you have to use 'evil police'? You shouldn't call them 'evil police.' The police are trying to make a living as well." Cheng asked again: "Are you quitting now? What chips do you have to bargain with them? You said that you want to negotiate. You must have some chips in order to negotiate!"

Initially some people thought that a reporter was provoking the minibus driver. People also praised the minibus driver for being reasonable and not exploited. Our reporter contacted Cheng Kam-mun. He admitted that he was present and he asked those questions. But he denied that he posed as a reporter. Cheng also said that he did not incite anyone. Instead he was hoping to use his own similar experience to make the minibus driver aware.


Apple Daily https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoKze3a6ZjY

SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIfKat8imYs Eyewitness said that he saw the police beat up the minibus driver.
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1DAGv9h84c Part 1 of street confrontation
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-csXOqcsnpU  Part 2 of street confrontation
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-znOThI1uME Public Light Bus General Association representatives leave without comments after meeting with the police.

Resistance Live https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmmjXroLD8c

Siu Ching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kou6eYYtmU Woman uses megaphone to harangue the minibuses for continually breaking traffic laws.

But the best story is the one that the English-language newspapers won't cover.

(Wen Wei Po) September 11, 2015.

Top left: Wong Yeung-tat (Civic Passion), Hong Kong Localism Power members CK Ho and Simon Sin in background
Top right: CK Ho (Hong Kong Localist Power)
Middle left: Cheng Kam-mun
Bottom left: Hung Hom Affairs For Hung Hom People member Hinson
Bottom right: People Power's Chin Bo-fun, who is in charge of directing the Shopping Revolutionaries

The incident took place at around 8pm. A traffic police officer issued an illegal parking ticket to a minibus on Shanghai Street. The minibus drivers were upset. More than 20 minibuses arrived to block the street to express dissatisfaction. There was massive congestion in the area.

This minor traffic incident quickly got picked up by the radical elements and propagated through social media. A number of activists said that Occupy Mong Kok has re-surfaced and the masses should rush down in support. Over at Sai Yeung Choi Street South, People Power member Chin Bo-fun was directing the Shopping Revolutionaries. She immediately seized the megaphone and brought her people down to curse the police.

Shortly afterwards, Civic Passion leader Wong Yeung-tat came with several cadres. He took videos at the scene and posted them to the Civic Passion website about the new Occupy Mong Kok by minibuses on Shanghai Street. He wrote: "It is possible that the situation will become even more severe." Other Civic Passion members such as Cheng Chung-tai were not at the scene, but they responded on Facebook with texts, photos and videos. Cheng Chung-tai wrote: "Young wastrels blocking the street! Time to get worried?" Two hours later, the incident was over. Cheung Chung-tai cursed on Facebook: "Damned useless!" to show his dismay that the minibus drivers did not continue to occupy.

Student Frontier leader Cheng ("Four-eyed brother") Kam-mun filmed with his mobile phone. Through Facebook, he said: "Occupy Mong Kok! Full-scale mobilization!" He claimed falsely: "The minibus drivers have decided to escalate their action." He called for people to rush to Mong Kok in support. When he learned that the minibus drivers have reached a deal with the police and were going to withdraw from the scene, Cheng Kam-mun began cursing in foul language on Facebook.

A number of pro-independence City-State supporters also rushed to the scene because they didn't want to lag behind the Localists. Our reporter spotted Hong Kong Localism Power convener Simon Sin and spokesperson CK Ho yelling by megaphone in the crowd. According to information, both Sin and Ho are interested in running in the District Council elections later this year. An observer noted: "Who is going to vote for people who make trouble?"

Another City-State faction Hung Hom Affairs For Hung Hom People member Hinson and others also came late at night. But by that time, traffic had resumed flowing on Shanghai Street with a strong police presence. So they were reduced to spectatorship from the curb.

(Wen Wei Po) September 11, 2015.

Chin Bo-fun

When the minibuses started to block Shanghai Street, the first group of radical activists to show up to exploit the situation were the Shopping Revolutionaries from nearby Sai Yeung Choi Street South. Many of their members come from the radical group People Power. According to information, People Power have set up Sai Yeung Choi Street South as their turf and they will stop other radical groups from entering their territory. Every night, the Shopping Revolutionaries shout and holler on Sai Yeung Choi Street South. The shopkeepers hate them because of the damage to business, but they are fearful of retaliation.

At first, the Shopping Revolutionaries were assembled by People Power executive committee member Tam Tak-chi. But Tam is interested in running in the District Council elections, so he must stay away. At present, the loudest voice comes from a woman named Chin Bo-fun. According to information, she is retired public servant and now an active People Power party member.

Unlike other assemblies, the Shopping Revolutionaries consist of a few shouters as well as a number of mysterious men who look like bodyguards. These men say nothing and only observe passersby. According to information, these mysterious men also accompanied Tam Tak-chi to court. They were also present with the Shopping Revolutionaries in Shanghai Street. According to our source, People Power was very active in Occupy Mong Kok. If there should be an recurrence, they want to be there sooner than other radical groups.

(Oriental Daily) September 12, 2015.

On September 9, a video was uploaded to Facebook. The video is 2:23 long, showing a minibus driver being interviewed by the press. He said that they want to disperse now and then decide on the next steps. Suddenly a voice came out: "Do you trust the evil police? ... If you leave now, what chips do you have to bargain with them?" This questioner is "Four-eyed Brother" Cheng Kam-mun, who was mixed in with the reporters. The minibus driver immediately replied: "Why do you have to use 'evil police'? You shouldn't call them 'evil police.' The police are trying to make a living as well." Cheng asked again: "Are you quitting now? What chips do you have to bargain with them? You said that you want to negotiate. You must have some chips in order to negotiate!" The minibus driver said: "You shouldn't say that. One thing at a time. I have all my chips already. Rest assured, okay! You shouldn't be so excited. You shouldn't be exploiting this situation! Okay or not?"

Initially some people thought that a reporter was provoking the minibus driver. People also praised the minibus driver for being reasonable and not exploited. Our reporter contacted Cheng Kam-mun. He admitted that he was present and he asked those questions. But he denied that he posed as a reporter. Cheng also said that he did not incite anyone. Instead he was hoping to use his own similar experience to make the minibus driver aware.

Internet comments:

- Here is the part that would upset the revolutionaries even more: "Our reporter observed that the minibuses in the Langham Place neighborhood today were very law-abiding. Those coming in or out of the Langham Place minibus terminal did not take on passengers by the exit. They very much maintained the order."
- "The Public Light Bus General Association representatives met with the police and left without commenting to the media." Chances are that the police "read the riot act" to them. The minibus drivers are more vulnerable than the typical unemployed/unemployable Occupy Mong Kok welfare recipient because their means of livelihood can be impounded and their licenses suspended. There is likely now an agreement in place, where orderly illegal parking is allowed. However, there won't be any more minibuses parked to block the terminal entrance while the drivers eat lunch in nearby restaurants. The agreement probably prohibits public discussion as well.

- Why would the minibus drivers trust the Shopping Revolutionaries/Occupy Mong Kok people? During Occupy Mong Kok, it was the minibuses and taxis who were most opposed because they said their livelihoods are affected. At the time, the Occupy Mong Kok people wanted the police to drive all the minibuses away for taking over the streets.

(EJinsight) December 8, 2014.

Chiu Luen Public Light Bus is facing a backlash after it secured a restraining order from the court to stop protesters from occupying roads in the shopping district of Mong Kok. Now the minibus operator has its hands full trying to fend off complaints that it is committing the same illegal activity, occupying Tung Choi Street in the same district for parking. It is reported that Chiu Luens minibuses were using three of the four lanes on Tung Choi Street as parking area without authorization from the transport department.

The complaints may start hurting its business. Internet activist group Passion Times reported that at least one of its minibuses received a parking ticket from a traffic warden in Mong Kok on Monday morning.

Chiu Luens role in spurring police to clear the protest sites in Mong Kok has placed it on the other side of the pro-democracy campaign. As a result, calls for commuters to boycott its routes are spreading on social media, and many Occupy supporters are joining the campaign. One netizen said he would rather walk than ride on a Chiu Luen minibus.

As one of the oldest minibus associations in Hong Kong, Chiu Luen has seen a thriving business plying the routes from Mong Kok to Kwun Tong, Tsz Wan Shan and To Kwa Wan. On average, a minibus driver has to pay around HK$2,000 (US$258) a month if they want to join any of its lines, according to Apple Daily reports. The operators route income, as it is called, could reach as high as HK$800,000 a month for some popular routes such as Mong Kok to Yuen Long.

Reports said Chiu Luens income wasnt really affected by the Occupy campaign. In fact, traffic along the routes improved because of less congested thoroughfares in Mong Kok and more passengers were going to the area to join the protest campaign or were switching from double-decker to minibus as their means of transport.

In its application for a restraining order, the minibus operator said that the street occupation was hurting the business of minibus operators as well as drivers and passengers. But the fact is, Chiu Luen has been charging the same management fee during the Occupy period. So why is Chiu Luen against the pro-democracy campaign? It is said that officials of the minibus operators are close to the organizers of the Anti-Occupy Central Alliance.

Chiu Luen was founded in 1968 by a group of minibus drivers who came from Chiu Chow in eastern Guangdong province. The association now has a fleet of over 100 minibuses with 300 drivers. Unlike the green minibus, Chiu Luens red minibus lines offer non-scheduled services. The minibus industry often criticizes the government for setting too many restricted zones that only apply to minibuses, and complains that minibus drivers are always ticketed for illegal stopping and parking in these restricted areas.

Chiu Luen would often represent the industry to negotiate with the government. Sometimes, it would even organize strikes to press its demands. Such actions have prompted authorities to look the other way when minibuses are illegally parked, sources say. Although the practice is illegal, red minibuses have been parking on Tung Choi Street for decades, according to one Chiu Luen driver.

The public light bus or minibus service became legal as a result of the 1967 Hong Kong riots. At the time, workers of China Motor Bus and Kowloon Motor Bus went on strike, crippling public transport in the city. As no buses and trams were plying the streets, the minibuses entered the scene. In the early days of their operations, minibuses had to fight for routes, and reports suggest that some of the operators established ties with gangsters. They also found ways to deal with traffic policemen. Thus, Chiu Luen gradually developed its connections and extended its influence.

But will it be able to withstand the boycott campaign being put up by Occupy supporters?

So why would the minibus drivers think that Civic Passion/People Power/Hong Kong Indigenous/Hong Kong Localism Power/Hong Kong City-State will ever really be on their side? The modus operandi of the radical elements is to throw the first rock and then disappear before the full-scale riot breaks out.

Video: Apple Daily https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73rvpI8j2dw Earlier, 200 Shopping Revolutionaries surround the Chiu Luen minibuses to protest the fact that they park in the street.

- Anyone with half a brain would know that the minibus drivers can't and won't do anything like Occupy XXX. If they use their minibus to set up a blockade on Shanghai Street, then what gets affected immediately? Minibuses won't be able to enter the terminal to pick up or discharge passengers! That is to say, they are going to kill their own livelihoods. If some protest action is to take place, it will be elsewhere (e.g. Mong Kok Police Station) other than here.
- The most effective police response is to help them occupy Shanghai Street by using police cars to seal off both ends and blocking all vehicular traffic in the area. It will quickly sink into the heads of the minibus drivers that they are losing money by the minute.
- Also, most of the minibus drivers do not own the vehicles. Most vehicles are concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who have managed to become immensely wealthy (at least, on paper based upon the number of licenses that they own and the fact that the cost of a minibus is somewhere between $900,000 and $1,300,000). While this action may have started spontaneously by the drivers, the ultimate decision will be made by the owners. The owners won't destroy their own wealth (license suspension or destruction of the vehicles which may not be covered by insurance). The radical activists are fantasizing when they think the minibus drivers will escalate. They know nothing about the socio-economic environment.

- When Mao Zedong was talking about that single spark in the prairie, the situation was that the Chinese Communist Party was still too small to lead the people into mass actions. Instead, they had to wait for opportunities to jump onto. This is the same with the radical Localists right now. For example, when North District Parallel Imports Concern Group held its guided tour of the Sheung Shui parallel trading stores, only a dozen or so people showed up. Nobody is going to pay attention to that. What they needed is something like the Reclaim Sheung Shui the week before when violence is hinted, and that attracted more demonstrators and reporters like flies.

(EJinsight) Anti-parallel trading protests linked to upcoming elections. September 8, 2014.

Legislator Yiu Si-wing (inset) said the protests were aimed at wooing voters in the District Council elections. But activist Ronald Leung (holding mike) said the protests were going on for the past three years

Legislator Yiu Si-wing, who is also a director at China Travel Service (Hong Kong) Ltd., said the recent protest against mainland parallel traders in Sheung Shui was part of efforts by some people to solicit voters support in the upcoming District Council elections. Yiu, who represents the tourism sector in the Legislative Council, said in a radio program on Monday that he felt it was strange that anti-parallel trading protests re-emerged in the past few days even though the government is addressing the problem through tighter customs inspections and a plan to build a shopping facility at the border. Yiu said the protests were hurting the local tourism industry.

But Ronald Leung Kam-shing, a spokesman for the North District Parallel Imports Concern Group, disagreed with Yius comments, noting that such protests have been going on for the past three years. Leung said it was laughable that someone would think the protests were related to the elections. He said those who are saying so are simply trying to discredit legitimate protest.

Legislator Vincent Fang Kang said the wholesale and retail sector which he represents is going through a difficult period that is worse than the situation during the SARS outbreak in 2003. He blames declining retail sales in the city on protests targeting mainland visitors and shoppers.

According to the Census and Statistics Department, retail sales for the first seven months this year dropped 1.7 percent from a year ago, but plummeted 6.1 percent during the same period in 2003, when Hong Kong was hit by SARS. Legislative Council president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing refused to speculate on whether the protests were related to the District Council elections, but stressed that such mass actions would not help any election campaign.

Leung said it was Yiu who was taking an overly political perspective on the protests, which should not be regarded as part of an election campaign.

Meanwhile, the Federation of Hong Kong Trade Unions in Tourism issued a statement blasting the anti-parallel trading protesters for being uncivilized and hurting the interest of the local tourism sector. The union said it feared such protests would lead to more layoffs in the industry.

(Oriental Daily) September 8, 2015.

Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong; North District Parallel Imports Concern Group's Leung Kam-shing

Early this year, the radical localists initiated the Reclaim actions to sharply reduce the number of mainland tourists coming to Hong Kong. Six months later, they started Reclaim Sheung Shui again. This is supposedly tied in with the publicity for localist candidates in the District Council elections this November. At least four radical localists are planning to enter those elections. Is it possible that even people who try to destroy local jobs can attract voters?

Candidate #1: Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong took part in Reclaim Sheung Shui last Sunday and was arrested by the police. According to some sources Ray Wong will enter the To Kwa Wan North district election in Kowloon City to challenge DAB legislative councilor/district councilor Starry Lee. But this is actually a smokescreen because the real candidate is another Hong Kong Indigenous spokesperson Leung Tin-kay, who is studying philosophy at the Hong Kong University. Leung will be feeding off Ray Wong's fame.

Candidate #2: North District Parallel Imports Concern Group spokesperson Ronald Leung Kam-shing has been uploading to Facebook photos of himself passing out flyers at the Sheung Shui MTR station. According to some sources, Leung wants to challenge the New Territories North District Council president So Sai-chi. However, Leung admitted in an interview that local reception was not enthusiastic. So he may be considering another district. This is a case of admitting defeat before the race even got started.

Candidates #3/#4: Hong Kong Localism members Simon Sin and CK Ho gained notoriety in the demonstrations against 12-year-old Siu Yau-wai. They are now changing their modus operandi. According to the group's Facebook page, Simon Sin has gone to test lead-levels in the water at Tsui Ping Estate, Kwun Tong. Meanwhile, CK Ho has been present at street booths in Po Tat (Sau Mau Ping) and Wong Tai Sin.

The pro-establishment camp does not seemed concerned about these localist parachuters. Their initial reaction is that voters will not support people who destroy jobs.

(Oriental Daily) September 9, 2015.

This morning, Hong Kong Indigenous spokesperson Ray Wong admitted that they are actively recruiting people to run in the district council elections. They hope to use the elections to publicize Localism and ambush the pro-establishment candidates. Wong denied that the Reclaim actions were intended as electioneering tactics. He said that he was merely a participant and not an organizer in last Sunday's event. He also said that he won't be running in the elections.

(HKG Pao) September 15, 2015.

According to Wen Wei Po, Civic Passion member Cheng Chung-tai has recently been showing up in the Lok Tsui district in Tuen Mun to distribute pamphlets and make speeches. His point was that it was expensive to do food sh opping in the Mei Lok Gardens because the current district councilor Democratic Party's Albert Ho had supported the privatization of the Link REIT which brought in supermarket chains to replace the mom-and-pop stores. Cheng also said that Ho is failing in his position as Legislative Councilor. It seems clear that Cheng plans to challenge Ho's seat.

(Wen Wei Po) September 17, 2015.

More recently, Cheng Chung-tai (Civic Passion) has started another wave of criticism against Albert "AV Yan" Ho Chun-yan, focusing on four points: (1) Ho supported the privatization of Link REIT; (2) Ho promised to resign in order to trigger a de facto referendum in the by-election, but he failed to carry it out and chose to hold secret meetings with mainland government officials instead; (3) Ho assisted newly arrived immigrants to ask for a judicial review in order to receive social welfare; (4) Ho supported the construction of the third runway at the Hong Kong International Airport when he is also on the board of directors of the Airport Authority.

Last Tuesday, Civic Passion threatened to disrupt the Tuen Mun District Council meeting. On that day, Cheng Chung-tai brought about a dozen or so supporters to the scene. They stayed for about 10 minutes but left when they couldn't see Albert Ho. Instead they went to Lok Tsui to hand out pamphlets about how Albert Ho is betraying Hong Kong.

In February 26, 2014, Albert Ho was filmed by the media as viewing sexy girlie photos while the Legislative Council was in session debating the government budget. Ho was probably not planning to run for District Council again. He arranged for a lawyer to parachute into his district. However this lawyer showed up for only about 1 month of so in April/May this year and has since disappeared. Meanwhile "AV Yan" is back in full gear.

According to information, Raymond Wong Yuk-man is sending Cheng Chun-tai to run in the Lok Tsui district because the middle-class citizens there are more likely to be impressed by Cheng's doctorate degree. However, Cheng is not interested in the district council seat. Instead he is drilling in preparation for the 2016 Legislative Council election in New Territories West.

The Democratic Party is aware of what is happening. Therefore "AV Yan" is forced to delay his retirement. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party have to modify its plans in other Tuen Mun districts mainly because some of their candidates are upsetting residents.

In the last District Council election, Raymond Wong Yuk-man sent out Chan Wai-yip to run against Albert Ho under the slogan "Repay by voting." Chan lost badly against Ho. Afterwards Wong insulted Chan by saying: "His quality is poor and so we can't blame the 'repay by voting' strategy." Chan immediately severely relations with Wong.

Internet comments:

- If the localists run in the district council elections, will they still be wearing black masks on their campaign posters?

- Of course they will wear masks. How could people recognize them otherwise?
- Ray Wong's campaign poster:

Candidate #1: The Wastrel
Sheer destructiveness, no constructiveness
There is no maximum uselessness, there is only greater uselessness
Please cast a vote for The Wastrel. If you don't vote for The Wastrel, he will fucking beat you up.
- It is a basic human right to cover your face if you should so choose to. Many countries in the world have the Sharia law for just this.
- The Hong Kong Police's Special Duties Unit (nicknamed Flying Tigers) wear masks on missions too.

- The greatest Hong Kong movie ever is Election: Even triad gangs can hold democratic elections but the Communists China won't let Hong Kong have it.

- Indeed, here is the Hong Kong University Student Union triads led by Billy Fung Jing-en:

Next we need an Election poster for Ray Wong and Hong Kong Indigenous

- District Councils deal with truly microscopic issues, such as planting a tree at the intersection, placing a bench at the bus stop, moving the bus stop 20 meters down the road, etc. Voters look for someone who has lived in the district for a long time and has a lot of social ties (Property Owners Association, Parents Teachers Association, etc). Parachuters with no local ties and knowledge have no chance (especially if they insist on wearing black masks).

- The name of the game is $MONEY$. When you enter to run, you have the opportunity to solicit donations. If you win, you get a job position that pays about $22,000 per month plus a operating expenses subsidy of about $30,000 per month. The District Council is the springboard to the Legislative Council, where the job pays about $90,000 per month plus expenses subsidies as much as the salary itself.

- When you come into the limelight, you will be scrutinized. Such is the case of Ray Wong:

(HKG Pao) September 9, 2015.

Our reporter found out that Ray Wong Toy-yeung was born in 1993 and is 22-year-old now. He is thin in stature, he usually wears black round-rimmed glasses. He was rebellious and was not a student. In Hong Kong Certificate of Education Exam, he did not score high enough to make university. So he entered the Caritas Bianchi College of Careers to pursue an associate degree in interior decoration. In 2013, in the last year of his studies, he dropped out of school due to a difference of opinion with the teaching staff. Thereafter he worked as a freelancer in interior decoration. His income was unsteady, and his clients were mainly introduced by friends and previous clients. Last year before he entered radical politics, he claimed to have engaged six jobs averaging $60,000 in profits per job. So his income was good.

Ever since he started the anti-parallel traders demonstrations, his business was greatly affected. He admitted that "China-capital companies won't seek me out and Blue Ribbon decorators won't work with me. Some clients are worried that if I got arrested in the middle of a project, what happens to the project and the deposit?" Therefore, he has not gotten any more business since the Lunar New Year.

Ray Wong said that he was most influenced by Wan Chin's book <The Hong Kong City-State Theory>, and his political views are influenced as such. However, he does not think that the City-State theory is feasible in Hong Kong. Instead, he thought that the Hong Kong University Undergrad's theory of ethnic self-determination was more relevant for the people to Hong Kong to build their local ethnic awareness.

Ray Wong comes from a middle-class family. His father is an engineer and his mother works for a trading company. His radical behavior has caused relations with his parents to deteriorate. At one time, he left his family and he has not improved relations since. He loves cycling, skateboarding, music and moves. He is up on current affairs. He tracks the latest information on Hong Kong politicians, organizations, traditional and Internet media. He is active on social media where he expresses his personal views. His language is radical, often mixed with obscenities.

Although Ray Wong does not think that Hong Kong Indigenous is like Civic Passion, his Facebook carries two photos: one in the sound studio of MyRadio which was established by Raymond Wong Yuk-man and another group photo with Raymond Wong, Wan Chin, "Four-eyed Brother" Alvin Cheng. This suggests that his group and Civic Passion come from the same roots -- namely, they are Raymond Wong's people. According to an informed source, Hong Kong Indigenous deliberately differentiates itself from Civic Passion but they only do so in order to get twice the exposure for localism. If the police should bust one group, the other can still carry on.

According to Ray Wong, the Hong Kong Indigenous group has about 50 core members who want to defend "Local values." Group members use this Facebook of a masked blue cartoon ninja icon for identification:

Why is the ninja clad in deep blue, which is the color of the Blue Ribbon foes? Ray Wong explained on Facebook: "Hong Kong Indigenous wears blue jackets in order to disrupt the dichotomization of Yellow Ribbon versus Blue Ribbon by the mainstream media. This is even better for promoting localist ideas."

Internet comments:

- Why is Ray Wong so anxious to see small businesses die all over the place? Because when you discontinue your rental contract, you have to restore the site to its original condition. And you need to hire an interior decoration contractor to do that. And Ray Wong is willing and able to fill that role.

- Why didn't this article publish Ray Wong's home address? I am curious as to whether he lives in Sheung Shui or not. Wouldn't it be funny if he lives in Tuen Mun or Chai Wan, which are more than one hour away? After all, those XXX Affairs for XXX People organizations (where XXX = Hung Hom, Sheung Shui, etc) insists that local affairs can only be decided by local people.
- This is more local than localism. At the top level, it means that Hong Kong affairs should be decided upon by the people of Hong Kong. At the next lower level of the 18 districts of Hong Kong, it means that Sheung Shui affairs should be decided upon by the people of Sheung Shui, Wan Chai affairs should be decided upon by the people of Wan Chai, etc. At the next lower level of sub-districts, it means that Cheung Chau affairs should be decided upon by the people of Cheung Chau. At the next lower level of neighborhoods, it means that affairs on the block surrounded by Nathan Road, Soy Street, Dundas Street and Sai Yueng Choi Street South should be decided upon by the people of that block. At the next lower level of buildings, it means that affairs in the Sun Hing Building should be decided upon  by the people who are residents in that building. At the next lower level of floors, it means that affairs on the 16th floor of the Sun Hing Building should be decided upon by the people who live on that floor. At the next lower level of families, it means that family affairs should be decided upon by family members. This sounds fine, but it won't work -- what if the people on the 16th floor of the Sun Hing Building vote unanimously to just dump their garbage onto Nathan Road below?

- I thought that there was going to something new, but Ray Wong is just another unemployed bum living off social welfare just like Umbrella Revolution stalwarts "Captain America" Andy Yung, "The Painter" Eric Poon, "Capone" Ng Ting-pong. In Soviet Russia, they would have charged these people with parasitism. In 1964, the Russian poet Joseph Brodsky (1987 Nobel Prize in Literature) was charged with social parasitism because his series of odds jobs and role as a poet did not contribute to society.  They called him a "pseudo-poet in velveteen trousers" who failed to fulfill his "constitutional duty to work honestly for the good of the motherland."
- Not true. Ray Wong claimed that he made $360,000 last year. If he is frugal, he has enough savings to fight some more years for Freedom, Democracy, Human Rights and, most importantly, Local Values.
- Rubbish. Who has ever heard of an inexperienced interior decorator without even an associate degree making that kind of profit!? Even experienced interior decorators working on large projects can't do that. The average profit margin is 2%. So a project would have to worth $60,000 / 0.02 = $3,000,000 to generate $60,000 in profits. How many $3,000,000 projects are out there when the average price of apartments are just in the millions? What are you trying to build? The Eiffel Tower? The Empire State Building?
- When you are young and inexperienced, the only way you can bid for a job is to have razor-thin profit margins.  You may even want to lose money to gain the experience.

- Many other Occupy Central regulars just live off their parents. However, Ray Wong has the integrity to disown his parents. In matters of great right versus great wrong, the law comes in second place and the family comes in third place.

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

- Normally I am likely to say: "May his whole family drop dead." But in Ray Wong's case, I pity his parents who brought up such a difficult child. So I say: "May Ray Wong drop dead."
- No, he came out this way because his parents brought him up this way. They should be made to repay society for the damages wrought.

- Jackie Chan was right: "The Chinese needs to be supervised (中國人是要管的)." Ray Wong is a fine illustration.

- Hong Kong Indigenous numbers only 50 members, or so Ray Wong claims. Why do the other 7 million Hong Kong residents have to accede to their wishes?

- If there are 1.2 million Occupy Central participants as reported by the Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme, some of them can surely bring Ray Wong some business, so that he can continue to fight for "localist values." Where are they? Are they all talk and no action? Or all talk and no money?

- This is the first of the many hatchet jobs on Ray Wong and his cohorts. I wasn't as appalled as I thought I might be. There was actually plenty of other avenues to explore. I look forward to future installments (such as the one about his living conditions -- how he is growing his own chickens, rice and vegetables; setting up his own water supply; generating his own electricity because he is practicing Localism as opposed to just talking about it).

- I want to ask Ray Wong: Why do you people wear masks? Is there something really bad in the air, and why won't you tell us? More importantly, how can you represent us when we don't even know what you look like?
- Ray Wong wears a mask for business reasons, so that his prospective clients won't recognize him when they come in to discuss proposals.

- The case of Ray Wong makes me think of a uniquely Hong Kong term: "Litter cum recycling."

Ray Wong is definitely "litter" for sure. I am not sure if he is "cum" which is useful for procreation. But he should be sent to "recycling."

- (Foreign Policy) Meet the Man Who Wants to Make Hong Kong a City-State. May 18, 2015.

Beneath an elevated subway station, with cars whizzing past, Ray Wong exhorted citizens on a recent Sunday to join a revolution just not in so many words.

If we allow communists to prescreen our chief executive, the head of Hong Kongs officially independent government, then the chief executive will not represent us! Wong boomed into a microphone. He scanned the tide of pedestrians sweeping past, searching for a receptive ear. The city, he said, must reject a Beijing-backed elections plan thats up for a vote this spring and defy Chinese leaders from exerting more control over Hong Kong. Remember, Wang noted, that the nation silenced the last call for democracy in 1989. If you do not want the slaughtering-unarmed-students communist government to prescreen our chief executive, we must stand firm and reject this arrangement! Wongs lanky frame was decked in a crisp, light blue tee shirt with white letters reading, Hong Kong Indigenous. Most shoppers scooted to a nearby mall without looking his way.

These are low days for democracy in Hong Kong. A few months back a massive street occupation sought free elections and beckoned everyone to debate the citys political future. Since then, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, the university group that led tens of thousands of people to stand up to riot police, splintered, accused of being opaque and incompetent. Scholarism, another student group that led protesters, has been muted, focused mostly on posting objections to the election plan on social media. Old guard democrats are playing parliamentary games. Weeks from a vote that could give Hong Kong its first direct elections in history albeit for candidates backed by Beijing with the city split on the plan, the fire and heat of last fall has been doused.

Into this vacuum has stepped Wong and dozens of angry youth. Their friendships forged during the protests, many of them said they had wanted to provoke the police during the occupation to force government concessions, but lost out to more moderate voices. Since then, these activists have argued online and on the streets that Hong Kong, 17 years after Britain turned the colony back to Beijing, would be better off without China. For the city to self govern, these youth say, it must fight off a mainland incursion that threatens the citys language, culture, and traditions that are distinct and superior, they argue from those of the Peoples Republic. Their first step has been to discourage mainland arrivals.

Weeks after the police cleared the protest camps, Wong started Indigenous, a grassroots group with about 40 members, and headed to the citys northern suburbs near the mainland border. There Wong, along with members of the radical political party Civic Passion, led hundreds of people to protest the illicit trade in powdered baby formula and other goods hauled off in suitcases by mainlanders. The gatherings were ugly and at times violent, with participants cursing at mainland tourists riding northbound buses. To a degree, the demonstrations worked. After the third gathering, the central government said it would restrict Shenzhen residents to one visit a week. It was the kind of concrete concession democracy protesters had failed to secure.

Wongs brand of nativism has attracted working-class youth as well as elite college students and graduates frustrated by the slow drip of political change. Many agree with Wongs message that preserving Hong Kong for Hong Kongers is the best way to fight for democracy. If residents strengthen the citys identity, they will be ready one day to leave the mainland and form a city-state akin to Singapore, he said. But he cautioned that Hong Kong citizens arent ready for that yet. Were not creating trouble for nothing, he said, speaking carefully in an interview with Foreign Policy. Many Hong Kong people dont want to see Hong Kong become just another Chinese city.

Admirers and critics say Wong has tapped into the anxiety of modern Hong Kong youth who fret about their future under China in this hyper-competitive, uber-expensive city. According to the agreement forged between the mainland and Hong Kongs former ruler, Britain, the city remains technically autonomous until 2047. Those freedoms seemed to have perished for many last June when the communists decreed in writing that the city was subservient. The report was seen as a betrayal by many and especially inflamed youth who didnt remember the days of colonial subservience. Its fear of China, fear of the [Communist Party], fear of invasion, fear of losing our culture, our language, said Raphael Wong, a 27-year-old member of the League of Social Democrats whos critical of the tactics of Ray Wong (no relation). And fear makes anger.

The seeds of nativism sprouted in the massive fall occupation, sowed by members of the Civic Passion party, a theatrical group of radicals who spread the notions of self-governance to youth through a manga-filled print magazine, Passion Teens Weekly.

But the ideas, known here as localism, date back. In 2006, activists tried to save area landmarks as city bulldozers cleared paths for more skyscrapers and rail lines. Arguments made to preserve Hong Kongs ferry pier and farmland vestiges of the best of British colonialism and traditional China were rooted in the writings of an ethnography professor at Lingnam University, Horace Chin Wan-kan, said Sonny Lo, a political science professor at Hong Kong Institute of Education.

In 2011, Chin asserted in a book that Hong Kongs route to independence rested not on a future democratic China, but on the citys re-birth as an autonomous city-state. Chins edgy theories made the book a hit, but his subsequent knock on democrats who have staged an annual vigil for victims of the Tiananmen Square massacre bruised his reputation. (Chin did not respond to requests for an interview.) Few advocates, though, have grappled with the inconvenient truth that Hong Kong depends on the mainland for much of its energy, water and food.

Chins theories primed the city for the 2012 battle against a proposed patriotic schools curriculum. After massive strikes led by school children, the then-new chief executive, C.Y. Leung, decided that schools could opt to use the lessons or not. Still, fears grew that communist notions were creeping into Hong Kong through the growing number of mainland residents arriving to give birth, attend school, and work. Far more Hong Kong locals told pollsters that they were Hong Kongese than said they were Chinese.

By last August, when a committee of the mainland legislature presented Hong Kong with an blueprint for the 2017 elections rejecting the notion of public nomination and dictating that chief executive candidates would be screened the citys localists were primed. Some residents have said its a low-grade battle that could drag on for decades.

The Hong Kong perspective is becoming stronger and stronger, said Lo, who is publishing a book in July about prospects for Hong Kong democracy. As long as Beijing is paternalistic in terms of Hong Kong, there will continue to be confrontation and arguments between the young people and the central government in Beijing. If the number of nativists grow, he added, the Hong Kong people will be divided, deeply divided.

On his social media and his Internet radio show, Wong of Hong Kong Indigenous is busy building his case. A mainland incursion is stripping residents of their identity and rights, says Wong. He points to the increased use of standard Mandarin in Hong Kong schools instead of the native Cantonese. The growing number of mainland migrants, he says, will be diluting the ratio of local people. More mainland arrivals are depriving us of resources, he said, especially in primary schools, public housing and certain jobs. (A 2014 Hong Kong government study rejected such claims.)

In a city already teeming with competition, Wongs speeches have tapped into the frustrations and angst of the citys youth, said Cheng Chung-tai, a member of Civic Passion. He helped lead the winter baby formula protests against mainland traders. We are facing a big and powerful invader, said the university lecturer. If you can feel that Hong Kong is facing a situation of re-colonization by the Communist Party, then you can call yourself Hong Kong indigenous.

The fight for an independent Hong Kong will no doubt be long, perhaps violent, Wong says solemnly. But he says hes prepared to lead, if asked. If brute force is the intended tactic, Wong hardly appears equipped. At 125 pounds, with his Harry Potter spectacles and a bed at his parents apartment, the lanky graduate doesnt look like he could withstand one blow of a police baton. He described his several arrests during the fall and winter protests and showed a picture on his phone from the November night when he claimed to have helped a gang ram metal barricades into the windows of the citys legislative chambers.

He then caught himself and countered that he doesnt directly advocate violence. But its clearly part of the plan. During a March taping of his radio show, his voice clear and steady, Wong said that once Hong Kong citizens realize theyre facing a crisis that their culture and community has been infiltrated by the communists, and they are being oppressed, then theyll gradually develop an antagonistic ideology. This, Wong concluded, can be our so-called preparation for the next mass fight.

- (HKG Pao) September 17, 2015.

On September 13 (Sunday), Ray Wong and members of the League of Social Democrats, the Labour Party, Scholarism and other radical groups went down to Hong Kong Police Headquarters to protest his own arrest in Sheung Shui and unjustified arrests in general. Those present included League of Social Democrats vice-presidents Wong Ho-ming and Ng Man-yuean, former Federation of Students deputy secretary-general Lester Shum, Labour Party member Chow Nok-hang, etc. These people are classified as "Leftist Retards" by the Localists. So when Ray Wong was reported to be present, the Localists turned on Wong for betraying their cause. Cemetery News said that Wong was a "traitor" and a "piece of trash" who will "go to hell."

Early on Monday morning, Ray Wong wrote more than 1,000 words to defend himself. Wong said that he did not attend the demonstration in order to "unite with leftist retards" but he "wanted to use the occasion to expound upon Localist ideas." But his clarification only drew more attacks from the Localists. Some Internet asked Legislator Raymond Wong Yuk-man to boot Ray Wong off his Internet radio program under the threaten of withholding monthly subscription fees. Meanwhile Civic Passion leader Wong Yeung-tat said that Ray Wong is no longer a fellow traveller.

To dampen passions against Ray Wong, Raymond Wong asked his radio station director Leung Kam-cheung to play guest host on the radio program alongside Ray Wong and others. During the program, Yeung repeatedly condemned Ray Wong for being "fucking stupid" to attend the demonstration. Leung said: "You are not permitted to commit this type of mistake again" and "I cannot give unconditional support to those who make mistakes." Ray Wong also made abject apologies a number of times.

Just when people thought that the affair will die down after Ray Wong's apology, his supporters counter-attacked on Wednesday. They condemned Leung Kam-cheung of "acting like a bully" and "coercing people to apologize." Meanwhile, the Localists' leader Raymond Wong Yuk-man has been completely silent. A supporter noted: "Whenever there is trouble among the Localists, the founder becomes a turtle hiding inside its shell. With a founder like this, who needs enemies?"

- (Polymer) Leftist retarded villains, revolutionary hypocrites. September 11, 2015.

Among those in the resistant movement of social activism, the better known people right now are City-State's Wan Chin, Legislative Council Raymond Wong Yuk-man, Civic Passion's Wong Yeung-tat and certain post-Occupy figures such as Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong Toy-yeung, former Student Frontier's Four-eyed Brother, Grandmaster Kam-kam, etc.

... Over the three months of the Occupy movement, those who were present at the sites have recognized the true nature of the Leftist Retards. The enemy and ourselves are clearly distinguishable. We know now that the Leftist Retards' narrative is "poison." If we have to make another critique, it would only be for the benefit of the ignorant Hong Kong 'pigs' so that they won't be victimized by that evil cult.

The Revolutionary Gang (the title came from a Wan Chin essay) is now best known through Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong Toy-yeung and City-State's Wan Chin. In recent Internet battles, the "Lam Lei-tip's opinion about the dress uniform of Hong Kong Indigenous" and "Wan Chin and CK established their differences" have drawn much attention. But there is only one conclusion: We should be scared of the revolutionary hypocrites.

As a scholar who wrote the book on City-State, Wan Chin spouts revolution in his essays. He says that he is willing to offer his life for the goal of establishing a new nation. However, his praxis is incomprehensible. Nation-building can only be accomplished by revolution. That is fine, but his idea of giving up his life for the sake of the revolution consists of "Analyzing the situation in China, waiting for the Chinese Communists to destroy themselves," "go down to the Occupy area and demonstrate how to use a plastic luggage case as a shield," "Nakade Hitsujiko (=Princess Chao Ming in the City-State hierarchy) raise the Reclaim The Intersection At Midnight placard and then quickly fled", "Yeung Wai-yip placed Lord Guan's altar as a road block, and the priority mission during the clearance is to protect Lord Guan," etc.

Here is a YouTube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fp9IkCrVXXQ in which someone has made a cartoon off Wan Chin's demonstration on how to wield a shield that was made out of a suitcase.

Nakade Hitsujiko and the "Reclaim the intersection at midnight" sign.

Lord Guan's altar in Mong Kok

I can only say that his group must be "saboteurs" of the revolution.

His group has been soliciting donations. Of course, they always say that they are looking for "reforms" instead of "revolution" in order to get the suckers to pass over the money. They keep fantasizing about the revolution, they fantasize that "the Chinese Communists will destroy themselves and then Hong Kong will be saved," they fantasize that "the gods and the ghosts will show up and rain disaster upon the police trash." they have never done anything practical, nor have they educated people about how to do it.

His group will turn out for the "elections." Everybody knows that the Hong Kong electoral system is a failure. Everybody knows that the District Council votes are bought by offering small favors (snake dinners, vegetarian dinners, moon cakes, rice dumplings) to grassroots folks. People got into resistance in the streets because they know that the councils are failing and they want to have a revolution.

To run in the elections, they need money. The money has to come from their 'supporters'. Did their supporters give their money thinking "I support your election effort" and "I hope that you can bring in some reforms"?

So this is the case of the snake-oil salesman!

Meanwhile Hong Kong Indigenous' Ray Wong recently wrote that "if you want to fight with words, there are ways to fight with words; if you want to fight with force, there are ways to fight with force." He said that he was a rookie when he joined Hong Kong Indigenous.

Well, I was the first one to point out when his organization first showed up, they said "We are a group of anonymous Hongkongers who stand on the foremost frontline in every battle to defend Hong Kong" and "The previous resistance models are ineffective against the Hong Kong Communist regime, so that we are compelled to stand up and seek a breakthrough." But how he is slapping his own face with this new essay. Isn't this fraudulent?

Think about it! How many persons believed that his organization was "always been at the foremost frontline," "much experienced," "use force to lead the way," "discard the old and establish the new" etc, and then put in their efforts? When they show up, they ended up being hit by police batons because of those "inexperienced rookies"?

Today, he said that he is reflecting and therefore he can forget his previous fraudulent of claim of "valor" and "experience and toss himself into running for election. Isn't he awesome?

Obviously, someone is going to say that we should get young people a chance, or that the City-State theory should have some merits ...

Internet commentary won't destroy something; it merely gives a direction for people to think some more about. I want to say that while we know that the Leftist Retards are clearly the enemy, you should think whether the group that you as a revolutionary has the same "ideas" as your "goals".

Do you think that their method will succeed?

Do you think that they are always looking for ways to succeed?

I think that you must think that "revolution" is "easy" if you trust the organization and if you work hard for the organization.

Yes, this is is just like Communist education.

(Wen Wei Po) September 2, 2015.

Entrepreneur Yeung Kin-man has donated $200 million to City University. Of these, $100 million is earmarked for the School of Veterinary Science. Another $50 million is donated to found a number of chair professorship in various schools and faculties. The remaining $50 million will be used to subsidize City University students to go overseas as exchange students. According to the strategic development plan, 65% of the City University will be able to go overseas as exchange students between 2015-2020.

(Apple Daily) September 7, 2015.

The invisible tycoon Yeung Kin-man recently donated $200 million to City University. The university board of directors voted by a majority to accept the donation, and planned to change the name of the Academic Building (1) to the Yeung Kin-man Academic Building. The university has not announced the matter. Our newspaper obtained confidential documents of the university board of directors showing that half of the donated amount will be used to support the School of Veterinary Science and related biological and medical science course development.

This seems to be a regular donation, but it is suspected of being a political gift. When CY Leung was the chairman of the City University board of directors, he strongly supported the establishment of a School of Veterinary Science but he was repeatedly defeated. Recently City University wants to establish the school on its own by soliciting donations amounting to $2 billion. By early this year, it had only managed to procure $500 million. City University responded that $100 million was allocated by Yeung to the School of Veterinary Science. As for the naming of the building, the donation and its uses, everything followed the established guidelines and procedures.

Yeung Kin-man is a low-keyed person who is in the business of making mobile telephone monitor screens. It was a big change in style to donate money to City University this time and have a building named after him. In May this year, Yeung and other business people set up a Happy Hong Kong Charity Foundation which has donated $30 million to the pro-establishment camp for community work. Two of the Happy Hong Kong Charity Foundation honorary sponsors are HKSAR Chief Executive CY Leung and China Liaison Office director Zhang Xiao-ming.

(EJinsight) September 9, 2015.

Students of the City University of Hong Kong (CityU) urged the school administration to reject a HK$200 million donation made by businessman Yeung Kin-man as they accused the entrepreneur of exploiting his workers, Ming Pao Daily reported on Wednesday. The donation is the largest the university has ever received.

Yeung is the founder and chief executive of Biel Crystal Manufactory Ltd., one of the largest manufacturers of glass covers and touchscreens for mobile phones. The companys factories on the mainland employ more than 100,000 workers. Its clients include Apple and Samsung Electronics.

The CityU student union staged a protest during the donation ceremony on Tuesday.

Cyrus Chu Kwok-chi, president of the student union, had tried to submit petition letters to Yeung and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who is the university chancellor. However, Chu was blocked and carried away by security guards at the venue. The union expressed shock at the way Chu was treated, saying that he had received an invitation letter to the ceremony.

Chu was sent to hospital after a confrontation with security guards who blocked him from entering the venue again. But a spokesperson for the university denied that Chu was manhandled by security guards, noting that the student leader felt unwell because he had been shouting at the venue for more than an hour.

In 2013 the Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour, a non-government organization that monitors misconduct in work places, accused Biel Crystal of forcing 11-hour shifts for seven days a week and giving workers only one day off each month. It also said that at least five workers in the company have committed suicide since 2011.

The newspaper failed to reach Yeung for comments.

(Oriental Daily, with video) September 8, 2015.

"Firmly refuse the blood-and-sweat donation
Give our City University its integrity back"

A security guard is injured

The City University board of directors' community relations committee recently passed the motion to accept the $200 million contribution from businessman Yeung Kin-man. Yesterday there was an acceptance ceremony at Conrad Hotel in Admiralty. More than a dozen students stood outside, held up protest banners and chanted slogans. They said that their Student Union president was inside and they were concerned about his personal safety. The chaos went for 2 hours and stopped only when the university board of directors chairman took a letter of petition from the students.

When the students arrived to protest, the police set up a protest zone outside the hotel. As the demonstrators discussed whether to leave, the City University Student Union president Cyrus Chu Kwok-chi was removed from the meeting. According to Chu, he wanted to hand a letter to Chief Executive CY Leung during his speech, but he was carried off by eight security guards as soon he stood up. He was refused re-entry into the meeting hall. Chu demanded the university authorities to giver him a reasonable explanation. Meanwhile other students tried to charge into the meeting hall. Chu tried to breach the security guards by jumping down the standing room area by the stairway. Because his action was dangerous, the fire department and the emergency medical service were summoned. Chu laid on the stairwell and refused to be taken away. Eventually, he was taken to Queen Mary Hospital to receive treatment.

A security guard claimed to be hurt. He sat and looked pained, but he refused treatment. According to information, he told the police that someone kicked him amidst the chaos.

The City University Student Union suspects that there are political aims behind this sudden donation. Accepting the money will destroy the autonomy of the university, including personnel appointments. They demand that the university authorities reject the donation from Yeung Kin-man as well as to cease and desist everything that involves the naming of buildings and chair professorships.


City Broadcasting Channel

Internet comments:

- I fully support the stopping of all large-sum donations from celebrities (actually, Yeung Kin-man is barely known in Hong Kong despite the size of his businesses) to universities. All universities should be self-funded in order to maintain their integrity and autonomy. They can work out their own destinies.
- I also support the stopping of all government subsidization of universities, because CY Leung is the Chief Executive and head of that government. If the university accepts money from the government, we will all die (or something).
- The immediate consequence of stopping donations/subsidies is that tuition fees will have to be raised through the roof. But that is okay, because it is worth the price. We expect to pay that price in order to maintain our integrity. 

- Of the $200 million, $50 million was designated by Yeung Kin-man to subsidize City University students to go overseas as exchange students. The City University students will now have to pay their own way in full to show us their integrity.
- City University Student Union president Cyrus Chu was accused in April 2015 of taking $30,000 from the Student Affairs Office so that he can go on an exchange program to Japan along with his girlfriend. So he has made this trip and he doesn't give a damn about anyone else hereafter.
- The City University administration has condemned the Student Union for deliberately not mentioning the purpose of this $50 million.

- It is a strange idea that Yeung Kin-man should put down $200 million in order to make CY Leung look good (or something). There is plenty of other things that $200 million can be used for, other than "make CY Leung look good." Here is an example: (Economic Journal, 2014/12/08): The Land Registry said that units 36A and 36B of Legend Tower, 7 Shing Yip Street, Kwun Tong with an area of 18,156 square feet has been sold for $203,347,200 at a rate of $11,200 per square foot. The buyer is Fu Tai Industrial Development Company Limited, whose director is Yeung Kin-man.

- "Firmly refuse the blood-and-sweat donation." Blood-and-sweat? The donor Yeung Kin-man is in the business of manufacturing mobile phone touch screens. (Economic Journal) September 8, 2015.

You may be unfamiliar with the name Yeung Kin-man, but you are likely to be very familiar with his company's products. When you touch the screen on your mobile phone, that piece of glass screen very likely came from his factories. Yeung factories in Shenzhen and Weizhou accounts for one-third of all mobile phone screens in the world. His clients include Apple (USA), Samsung (South Korea), Sony (Japan), Xiaomi and Huawei (China). In addition, about 100 of the glass covers of the 30 million luxury European watches are manufactured by his companies. He hires as many 110,000 employees. Recently he donated $200 million to City University to support a School of Veterinary Science and other scientific research and development as a way of promoting innovation ...

If you object to Yeung Kin-man because he runs sweatshops, you should also object to Apple/Samsung/Sony/Xiaomi/Huawei because they buy their screens from Yeung's sweatshops. Since that means you can't post onto Facebook without your mobile phone, this is surely out of the question for you.

- Yeung Kin-man is suspected of being a "689" (=CY Leung) lackey because (1) he is involved in a certain Happy Hong Kong Charity Foundation and (2) CY Leung is a honorary sponsor of the said charity foundation.

This is like saying that these City University students should quit attending university in Hong Kong because, by being the Chief Executive, the law says that CY Leung is the Chancellor of all eight universities. If they insist on attending university in Hong Kong, they may become brainwashed (or something).

- Why are the City University students adamantly opposed to a School of Veterinary Science? Because this was what CY Leung wanted when he was the chairman of the board of directors at City University. Since anything that CY Leung wants is bad, this must be aborted at all cost. Furthermore, while CY Leung couldn't get his way when he was here, Yeung is now coming to complete it for him. So the project must aborted at all cost. City University must never get a School of Veterinary Science. I don't know why, but this just cannot be allowed to happen or else we all die (or something).

- Just an observation about the two hours of chaos for the purpose of having a student handing over a petition to the chairman of the university board of directors. Why can't the students just send it by post? You are missing the point! The students don't care about any stinking letter. They only want the media taking pictures of them handing a letter over to the chairman of the university board of directors.

- Just a point about what happened to City University Student Union president Cyrus Chu Kwok-chi. One report said: Chu wanted to re-enter the meeting hall but was blocked by 8 security guards, so he tried to jump down two storeys. Then he laid down on the floor, refused to be moved for an hour but eventually agreed to go to the hospital. Another report said: A spokesperson for the university denied that Chu was manhandled by security guards, noting that the student leader felt unwell because he had been shouting at the venue for more than an hour. A third report said: Chu was taken to the hospital because of a leg cramp. So the total picture comes from the pieces.

- City University has been in the news quite a lot recently. For example, their O (Orientation) Camp brawl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y67wP_zWJRw shows us that they've got plenty of integrity.

- When I got to the part about "The City University Student Union suspects that there are political aims behind this sudden donation. Accepting the money will destroy the autonomy of the university, including personnel appointments" I almost choked to death. What about the sudden mysterious donation of $1.4 million to Benny Tai which he re-routed to Occupy Central-related projects? What about the appointment of Johannes Chan to Pro Vice Chancellor. It is as if they transplanted all the problems from Hong Kong University to City University almost verbatim with only the names of the individuals changed.
- No, the situations are different. In the case of City University, the donation was offered to the university itself and the board of directors discussed and approved it. In the case of Hong Kong University, the donation went to Benny Tai and the university council found out only by reading Wen Wei Po/Ta Kung Pao. In summary, the first situation was against Freedom/Democracy/Human Rights/Transparency/Rule of Law/Universal Suffrage while the second situation was for Freedom/Democracy/Human Rights/Transparency/Rule of Law/Universal Suffrage.
- (Wen Wei Po) Leung Hiu-yeung used to be the CUSU External Affairs Secretary. He was kicked out of school last month due to failing grades, so he is now an 'outsider.' On this day, he also stood dangerously outside the two-storey-high stairwell just like Cyrus Chu. So City University now has evidence of outside interference with the autonomy of the institution.

(SCMP) Fifa has a cheek to lecture Hong Kong fans about booing China national anthem - but they ought to heed the warning. James Porteous. July 19, 2015.

Two opaque bodies wielding immense global power, riven with corruption allegations. Answerable to nobody, handing down diktats with abandon. Billions of dollars sloshing around, making a skim here and there irresistible to some. Transparency International, Amnesty and similar organisations are not fans. Nor are the US and many other Western governments - though they do have support from the likes of Qatar and Russia.

Yup, Fifa and the Chinese Communist Party have a lot in common - though China's governing body has done more to improve life for the people they represent than football's.

Another thing the two august bodies have in common, it seemed last week, is a clumsy determination to stoke protest in Hong Kong by issuing heavy-handed proclamations.

Just as Beijing appeared hell-bent on stoking passions during Occupy Central by barking orders, so Fifa might have helped guarantee angry scenes from Hong Kong fans in their next World Cup qualifier, against Qatar on September 8.

Fifa sent a letter at the start of the month to the Hong Kong Football Association noting that "according to information at our disposal, the fans of the representative team of Hong Kong booed their national anthem" before the team's first two qualifiers in June. Yes, our own anthem, not Bhutan's or the Maldives'.

"[We] would be left with no other option than to impose sanctions against your association, should such incidents recur," Fifa said. Predictably, when the HKFA revealed this and pleaded (once more) with fans not to boo the March of the Volunteers again, fans reacted furiously.

"How can you be punished for booing your own national anthem?" was the gist of complaints, but Fifa's "principles of fair play" apply not only towards opposing teams "but also towards your own association and its representative team".

Who better than Fifa to say what's fair, of course. This is the organisation that was compared to the mafia by US Senator Richard Blumenthal during a Senate hearing last week into their ongoing corruption crisis. He did backtrack: "[that was] almost insulting to the mafia ... because the mafia would never have been so blatant, overt and arrogant in its corruption," he clarified.

The same day, Transparency issued recommendations on how to begin cleaning out the Augean Stables in Zurich. Later, former vice-president Jeffrey Webb was on a plane to New York under extradition to face corruption charges, one of 14 men indicted by the US Justice Department. Then sponsors (finally) spoke out.

It wasn't all bad news: president Sepp Blatter, absent in New Zealand and Canada for the Under-20 World Cup and Women's World Cup, will be heading to Russia for the 2018 World Cup draw. Nothing to do with Russia having no extradition treaty with the US.

You wonder how the mandarins can be bothered to hammer minnows like Hong Kong, but life goes on for those of the 400 members of staff in Zurich whose time is not occupied by paper-shredding and panicked telephone conversations with expensive lawyers.

We asked Fifa: who reported the booing (presumably the match delegate, but who knows); has a team been punished before for such a "crime" (the Spanish government made unhappy noises when Basque and Catalan fans booed Spain's national anthem ahead of the King's Cup final between Athletic Bilbao and Barcelona recently, but no punishment seems to have been made); and what might happen if the March of the Volunteers is raspberried again?

After an initial meaningless statement confirming the warning, they sort of answered: "cannot comment cannot confirm ... cannot comment". Thanks. We had to laugh when Fifa's ultra-oxymoronic ethics committee proclaimed the very same day that "more transparency" was needed.

What is transparent is that the HKFA will be very worried. Hong Kong Stadium still has not been approved by the government for the qualifier against China in November, sure to be a testy affair.

"High-level talks" are ongoing, we understand, with the government believed to be worried about 40,000 fans seeing the game as an ideal opportunity to rile the mainland.

It could even be played behind closed doors if there's more booing at the Qatar match - which would likely be a relief for the Hong Kong government as it would help them avoid a tricky decision.

So, much as it sticks in the craw to take advice on manners from Fifa, let's hope fans hold their tongues in September.

(SCMP) September 8, 2015.

James Porteous: Hmmm ... some fairly loud booing for China's national anthem for 30 seconds before other fans tried to drown it out with applause - could Hong Kong be facing punishment from Fifa for that, having been warned?


The China national anthem was booed before kickoff again, for perhaps 30 seconds before being drowned out by applause from fans realising the potential repercussions - HK could face playing games behind closed doors, or be docked points by FIFA.

(Apple Daily, with video) September 8, 2015.

When the national anthem came on, many fans in the stand clapped and booed, with some of them shouting "We are Hong Kong" to drown out the national anthem. TVB used to broadcast the national anthem part, but they did not have a live broadcast this time.

In June this year, the Hong Kong team won its home matches against Bhutan and Maldives. However, some Hong Kong fans booed their own national anthem. In July this year, the Hong Kong Football Association received a letter from FIFA that if such improper conduct were to appear again in future matches, appropriate penalties will be imposed, ranging from closed door matches, forfeiture of matches, points deduction or even expulsion from the World Cup.

(Oriental Daily, with video) September 8, 2015.

When the national anthem began, the Power of Hong Kong core members were very restrained and did not boo. They even called for the fans around them not to boo. But fans in others parts of the stadium booed aloud. Some fans began to sing to the national anthem in an attempt to drown out the booing. But the booing was louder. Some fans turned their backs to the playing field in a display of their attitudes. TVB News Channel broadcast the singing of the national anthem, but the TVB J2 channel which broadcast the f full match live did not broadcast this part.


Ellis Kwong Wai Kwan
Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfe6HWJFJ5o
Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyQxNBpfNmg
Part 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sikF0qSgE0w

YouTube Spoiling the Spanish anthem

Internet comments:

- Apple Daily reported that TVB did not broadcast the national anthem part. According to Oriental Daily, TVB J2 which aired the whole match live did not show the national anthem part, but the TVB News Channel (and the TVB Jade late night news report) both reported the national anthem part. What is the difference? The TVB J2 live match broadcast would be seen in mainland China, and thus do even more damage to Hong Kong tourism/retail/hospitality industries. But the people of Hong Kong can watch their local news and see what some people are trying to do here.

- Here is the Hong  Kong team: Yapp Hung-fai; Jack Sealy, Festut Baise, Jean Kilama, Cheung Kin-fung; Bai He, Huang Yang; Lo Kwan-yee, Lam Kaw-wai, Jaimes McKee; Chan Siu-ki. Those five names in bold are homegrown players, and the other six players hail from elsewhere (the two defensive midfielders are from mainland China). So what is there for the Hong Kong localists to cheer about? What is Labour Party's legislators not complaining about being deprived of employment opportunities?

- The booing is a microcosm of Occupy Central versus Valiant Warriors. Occupy Central wanted the central government to make concessions and therefore negotiations are needed; the Valiant Warriors think that only valiant resistance can bring down the Chinese Communists and no compromise should be made. So in like manner, the Power of Hong Kong group did not boo and asked others not to boo because of the potential FIFA sanctions; the Valiant Warriors think that only valiant booing can bring down the Chinese Communists and no compromise should be made.

- If the next home match against China is turned into a closed door affair, Hong Kong's valiant localists warriors will go and beat up Sepp Blatter/Michel Platini.
- In Europe, law-breaking fans are identified and banned from matches. The Hong Kong boo'ers failed to take the standard tactic of wearing masks to avoid identification.

- Since Hong Kong fans were booing their own national anthem instead of their opponents' national anthem, the penalty should be less.
- You misunderstood the reasoning. The penalty is really for injecting politics into soccer by whatever means. If you want to play politics, do it elsewhere; you have plenty of other opportunities.

- This is pathetic. The last match was against China in Shenzhen, and there was no booing from the 2,000 Hong Kong fans. They were too intimidated by photos of the Chinese armed police rehearsing in the stadium. If you arrested for disorderly conduct in public, it is 15 days of administrative detention without any means of appeal.
- In Hong Kong, we have the notion of a "watch dog" (
門口狗). This is a guard dog. When the dog is in its home turf and spots a stranger, it will bark and yelp loudly to intimidate. When you talk the dog outside for a walk, it will droop its head and whimper lamely.

- It is the Hong Kong soccer fans who have no manners, not Hong Kong fans in general. Hong Kong fans don't create any problems with the Chinese Women's volleyball team (now championship) or the Chinese diving team.
- Support the Hong Kong team = Boo the national anthem. What a brain-damaged idea!
- What is for certain that those booed do not love Hong Kong. FIFA had issued their warning already. These fans won't mind if the Hong Kong team gets penalized. They don't love Hong Kong.

- 人必自侮,然後人侮之;家必自毀,而後人毀之;國必自伐,而後人伐之。 There is saying in Chinese: "A person must insult himself before others insult him; a family must ruin itself first before others ruin it; a nation must destroy itself first before others destroy it."

- What do you think the Hong Kong national anthem should be? My vote is George Lam's Love You Until I Am Feverish. It is usually sung with an alternate set of lyrics to Love You Until I Eat Bananas.

- All these cost-benefit analyses are missing the point. The only thing that mattered to the perpetrators is that they feel good. That is all they care about. Just like the Umbrella Revolutionaries/Shopping Revolutionaries/Reclaim Revolutionaries.

- Want war? Got real war! See Football War.

- The Internet says that it is unlikely that FIFA will impose penalties. Ignoring the question of whether you can trust the Internet, let it be said that if no penalties are imposed, then FIFA is encouraging the Yellow Ribbons to cause trouble in the next game where Hong Kong hosts China. That may be a good thing, because a major incident may cause Hong Kong to be forced out of the tournament immediately.

(Oriental Daily) September 7, 2015.

Alex Chow (Federation of Students), Chan Kin-man (Occupy Central Trio), Joshua Wong (Scholarism)

September will be the anniversary of the Occupy Movement. At a forum today, Chan Kin-man (Occupy Central), Alex Chow (former secretary-general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students) and Joshua Wong (Scholarism convener) all agreed that the Occupy Movement did not force the Central Government to rescind the 831 resolution and did not obtain universal suffrage for the people of Hong Kong. They acknowledged that all the efforts went for naught. Furthermore, Chan Kin-man said that the moderate pan-democrats have rebelled so as to impact the support for pan-democrats in the District Council and Legislative Council elections.

It is noticeable that no pan-democrat legislative councilor participated in the forum today. Could it be that they are disavowing the Occupy Movement at a time when the District Council elections are coming up?

The Occupy Movement moved ahead of schedule after the so-called 926 charge into the east wing of Government Headquarters, which is sometimes referred to as Civic Plaza. Chan Kin-man acknowledged that a pessimistic view of the Occupy Movement was that its greatest failure is the failure to obtain genuine universal suffrage. It also firmed up the hard-line stance of the pro-establishment camp and it caused the democracy movement to become even more constricted. So this seems to be a total defeat. Chan also said that the Occupy Movement caused certain moderate pan-democrats to switch sides, such that the support level for the pan-democrats have fallen from 60% to 40%. This means that the moderate pan-democratic candidates will be staring into a crisis in the upcoming elections.

But Chan Kin-man said that all has not been lost because the remaining 40% will be a "critical minority." Why did the movement seemed rudderless in its final stages? Chan said that most citizens regard the students as the movement leaders and therefore the Occupy Trio could not change the students' decisions. Does that mean that the students should be blamed for the failure of the movement?

At the forum, Joshua Wong acknowledged that the decision-making structure was undemocratic and that there was lack of democracy within the movement. For example, the Hong Kong Federation of Students had more than half of the votes in the five-party platform  (consisting of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Scholarism, Occupy Central, the pan-democratic legislative and the civil groups). So even if Occupy Central and Scholarism agree on something, it won't go through if the Federation of Students disagrees. In other words, Joshua Wong criticized the leadership of the Federation of Students.

Meanwhile Alex Chow said that they could not resolve the internal contradictions of civic society and therefore nothing can be accomplished without the trust. He said that the students initiated the escalation without consultation. The tragedy of the student movement was that they had no more cards to play or they played whatever cards they could without justification. Chow said that it takes 40 years to develop students movements elsewhere, so this means that large-scale movements will have to keep going indefinitely.

But the best move came from the pan-democratic political parties. Not a single pan-democratic legislator showed up for this forum. During the Occupy period, these people showed up regularly to offer support. Could it be that the elections are more important now, and the pan-democrats want to maintain a "safe distance" away from the anniversary of Occupy Central?

(InMediaHK) September 3, 2015.

Alex Chow said that the Umbrella Movement was a landmark in political culture and democracy movement. It exposed the mutual distrust within the civilian sector. Many of the decisions made by the Occupy Movement leadership (such as deliberations and voting) were controversial, and bred more distrust.

Alex Chow said that most of the decisions were made by the Occupy Central Trio, the Federation of Students, Scholarism and civil group. In Hong Kong, citizens do not trust groups. Under this type of decision-making structure, citizens won't understand or support the decisions and the decision-makers need to have superhuman abilities to deal with all the political issues.

Alex Chow said that the civil society continued business as usual during the Umbrella Movement, which means that the organizers have no cards to play. Even after 928, the civil society did not start a non-cooperation movement, there were no labor strikes, no business strikes and no school strikes. Public servants, teachers and the communities continued as usual. When civil society cooperates with the government, there are no cards left to play. Meanwhile the pressure grew, anxiety grew, discontent grew and dialogues reached dead ends. Chow said that every card played was ineffective, the options became fewer and clearance was coming up. Thus came the tragedy of Lung Wo Road on November 30, 2014.

Alex Chow said that the everyday politics of civil society in Hong Kong does not practice the democracy movement. Even if a more large-scale movement were to take place in the future, it is still doomed to defeat. "The Umbrella Movement is the result, not the cause, of the our everyday politics over the past several decades. If we keep thinking the same way, any future movement is doomed to fail. The only way to break through is to hope for the government to make a mistake. Is that what our strategy will be?"

Alex Chow also mentioned the university students voting to withdraw from the Hong Kong Federation of Students. He said that this is quite similar to the Umbrella Movement. Students are still electing representatives to handle all the affairs. This means that the student movements are like the April 5 movement -- namely four or five representatives doing everything for them. Students only think that their job is supervise the elected officers without having to participate themselves. This type of thinking restricts the power of civil society and stalls the students movements.

(InMediaHK) September 3, 2015.

Legislative councilor Leung Kwok-hung said that the Umbrella Movement was not a revolution. The foreign correspondents were merely hyping things up. He said that if we think that this was a revolution, then we don't understand ourselves too well. However, this is being defined not as a revolution because we want to decide whether we want a revolution sometime in the future.

Leung said that the word revolution refers to something irreversible, such as the Copernican Revolution.  There has been no narrative for the Umbrella Revolution. Nobody in Hong Kong wants a revolution. The Umbrella "Revolution" evolved from the Occupy Movement, which is not a revolution in itself.

In retrospect, the Umbrella Movement kept lowering its demands for universal suffrage in order not to clash with the government. This proves that the Umbrella Movement was not a revolution. There was a referendum that included three options all of which included civil nomination. Benny Tai thought that the three options were not moderate. The design of the Occupy Central movement was to have middle-class citizens and intellectuals to make some sacrifices and call on the people of Hong Kong to come forth. Therefore Benny Tai attached 12 other options that met international standards for the Chinese Communists to pick. The Chinese Communists refused to accept any. This forced the Hong Kong people to take action. If the Chinese Communists had accepted any one option, the Umbrella Movement would never take place. Therefore 928 happened in order to stop the counter-revolution, not to start a revolution.

According to Lenin on revolution, there should be a set of guiding principles, organization, propaganda and mobilization. However, the Hong Kong democracy movement does not even have a narrative.


On reaching out to the local communities, Leung said that the point is not so much about going into the communities as about what you do out there. Leung said: "I have lots of friends who play soccer with me, but they ignore my politics." He says that before going into the local communities, you need to resolve the problems of the Umbrella Movement and the democracy movement first. Otherwise you have nothing to talk to people about.

"The mistake in the Umbrella Movement was that we were too optimistic." He said that we couldn't stick to non-violence during the movement and we couldn't force our enemies not to use violence against us. In the five-party platform, none of the parties dared to make the decision to attack Government Headquarters. That would have been a grave decision. In his own case, Leung did not make any proposal between September 28 and October 2.

In mid-October, the Blue Ribbons began to interceded violently. This effectively curtailed the mobilization of the Umbrella Movement. "The Communists were really crafty." The movement was now doomed to shrink. The presence of the Blue Ribbons meant that we could not concentrate on the government. Afterwards, "when you talk, you get cursed out; when you get beaten up, you don't even understand why; the civil disobedience campaign became more and more remote."

(InMediaHK) September 3, 2015.

Joshua Wong said that the Umbrella Movement did not fail; it merely failed to achieve anything. He said that the five-party platform merely meant that each party said whatever they want to say. So the pan-democrats and the Occupy Central trio were not interested any more escalations. This meant that the platform was led by the students. Nobody thought about how to incorporate the localists and newbies into platform.

Joshua Wong said that they held meetings day and night, "with dozens of reporters waiting for us to come out." He said that the students never thought about withdrawing whereas the pan-democrats and Occupy Central trio do not want any escalation. This meant that there is a political tussle within the platform. "They each have their say" and "nothing was ever resolved."

In the National Education campaign of 2012, more than twenty organizations took part but only three of them really made the decisions. When Scholarism thought that they had won and wanted to withdraw, some people surrounded them and demanded explanations. What Scholarism did was to remove all the microphones. So that was a top-to-bottom decision.

Joshua Wong said that the idea social movement should be run bottom-to-top. In Malaysia and Taiwan, the student movements were run top-to-bottom. In theory, every movement is initiated by an organization. The point is that the organization must be democratized. At Scholarism, volunteers or members will sometimes questions why decisions were made without consultation. At the Federation of Students, they couldn't consult all the member universities all the time.

Joshua Wong said that even before the Umbrella Movement, some people were accusing "leftist retards" for "betraying Hong Kong. During the Umbrella Movement, some localists challenged the decisions made by the Grand Stage. The localists and the newbies were not incorporated into the decision-making process. These people came into the movement in ways that do not conform to the traditional model. Traditionally, students participate in student unions in school and then graduate to join NGO's etc. The localists and newbies do not come this way. In the latter stages of the Umbrella Movement, 30% to 40% of the participants were either localists or newbies. Therefore future movements must think about how to incorporate them into the decision-making process.

(EJinsight) Why Jimmy Lai thinks student leaders are arrogant and foolish. September 10, 2015.

It must have been tough for Jimmy Lai to openly criticize the student leaders of last years protests for being arrogant and foolish.

The media maverick, who stood in the frontline of the pro-democracy movement, said the students ignored their elders in the Occupy Central movement when the latter called for a retreat two months after the street occupation began. The way they treated the Occupy Central founders could not be worse, Lai said.

He was reflecting on the movement in an interview with his own weekly magazine ahead of the anniversary of the protests.

He compared the students to people who finish a messy meal and leave everyone else to clean up after them. They were late for meetings, not just two minutes but an hour or more, he said. When they called a meeting, they wanted us to be there right away. But they came only when everyone else had arrived.

Lais frank revelations were carried by pro-establishment newspapers which earlier accused him of shirking responsibility for his role as a financier of the 79-day movement. They also highlighted a deepening generational conflict post 1950s activists against their post 1990s counterparts.

The difference in strategy between Occupy Central on one hand and the Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) and Scholarism on the other emerged in November when the former tried to persuade the latter to withdraw from the streets and save their energy for the next phase of the movement. But the students wanted more radical measures, knowing they had the support of the wider population.

At one point, the students pressed lawmaker Albert Ho to quit in order to trigger a by-election and proxy referendum on political reform. Ho announced he was going to resign in January but the move fizzled after it got a cold shoulder from the public. Lai described it as crazy, foolish and irresponsible.

He was no less unforgiving toward student leaders Alex Chow and Joshua Wong, whom he condemned for not having respect for veterans like him and others. Chow disappeared from the limelight after the protests ended, yielding to Nathan Law as HKFS secretary general. Wong, Time magazines No. 3 candidate for 2014 Person of the Year, has an active media presence, especially in Lais publications.

It was not the first time Lai had been critical of the student leaders. He seriously disagreed with their decision to hold out until they got concessions from the government which never came.

To be fair, the students had run out of energy and their inability to show up on time at important appointments should not be taken too seriously.

Its no secret that Chief Secretary Carrie Lam is no fan of Joshua Wong, who often publicly embarrassed her without giving her a chance to reply. But Lam showed her soft power by appearing to win over Alex Chow in their first and only meeting during the protests.

Im sure there will be more details when people come out with their own version of events. We think Lais grumbling is only the beginning.

(HKG Pao) September 20, 2015.

Caption: "I want revolution, I want peace, I don't want to go to jail!!"

Occupy Central Trio member Reverend Chu Yiu-ming was interviewed about the one year anniversary of Occupy Central. Chiu said that he was criticized by other church pastors for betraying his faith, but he used the fact that Occupy Central ended peacefully in rebuttal. Reverend Chu probably forgot that even though there were no casualties in the streets, the mental and economic damage to citizens was tremendous. And after the "peace," the social rift will have a much deeper impact.

In truth, the demonstrators did not achieve peace themselves. In the Occupy areas, there were a lot of thefts, sectarian clashes, damage of public property and even surrounding police cars, topping barricades and constructing barbed obstacles and other unpeaceful things. The reason why there was no large-scale clash was because the police acted in restraint and the citizens endured things quietly. For Chu to have the chutzpah to credit himself, isn't he lacking in the attribute of humility in Christianity?

Chu Yiu-ming said that his health is failing and he has been in and out of hospitals many times since Occupy Central started. So at the age of 70, he doesn't know if he will be prosecuted and sent to jail. He seemed to be rallying public opinion to get himself out of jail. Didn't the Occupy Central Trio said initially that they will quietly let the rule of law takes its course, that they will not resist and they will be sentenced without protest? But now we see the Occupy Central trio coming up with individual reasons why they should be able to stay above the fray. How can the masses gain victory when they have perfidious leaders like these?

Chu said, "The younger generation will never be the same after the baptism of tear gas." He is right. The tear gas caused the young people to become rebellious and released a Pandora's box of Shopping Revolutionary, Hong Kong independence, destruction of rule-of-law and contempt to the law. Furthermore the silent majority also saw that street violence is even more evil than tear gas. So we must counter-attack, disband Occupy Central and put the Yellow Ribbons to the law.

(South China Morning Post) September 1, 2015.

In 2009, the former Diocesan Girls School student talked to the press after she scored 10 As in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations (HKCEE). Mak told reporters at the time that she would like to become a politician and even the Hong Kong chief executive one day. I want to become an influential [person], not only for the pay, she said at the time. When asked again in the interview, Mak said: [This will be] something in N years. It is hard to know.

(South China Morning Post) September 7, 2015.

She may be a beauty queen with a Cambridge law degree who expressed interest in being a political leader, but one dream is too big for Louisa Mak Ming-sze moving out of her family home.

If I wanted to move out of my parents home, I would have a lot of issues financially, the new Miss Hong Kong said in an exclusive interview with the South China Morning Post. I do feel strongly about it because a lot of my friends recently graduated, got jobs and want some freedom from their parents and are unable to get anywhere to sleep.

The 23-year-old said the citys soaring property prices had left young people unable to chase their true vocations and instead chasing high-paying jobs in sectors like finance and medicine. If you dont even have a place to sleep, how can you talk about dreams and aspirations?

And Mak who, after achieving top grades in her school exams in 2009 told the media that she was interested in becoming a politician said tackling the problem would mean taking on vested interests, including homeowners as well as big business.

Thats why us Hong Kong people have to be united and try to think how we can go forward with the interests of the bigger society in mind. No one wants the price of their own house to go down. But we must realise that this is a very immediate issue. Its affecting a lot of the younger generation.

But Mak also sees a need for the city to strengthen its legal and social systems to prevent the tyranny of the majority as it moves towards democracy. She said comments by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying during last years Occupy protests that poor people would dominate in a full democracy were not a novel idea.

When the majority can decide everything, then there may be unjust results, she said. People like to quote the Nazi regime, though its a bit confusing because whether they were the majority is still debatable But I do take the point that democracy in itself is not enough, because when the majority can make decisions, then they can suppress those in the minority. Thats why we need protection from the legal system.

She said there was still a lot of discrimination in Hong Kongs legal system and society, which needed to be improved through education and other means. Its always time [for Hong Kong to have democracy], but whether its feasible is another issue, she said. She would not comment on whether it was feasible, saying instead: We are trying to [realise democracy]. Thats what we are all aiming for at the moment. 

(South China Morning Post) September 7, 2015.

She may be better known as a beauty queen, but as a straight-A student and Cambridge law graduate, the new Miss Hong Kong has strong ideas on what she would do if she were to become the city's leader - including tackling vested interests to cut inflated housing costs.

"If I were the chief executive, I would definitely want housing to be affordable," said Louisa Mak Ming-sze, who, after gaining a perfect score in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination in 2009, said she wanted to enter politics and even become chief executive one day.

The 23-year-old said she understood the difficulties in making housing more affordable, particularly because of vested interests, which included not only businesses but also individual property owners.

She said every policy would inevitably affect some interests, leading to some people losing. She said if she was chief executive, she would make sure that the majority was winning. "There is not going to be a policy where everyone is going to be happy. And that's why it's difficult, and I'm not confident enough in myself."

Perhaps this is why the new Miss Hong Kong, although she sounded certain that she wanted to be a politician back in 2009, is now not so sure about this path any more.

She said there were constraints on the road of politics that she did not expect when she was younger, such as power struggles and financial requirements.

"There is this thing about being politically correct. I myself have always tried to be correct, but not politically correct. I need to know whether I have the capabilities to serve society in that role, because I learned that it takes much more than simply caring about society."

Mak said she was open to different options, including performing, because she is passionate about dancing and drama.

"I realise that the media is a very powerful influencer When I was doing some drama productions at university, I found it a very satisfying experience to be able to send out messages, but through someone else's mouth. I am looking forward to bringing some new content to the media, if I am able to."

Being an "influencer" has been Mak's dream since she was little. Last year, she interned at Sing Tao Daily for four months as a feature writer to "send messages out there and to voice your opinions indirectly", while "pretending to be neutral".

At about the same time, she posted a photo on her Instagram account showing her in the middle of the pro-democracy Occupy protests.

"I appreciated the movement because it really made us think. Some people were very for it and some people were very against it, but I think it's that clash that will inspire us to think. It was beneficial to Hong Kong because we finally saw people with passion for society. On a social level, I think it really allowed different sections of society to communicate, despite hostility sometimes."

But Mak said she was disappointed in seeing that people were not able to tolerate different views during the movement and she described it as "the worst thing you can have in a democratic society."

She said she went to the protests because it was a "special moment of Hong Kong's history". She said both the movement's supporters and detractors should have gone to the scene to "see for yourself, to feel it".

She did not say whether she was a supporter or a detractor. "I think action speaks for itself."

The desire to be an influencer is is also why she sought to become Miss Hong Kong, a decision that seemed a far cry from her dream and her education. "In order to do good on a larger scale you really need some people to see you and hear you. That's always what I wanted to do since I was young. Money or material things never satisfied me. I thought Miss Hong Kong was something that would only add value and help me to bring some influence to society. I thought it was the most suitable opportunity at that time."

In the coming year, she wants to be able to host shows interviewing different people and make documentaries to "bring food for thought to the audience". But despite her legal education, becoming a lawyer seems an unlikely option, as she likes to try new things, tends to overlook details and does not "enjoy the prospect of being in an office from 9am to midnight".

Born in Australia, Mak moved to Hong Kong with her parents when she was two years old. Her father, Mak Cheuk-sang, is the vice-principal of SKH Lam Woo Memorial Secondary School, a local elite school, and her mother is an occupational therapist.

Some have said that winning the beauty pageant will help Mak climb to an even higher social class and may eventually lead to a rich husband, but Mak scoffs at the idea. "I can't be more offended [by the idea], to be honest." She said she would not have needed the pageant to seek a rich spouse because there were "a lot of eligible bachelors around me" at university.

"It's just normal that we do want to achieve more and make it to a more influential position Miss Hong Kong to me would be a ladder, but a ladder to more opportunities and a more influential position, where I can then further my own aspirations." However, people have been criticising beauty pageants more and more for degrading women.


Internet comments:

- The Miss Hong Kong pageant is an example of an undemocratic election. It is true that anybody can enter the context. But the roster is screened by a panel of judges and filtered down to a much shorter list. The final vote is open to the public (more precisely, you have to own a mobile phone). In other words, this is similar to the August 31st framework from the National People's Congress Standing Committee.

- (ET Today) Louisa Mak took the Miss Hong  Kong crown as expected in addition to being elected the Most Photogenic Lady. But she was also the most disliked Miss Hong Kong in history. After the results were announced, the other nine contestants rushed up to congratulate the first runner-up Ada Pong and second runner-up Karmen Kwok while totally ignoring the winner Louisa Mak. This shows that the newly crowned Miss Hong Kong needs to pay more attention to her social skills.

Of course, she seems to understand that if she were ever to be in a policy-making position, she is bound to upset certain people and will need good acting skills to feign to care about everybody.

- She said: "I appreciated the movement because it really made us think. Some people were very for it and some people were very against it, but I think it's that clash that will inspire us to think. It was beneficial to Hong Kong because we finally saw people with passion for society. On a social level, I think it really allowed different sections of society to communicate, despite hostility sometimes." But Mak said she was disappointed in seeing that people were not able to tolerate different views during the movement and she described it as "the worst thing you can have in a democratic society."

There are plenty of other opportunities to do the same, such as discussions about the meaning of July 1st or October 1st in Hong Kong. There was no need to Occupy Admiralty for 79 days for nothing. Can she really name any benefit that came out of it?
- It is the opinion of many Hongkongers is that the Umbrella Revolution has vindicated the Chinese Communists in their clearance of the Chinese students in the June 4th 1989 incident.

- Louisa Mak posted a photo of herself at Occupy Admiralty. Has she gone in to surrender herself to the police for attending an unlawful gathering? According to Professor Benny Tai, this final step is necessary in order to complete the rule-of-law process for civil disobedience. Lousia Mak is a law student, and should be well-aware of this.

- About the Umbrella Revolution: She said she went to the protests because it was a "special moment of Hong Kong's history". She said both the movement's supporters and detractors should have gone to the scene to "see for yourself, to feel it". She did not say whether she was a supporter or a detractor. "I think action speaks for itself."

At one level, this is a lot of words about nothing. It is vacuity (=lack of thought or intelligence; empty-headedness). At another level, this is smart because by saying nothing of substance, she can't offend anyone. If she signs up for one side or the other, she will be marked as the enemy by the other side. So it is smart to say a lot of nothings. At yet another level, this type of cynical obscurantism means that the speaker has no moral principles and therefore must never be trusted. At her age, she is already well-versed in reciting the script.

- Well, Louisa Mak has some wishful thinking about being able to stay above the fray. She has signed with TVB and that means she can't give interviews to Apple Daily/Next Magazine as a matter of company policy. However, Apple Daily has taken her South China Morning Post interviews and reported as news. Their particular way of positioning things means that Louisa Mak is regarded as the Yellow Ribbon Miss Hong Kong by some people already. The title of their piece is: "10 A's Miss Hong Kong responds on Occupy Central photo, the Umbrella Movement was beneficial." And she can't afford to either admit or deny for fear of offending one side or the other.

Where you support or oppose the movement's supporters and detractors ...

... you should have gone to the scene to see for yourself, to feel it

even though she has not directly answered whether she supports or opposes Occupy Central

- If Louisa Mak decides to come out of the closet as a Yellow Ribbon, she may become the first Miss Hong Kong ever without a Home Visit Permit for going to mainland China.

After the glorious days in which Hong Kong established itself as the tourist-bashing capital of the world:

there was a long lull. But now the summer vacation is over and we set out for another round of tourist-bashing.

(Wen Wei Po) August 31, 2015.

According to Facebook posts, the Localists Alliance and Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People are jointly organizing the Reclaim Sheung Shui event. Both groups were formed very recently. They declare that on September 6th at 2pm, they will assemble at the Sheung Shui MTR station. The stated goal is to object protest against parallel traders. There are two march routes, including the Sheung Shui Metropolis Plaza, Lung Sum Road, Shek Wu Hui district Sun Fung Road/Sun Wan Road and the Shek Wu Hui taxi stand. These locations are the main distribution points and transportation hubs in Sheung Shui.

According to our investigation, not many people are active in Localists Alliance and Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People. Previously the anti-parallel trading action were initiated by the North District Parallel Traders Concern Group led by Ronald Leung Kim-shing. So far, 65 persons have indicated that they will join the upcoming action, including Ronald Leung Kim-shing. In early 2014, Leung Kim-shing organized an anti-locust movement to curse out mainland tourists on Canton Road in Tsim Sha Tsui. The incident was roundly condemned by Hongkongers and Leung was forced to apologize several laters and that movement stopped.

According to our information, the Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People members come from the Hong Kong City-State faction. Most of them are local Sheung Shui residents. Other Hong Kong City-State people have formed similar organizations such as Hung Hom Affairs For Hung Hom People etc.

In April this year, the central government announced that the multiple-visit permits for Shenzhen residents will be turned into once-a-week permits. Afterwards, the localist radicals became clearly more restrained. According to information, they want to re-start the Reclaim campaigns because the District Council elections are coming up.

Our newspaper contacted Sheung Shui rural affairs committee chairman Hou Chi-keung. He said that he is opposed to anyone who wants to attack his community, especially businesses. "We should welcome anyone who comes to Hong Kong to spend money as long as they are not doing any illegal." He said that these protestors are not interested in opposing parallel traders, but they only want to get more votes. "If this goes on, not just Sheung Shui but all of Hong Kong will be victimized."

(Wen Wei Po) September 5, 2015.

According to information, the organizers applied for a no-objection notice from the police. They proposed two march routes. The police met with the organizers on Wednesday. The planned route begins from the Sheung Shui train station and goes past the Metropolis Plaza, Lung Sum Road and a number of streets in Shek Wu Hui before ending back at the train station. Along most of the way are various pharmacies, cosmetic stores, jewelry stores, etc. The police may be shutting down certain vehicular lanes to allow them to march instead of on the narrow sidewalks. However, the organizers did not promise.

Our reporter made field observations at Lung Shum Road and Shek Wu Hui on Thursday afternoon. Although this is a three-day holiday in mainland China, there were not a lot of mainland customers. One pharmacy owner says: "Business volume is half of what it was compared to the beginning of the year. We can be said to be sustained by saline solution. We don't know how long we will last." When told that people are coming to "reclaim Sheung Shui" this Sunday, the pharmacy owner moaned: "I am more dead than live already. I'm surely going to die this time."

A Ms. Wang from Shenzhen said: "Previously, I came two to three times a week to shop here. Now I come once a week or every ten days. I usually come with three or four other persons. We are not parallel traders. We want to buy some daily necessities while in Hong Kong. We don't want to be regarded as parallel traders."

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015.

Front page cover:
Anti-parallel trade demonstration erturns
Retail industry: Rub salt in wound

Monthly year-to-year comparisons of retail trade sectors.
Columns: Jan-Feb (combined to reflect Lunar New Year issue); March; April; May; June; July
Rows: (1) Jewelry, accessories, watches and luxury gifts; (2) Clothing; (3) Emporiums; (4) Medicine and cosmetics; (5) Overall
Example: Clothing was down 13% in July 2015 compared to July 2014.

Hong Kong's retail industry has gone through seven consecutive months of declines. Even as the retain industry is shrinking, the Localism Alliance and Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People groups are organizing Restore Sheung Shui to demonstrate against dispensaries and shops in Sheung Shui.

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015 16:12.

About 30 Localism Alliance members and about 30 Loyalty Militia members were separated by metal barricades outside the Sheung Shui MTR station. The Loyalty Militia said that they were forming a new group to represent authentic localism. The two sides hurled insults at each other. The Localism Alliance called their opponents "dog thugs" and accused them of forming an unlawful gathering to betray the people of Hong Kong.

The procession grew to about 100 persons. As they turned from Lung Sum Road into Sun Kong Street, they stood outside dispensaries and dried goods stores and cursed them out for betraying the nation of Hong Kong. They chanted loudly: "Please give our homes back our peace and tranquility." Many dispensaries shuttered their gates when the procession approached. A number of pedestrians exchanged foul-mouthed curses with the demonstrators. When the procession neared Sun Sing Road, they surrounded a police car and accused the police of mistreating a police dog by locking it inside the car.

The Localism Alliance began their march at around 3pm, with regular demonstrator "Captain America" waving the British Colonial Dragon/Lion flag for Hong Kong independence. The Loyalty Militia planned to follow them to publicize the violence wrought by the localists' anti-parallel trade activities. But since they didn't a letter-of-non-objection from the police, they were not allowed to proceed. They dispersed by themselves after an hour or so.

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015 16:20

A number of stores decided to shutter their gates just in case of trouble. One fruit store owner said that "I have to feed my wife and kids" and he was going to lose several thousand dollars in sales because of these demonstrators.

Some dispensaries moved their goods indoors and lowered their gates. Fortunately this was a false alarm as the demonstrators moved away peacefully. Other dispensary workers ignored the police warning and continued to do business.

Jewelry sore worker Mr. Liu said that they will be half-open/half-closed. He said that before March, 70% of his business came from mainlanders and now his total volume has dropped to 50% of what it was before the demonstrations began in March.

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015 16:36.

When the procession got back to the Sheung Shui MTR station, the organizers said that the march was over. However, more than 100 persons stayed behind to quarrel with the Loyalty Militia who called the demonstrators "scoundrels" and "trash."

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015 17:17.

Hong Kong Indigenous spokesperson Ray Wong was reported to have been arrested. This angered the localists who then blocked the pedestrian overpass and two entrances into the Sheung Shui MTR station.

(Wen Wei Po) September 7, 2015

The Reclaim Sheung Shui action was instigated by two Facebook pages, the Localist Alliance and Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People. However, the organizers declined to disclose their relationships with other organizations. At around 2pm or so, two young men wearing black t-shits and black masks claimed that they were the organizers. Before the march began, one of the men went up to a woman in a black t-shirt at the corner of the train station. The two held a conversation which the woman seemed to be issuing instructions while the young man kept nodding. The woman then left quickly and did not participate in the march.

When the march began, there were Hong Kong Indigenous members led by Ray Wong, the People Power members who were the core of the Mong Kok Shopping Revolutionaries, City-State members led by Cheng Hup and Sammy Wan, the North District Parallel Trade Concern Group led by Leung Kam-shing. However, apart from Captain America hoisting the British Dragon-Lion flag for Hong Kong independence, none of the other people carried flags that identified their organizations.

The young man in black said that his family name was Leung and would not uncover his face. After the march ended, our reporter followed Leung to the Sheung Shui MTR station, and saw him change his black t-shirt into a blue denim shirt and from round-rim glasses to thick rectangular glasses. He also purchased tickets and did not use an Octopus card, because this stops the police from tracking him by the Octopus card.

In reviewing the records, our reporter found that Mr. Leung bear a strong resemblance to a Leung Chi-han who was arrested during Occupy Central. In early October 18, Leung Chi-hang was arrested for tossing a metal barricade onto Nathan Road in Mong Kok and charged with disorderly conduct in public. On May 12, Leung Chi-hang was found guilty. On July 22, Leung Chi-hang won an appeal on the basis of a newly found video tape and was set free. According to information, Mr. Leung has close ties with Hong Kong Indigenous, which showed up in force to support him.

City-State member Sammy Wan is a follower of Grandmaster Chin Wan. In the City-State hierarchy, he is known as the Big Golden-winged Roc General. He is also closely linked to Leung Kam-shing and both have appeared on Wan Chin's City-State Forum. In March 3, this Hong Kong Police's Cyber Security and Technology Crime Bureau arrested a man named Wan for teaching demonstrators how to break through the police line, including information on how to manufacture petrol bombs and percussion grenades.

(EJinsight) September 7, 2015.

Some localist groups staged a protest Sunday against the so-called parallel-goods traders from the mainland, resuming a controversial campaign after a break of about six months. The protest took place at Sheung Shui, with demonstrators chanting slogans such as Tackle parallel trading, return my peaceful homeland and Protect livelihoods, reclaim Hong Kong, Apple Daily reported. Police detained at least one activist as the protest forced some shops in the area to pull down their shutters.

Leung Chi-han, a member of the Local League and the organizer of the protest, said parallel-trading activities have revived in Sheung Shui in the run-up to the mid-Autumn festival. Many drugstores sell mooncakes manufactured and branded by local hotels, attracting a lot of parallel traders. Fresh activities by parallel traders have affected the lives of local people, protesters say.

According to the police, about 150 people took part in the demonstration Sunday. As the protesters marched near San Kung Street and Hong Chai Street, where most drugstores are located, police set up a cordon to prevent the demonstrators from getting too near. Some shops downed shutters for the whole day while some re-opened after the protesters passed.

A Sheung Shui resident surnamed Fok, who didnt join the protest himself, said parallel-trading activities have been getting more serious recently. The traders throw rubbish such as cardboards and lunchboxes everywhere, and some would even urinate in the streets, Fok was quoted as saying.

There were some conflicts, verbal as well as physical, between the protestors and supporters of the pro-establishment camp.

Ray Wong Toi-yeung, a spokesperson for the group Hong Kong Indigenous, alleged that a person from a pro-establishment group had laid his hand on a volunteers neck. He wondered if the police would arrest that person. Wong himself was involved in a skirmish with the police, an incident which led to Wong and a police officer falling to the ground. Wong was later arrested on charge of assaulting the officer.


TVB News https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0unyeKLkpo This is your fair-and-balanced report giving time to the demonstrators, the counter-demonstrators and the government.
TVB News http://news.tvb.com/local/55ec4eaf6db28ca464000004 Demonstrators obstruct police car outside Sheung Shui police station

Epoch Times https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrZw6DZ-ND0

HKG Pao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQdqbUyZi7U Counter-demonstrators calling the demonstrators "Trash".
HKG Pao https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=13&v=gku--aKc6mU Arrest of Ray Wong
HKG Pao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QHjTUwpZ_0 Demonstrators obstructing police vehicle from entering police station.

INT News Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH7NPwCDDKY 14:50 Start of the demonstration march, including the counter-demonstrators.
INT News Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNwZoc8JLEo 16:27 Follow-up action after the demonstration ended.
INT News Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ezR_-bIHqw 16:52 Inside the Sheung Shui MTR station

SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLOIlhnvuT0 Mr. Leung addresses the press
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIHT_JNH9QE Counter-demonstrators give speeches
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrQgT_b_qTY 1:03:00 full-length record
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrOnrZ2eX8U A female shop owner is unhappy with the demonstrators
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QorQ3vfWbIM Demonstrators go past a dispensary, with someone shouting about wanting peace and tranquility with a megaphone.
SocREC https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=441&v=7HjciT8ds-s Marching through the streets

SpeakoutHK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpHICQCnW3g

Internet comments:

- The iconic photo of valiant masked justice fighters harassing a little girl:

- Living off mainland tourists is addictive. We should wean off it.
- Great. What do you propose as substitute?
Develop our manufacturing industry, so that we go back to making plastic flowers and Christmas trees?
Develop our agricultural industry, so that we go back to grow rice in Yuen Long?
Develop our fishery industry, so that we go back to catching fish?
You can have your crazy ideas, but you are not going to force us to come with you.

- Different group, different people, but same modus operandi. Here is the very fearful Mr. Leung (no full name, please) of the Localism Alliance speaking to the press. It's very hot today, Mr. Leung is sweating but he doesn't want to remove the mask.

There is another guy who wore a black mask as well as a black wool cap!

P.S. Ming Pao reports that people yelled at them: "All of you are wearing masks to hide your faces because you are breaking the law!" and "Take off those masks!"

- Any such protests won't put a dent to the parallel trade industry. So why do it? Simple. The protestors want attention. They are not the only ones as more groups have set up to steal the limelight.

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015 13:09.

The Facebook group "Defend Localism" has initiated a Reclaim Sha Tin action today. They will gather at 2pm in New Town Plaza, Sha Tin. So far 30 Internet users have indicated that they will attend.

The counter-demonstration group Loyalty Militia will set up a booth at the entrance to the Metropolis Plaza this afternoon. This means that the booth will be along march route of the the Localists Alliance and Sheung Shui Affairs For Sheung Shui People. The Loyalty Militia said that certain people are harassing mainlanders (parallel traders, tourists and immigrants) in the name of Localism. They say that such people only want to vent anger, but their actions cannot accomplish anything except to establish Hong Kong as the international tourist-bashing capital of the world. They said that these so-called Localists do not represent the people of Hong Kong.

- The name of the action is Reclaim Sheung Shui. This means to take back Sheung Shui, not for one moment but forever. All those who go the scene to walk and talk are just jerking off. It has nothing to do with the meaning of Reclaim. Frankly, I really want to ask: Why bother, if you can't do what you say that you do?

- The premises behind Reclaim Sheung Shui are self-contradictory.

(1) The flag hoisted by the demonstrators is the British Dragon-Lion flag for Hong Kong independence. If you want an independent Hong Kong, then it should be freed from both the former British colonial masters and the Chinese Communists. But their idea of an independent Hong  Kong is under the flag of the Brits.

(2) Mr. Leung (no first name, please) said that parallel trade business is even better now than before the demonstrations earlier this year, and that is why they have to come out again. If the retail/restaurant/hospitality/tourism industries are all looking at consecutive months of year-to-year decline but the parallel trade business is booming, then that means that the earlier demonstrations did not reach the target and hurt innocent others instead. How about some reflection on that implication? Why repeat an action that has proven to be a failure?

(3) The demonstrators marched through the streets of Sheung Shui. They used megaphones to scream "Give us our peace and tranquility!" There was more noise pollution coming from the demonstrators than the parallel traders ever did.

(4) The demonstrators gathered to leave and created congestion at the Sheung Shui MTR station, especially since they want to harass the counter-demonstrators. There was more congestion and chaos coming from the demonstrators than the parallel traders ever made.

(5) (Commercial Radio) The demonstrators said that they objected to the dispensaries putting their merchandise on the street. For them, this is encroaching on public space. Well, they're the same ones who defended the inalienable right of unlicensed peddlers to set up the Kweilin Night Market on public space. Even more so, they are the same ones who occupied public space in Admiralty, Causeway Bay, Mong Kok and Tsim Sha Tsui for days on end.

(6) The demonstrators said that they objected to dispensaries selling shampoo. They said that dispensaries should only sell medicine and nothing else in order to serve the people. It's wonderful that the freest market in the world should have a bunch of masked men making decisions on what goods can be sold or not in specific types of stores. Where have they been anyway, because dispensaries all over Hong Kong have been selling shampoo for decades already. P.S. I have always wondered why they sell condoms in 7/11 convenience stores?

(7) The demonstrators said that stores should serve their local community members, and that is why there shouldn't be so many dispensaries and jewelry stores in Sheung Shui. Does that mean that they are not allowed to buy or use anything outside their own communities?  For example, if your mother drops dead, you better not hold services at the funeral parlors in Hung Hom because they are only allowed to serve Hung Hom residents. You have to bury her in Sheung Shui. Since there is no cemetery or funeral parlor in Sheung Shui, you just going to have to dig a hole somewhere and toss her remains into it.

- This particular demonstrator named Tse Kim-lung was arrested by the police. He was released shortly afterwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyl6AAIoo5w http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/news/20150906/54173258 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyl6AAIoo5w Guess for what? Freedom? Democracy? Human Rights? Universal Suffrage? No, he was smoking a cigarette in a restricted area and refused to comply with a police order to cease and desist. He is a Freedom Fighter and he should be exempt from the normal laws because we live in chaotic times.

- Hong Kong Indigenous member Ray Wong was arrested by the police.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYdEjHFhaok http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/news_video/index.php?news_id=465751 https://www.facebook.com/HongKongHermit/videos/1051197121558213/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADJphI2ZsrM His group encountered a group of counter-demonstrators, the police separated the two groups, there was shouting, Wong insisted that the police must arrest the other party (namely, the Blue Ribbon nicknamed "Magnifying Glass") for assault, Wong screamed: "I ask you. I ask you. Are you going to arrest him?", Wong got pushed back up the stairs by policeman even as he kept screaming, the policeman wanted to see Wong's ID, Wong said: "I'll show you, but are you going to arrest him?", the two men hit a parked bicycle and fell down on the ground, Wong was arrested without resistance, both Wong and the policeman underwent medical examinations at the hospital later. Wong will likely be charged with assaulting a police officer.

- i-Cable http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/news_video/index.php?news_id=465764 After being released, Ray Wong told the press: "There were two police officers in the police van. One of the policeman put a grip around my head. Both my hands were cuffed at the time. The other policeman kept using his elbow to hit my chest." Well, I looked at the video and I didn't see any redness on his face. How can you not have any sign on the face after 10 minutes of slapping?

- Confrontation between the two groups https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HufD4sCcZRM inside the Sheung Shui MTR station.

- Comparison of newspaper coverages:

Oriental Daily: Considered mainstream pro-establishment, pro-China, largest circulation newspaper

Anti-parallel trade clashes
Localists arrested

Wen Wei Po: Considered pro-China, pro-establishment

Apple Daily/Ming Pao: Considered pro-democracy, anti-China

Buried somewhere in the backpages.

(HKG Pao) Throughout yesterday, the Reclaim Sheung Shui incident featuring the men in black masks were continuously featured on television and Facebook. So this story was naturally on the front pages of most of the mainstream newspapers. The two exceptions were Apple Daily and Ming Pao, which normally likes to pump up social conflicts but chose instead to be low-keyed in this case.

Everything is about the getting the votes for your side. Such is democracy. Previously political parties entered the fight over the appointment of the Pro Vice Chancellor at Hong Kong University because there were 170,000 HKU alumni most of whom are voters. The students tried to help by "using force to stop tyranny" but the public reaction was adverse and only 6% of the alumnus turned out for the HKU Convocation. The Civic Party calculated that they had more to lose than gain, so they have retreated silently and left the mess to legislator Ip Kin-yuen, who has less pressure as the Education sector representative backed by the Professional Teachers Union.

As the main promulgator of Umbrella Revolution, Apple Daily knows full well that the citizens disapprove of violence as in Occupy Central and Shopping Revolution. With the District Council elections coming up, the pan-democrats obviously wish that the citizens could forget about the 79 days of occupation. So they have quickly switched their stances to become warm, fuzzy, friendly and moderate.

So when those radicals came and started another round by violence-filled clashes shown around the clock on television and Facebook, the Yellow Ribbon naturally downplayed the incident and hope that their readers wouldn't notice.

(EJinsight) HKU convocation wants CY Leung out as chancellor  September 2, 2015.

A University of Hong Kong (HKU) convocation voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to have Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying step down as chancellor. About 82 percent of 9,298 people who attended the extraordinary general meeting in person or voted by proxy backed a non-binding motion to change the HKU charter that makes the Hong Kong chief executive nominal head of tertiary institutions by default.

Also, 84 percent wanted the university council to confirm the appointment of Johannes Chan as pro vice chancellor before the month is out. Chan is the only candidate recommended by a search committee.

Meanwhile, a motion to support a July 31 statement by a group of senior academics regarding the appointment process was crushed. The statement, jointly issued by 10 deans of the university faculty, defended the appointment process, saying its protected by the Basic Law, Hong Kongs mini constitution. The deans also criticized the storming of a July 30 meeting of the HKU council by some students.

Council chairman Leong Che-hung said he respects the voting results. He said the council will follow the HKU statutes to ensure academic freedom and autonomy.

Chan said the results clearly reflected the views of HKU alumni. He said he hopes the council will consider the alumnis opinions and follow the usual practice in appointing key university officials.

(SCMP) Emotions run high as HKU alumni speak out against political interference in school's council. September 2, 2015.

University of Hong Kong alumni made emotional speeches lambasting political interference in their alma mater's governing council as more than 3,000 gathered on Tuesday to debate the controversially delayed appointment of a pro-vice-chancellor.

Dubbed the "biggest reunion of HKU alumni", it was an extraordinary general meeting of the HKU Convocation, a statutory body comprising 162,000 graduates and lecturers.

Results of the votes on six non-binding motions, relating both to the appointment and the role of Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying as ultimate head of the university, will be announced on Wednesday morning. More than 9,000 votes were cast, either in person or by proxy.

"It is a historic occasion," said Tai Keen-man, a member of the Convocation's standing committee, before the meeting at the Convention and Exhibition Centre. Some 3,200 attended it.

Alumni old and young turned up, including high-profile figures such as former chief secretary Anson Chan Fang On-sang, Democratic Party veteran Martin Lee Chu-ming, radio host Stephen Chan Chi-wan and former pro-establishment lawmaker Choy So-yuk.

Most of those selected by lot to speak expressed anger and disappointment at the deferred appointment as pro-vice-chancellor of Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun, a former law dean lambasted by Beijing-loyalist media over his ties to an Occupy Central co-founder.

The chief executive's role at HKU should merely be to "hand out diplomas" said law graduate Sean Leonard. "Minus 30 points to the council, whose members acted as drama queens," he added, in apparent reference to an incident in July when council member Lo Chung-mau collapsed on the floor as students stormed a meeting.

Another member said the council should "show love and care for students instead of calling them 'red guards'." Council member Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung had used the term to describe students who stormed the July meeting.

Writer Dominic Tsim Tak-lung said universities should be universal: "There should be no discrimination in terms of sex, age or political beliefs".

The few who argued HKU was not subject to political interference , including Beijing loyalist Chang Ka-mun, were greeted with catcalls.

The motions included calls for Chan to be appointed, for the chief executive to be removed as chancellor and for structural reform. Another supported a statement by 10 HKU faculty deans, which called for institutional autonomy but condemned the storming of the meeting.

The Education Bureau later issued a statement. We appeal to the community not to impose pressure on the council, and not to hinder the normal functioning of the university and the council, it said.

The bureau also said the chief executive - as chancellor - did not interfere with academic freedom and institutional autonomy, nor did he participate in the selection of staff. The bureau went on to defend the existing system, saying it was effective and appealed to different stakeholders to respect and comply with the law.

- (HKGPao) Observations inside/outside Part 1. By Lam Wan-seng. September 2, 2015.

1. Almost all the important figures of the Civic Party were present. Many Democratic Party luminaries from various generations were present too. This was like an annual party for political parties. Most luminous were Anson Chan and her sister.

2. The speeches became a Civic Party show as Audrey Eu, Alan Leong, Margaret Ng, Kenneth Kwok and others spoke. This lasted three hours. Overall, this became a pro-Johannes Chan forum.

3. Interestingly, while the Democratic Party was present in large numbers, only the retired Martin Lee and Yeung Sum spoke. Did they reach a backroom deal for the Civic Party to assume ascendancy? Or did the Democratic Party deliberately take the back seat in a fight for a HKU Pro Vice Chancellor? Interesting, the Democratic Party never responded to HKG Pao's question on whether they supported the students' siege on the HKU University Council members.

4. While the political parties assume such prominence during the proceedings, Ip Kin-yuan who initiated the emotions insisted that that no political parties were involved. This was quite ironic.

5. This Hong Kong University Convocation took place in the Hong Kong Special Administration Region of the People's Republic of China, but all speakers were required to speak in English. It was particularly humorous to hear the speaker say in English that they want to eliminate the "anachronistic tradition left behind by the British colonial administration in Hong Kong" of having the Chief Executive serve as HKU Chancellor. What if the speaker used Cantonese to say exactly the same thing? Would the speaker be accused of Communization of Hong Kong?

6. Everybody knows that the "anachronistic tradition left behind by the British colonial administration" had never been a problem either during the entire colonial period or the terms of the first two Chief Executives after the handover. If there is a problem now, then it is a problem with the current Chief Executive. They said that if Wen Wei Po/Ta Kung Pao said that Johannes Chan is unqualified for not possessing a doctorate degree, then neither does CY Leung. But how many of the former Chief Executives/Governors hold doctorates? They were HKU Chancellors because they held the top post in Hong Kong. That was all.

7. There were some voices against Johannes Chan. The difference when the speaker was supportive, they sat quietly and respectfully. When the speaker was not supportive, they booed. So what is this about defending the right of others to speak their opinions with your life?

(HKGPao) Observations inside/outside Part 2. By Lam Wan-seng. September 2, 2015.

Out of 9,298 valid votes, 7,821 votes agreed with "confirming Pro Vice Chancellor within 30 days," 7,657 votes agreed with "the Chief Executive shall not be the Chancellor" and 7,633 votes agreed with "the University Council chairman must be acceptable to the students and the teachers." Meanwhile Lawrence Pang Wang-kee's proposal to "support that statement from the ten deans" was vetoed.

Can those 7,000+ votes represent all of the 170,000 or so HKU alumni? Can public subsidized HKU hide inside their campus and ignore the opinion of the general public? At this time, the pro-Johannes Chan faction has mobilized and won the HKU Convocation vote. All those alumni who did not show up and all those others who have no voting rights shall now be "represented" in public opinion.

Here I have to say that the Yellow Ribbons have a good propaganda apparatus. On the way over from the Wan Chai MTR to the Hong Kong Convention Centre, I received three pro-Johannes Chan pamphlets. These inform me about how many articles Wen Wei Po/Ta Kung Pao have published against Johannes Chan, etc. They didn't tell me about Johannes Chan's embroilment in the donation scandal or how many articles Apple Daily has published on behalf of Johannes Chan.

Along the way, I also came across a number of other organizations setting up booths or collecting signatures against Johannes Chan's qualifications. An Internet poll showed that almost 70% of Hongkongers don't think Johannes Chan should be the Pro Vice Chancellor. So does the one-sided support inside the Convention Centre represent genuine public opinion?

In history, the most active and vigorous voices comes from the radicals. The majority opinion often gets overwhelmed. Such was the case with the issue of the HKU Pro Vice Chancellor. Such was the case with Occupy Central at first. To the silent majority who doesn't want to be "represented" by these people, can you afford to stay silent?

(Wen Wei Po) September 3, 2015.

On the issue about setting up a committee to follow up on the incident, Lawrence Wan said: "How can we follow up on something that hasn't taken place yet/ I think that we should wait to see what happens, and then see how to follow up."

However, Ip Kin-yuen couldn't care less. He pronounced victory after fewer than 5% of the alumni voted in favor of the resolutions. He equated the results to the preferences of the entire alumnus body. He insisted that the University Council must heed the opinions of the alumni.

When asked about whether the 5% of voters could represent all the alumni, Ip Kin-yuen changed the subject. He said that many people gave up their personal time to attend this meeting. He said that one individual even "signed a notice for his daughter even as he attended the meeting." But when the reporter pressed him on giving a direct answer, he said that he wants to "leave it to everybody to decide for themselves."

Internet comments:

- Why were the results of the HKU Convocation non-binding? Well, that's because it is not up to the HKSAR Chief Executive, or the University Council, or the HKU Convocation, or the alumni body as a whole, or the Student Union officers, or the student body as a whole, or the Staff Union, or the staff body as a whole, or the people of Hong Kong (whatever that means), or anybody else to decide. If there is going to be a change, it will have to go through the Hong Kong Legislative Council. Here is what the law says:

With respect to the position of the HKU Chancellor during the British colonial era, Cap 1053 University of Hong Kong Ordinance s 12 Officers and teachers, their appointments, powers, duties and emoluments (30 June 1997):

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

This was replaced after the handover from the United Kingdom to the People's Republic of China on July 1, 1997 by CAP 1053 University of Hong Kong Ordinance s 12 Officers and teachers, their appointment, powers, duties and emoluments:

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

Therefore, the Hong Kong University Convocation can vote from here to eternity and it wouldn't change a thing. They need to have a vote in the Hong Kong Legislative Council to change Cap 1053 University of Hong Kong Ordinance. Meanwhile everything else is just a lot of hot air from politico-types. Let them waste their time if they want to. Don't waste yours.

P.S.  Hong Kong Free Press says: "The Chief Executive serves as the chancellor for all of Hong Kongs tertiary institutionsa custom that begun with the territorys colonial-era governors. Traditionally only a symbolic role, opposition to this system has increased along with perceived interference in university governance by Chief Executive Leung." No, it is not a custom (Merriam-Webster: (a) a usage or practice common to many or to a particular place or class or habitual with an individual. (b) long-established practice considered as unwritten law. (c) repeated practice. (d) the whole body usages, practices, or conventions that regulate social life.). It is the written law.

- Here is what you expect: (Wen Wei Po) HKU Alumni Concern Group's Ip Kin-yuen said that if the University Council does not appoint Johannes Chan Man-mun as Pro Vice Chancellor without a "reasonable reason," they will consider filing a judicial appeal. He acknowledges that judicial reviews take a long time and the university will go without a Pro Vice Chancellor for the duration.
- It is rumored that there are enough votes on the University Council not to appoint Johannes Chan. You want "reasonable reasons"? Here is the standard litany: (1) lack of a doctorate degree; drop in RAE standing of the HKU Faculty Dean while Chan was the Dean; (3) mishandling of Benny Tai's secret donations, for which Chan was reprimanded for failing to HKU standards; (4) becoming a liability because everything that he does now will be politicized and detracts from the university's mission.

- (HKG Pao) September 2, 2015.

At the Hong Kong University Convocation, there were 9,298 valid votes. Of these the proposal of Lawrence Pang Wang-kee received 1,814 votes for. This means that 7,484 persons disagreed with the proposal.

What does Pang's proposal say? Pang proposal is a statement of support for the joint statement from the ten HKU Faculty Deans. It says: "We will not tolerate any uncivilized action that disrupts the normal operations of the University ... we are deeply disturbed by the actions harassing the HKU University Council." Basically, the idea is that they wanted to defend academic freedom and autonomy. This is consistent with what the other proposals are saying. So how can this be vetoed by 7,484 out of 9,298 persons? Do these people support what Billy Fung and his fellow students as well as unknown outsiders did on that night? Has the era of the Yellow Guards arrive at the Hong Kong University?

- Look at these numbers:

(Wen Wei Po) September 3, 2015

When asked whether the Convocation voting is representative of the alumni body, John Wan Chung-on did not respond directly. He is said that this was a data point of reference. The Hong Kong University Convocation has 162,000 or so members. Of these, 9,298 cast valid votes, either in person or by verified proxy.

9,298 out of 162,000 is 5.7%.

Of those who voted, the four motions on "The University Council must confirm the appointment of the Pro Vice Chancellor within 30 days," "Amend the Hong Kong University Ordinance so that the Chief Executive won't be the Chancellor", "The Chief Executive can only hold ceremonial responsibilities in university matters," and "The Hong Kong University Student Union Council will set up a special group to follow and implement the resolution" received between 7,745 to 7,821 votes (4.8% or so).

Do you think that these 5.7% feel/think the same way as the absent 94.3%? No way. Because of:

Response bias:

A typical RDD phone survey being conducted today has a cooperation rate of less than 20%. 10% is considered a good response rate from an online panel. When we report results of these studies, we are assuming that the vast majority of people who didnt respond would have responded in the same way as those who did. Often, this is a reasonable assumption. But, sometimes it is not.

We know for sure that those who didn't show up are different from those who did, because the latter cared about the issues (even though the entire effort was futile as everyone who is a university graduate must surely know about the Hong Kong University Ordinance) to attend in person or sign a proxy statement.

Because the distribution of opinions among those who didn't show up is unknown, it would be wrong for an academically-minded individual to say one way or the other. But Ip Kin-yuan only wants political exploitation, so he is quite willing to state that THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY ALUMNUS BODY HAS VOTED THIS OR THAT BY AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY.

In like manner, do you remember the Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme's "REFERENDUM"? They got 792,808 valid votes overwhelmingly in support of "Civil Nomination" of Chief Executive. Even if they are truly valid (ignoring all the documented ways of casting unlimited votes in their system), we have to remind ourselves that the population of Hong Kong is 7.3 million of which 3.5 million are registered voters. Do you think that the non-voters feel/think the same way?

- Spiral of Silence:


The spiral of silence is a political science and mass communication theory proposed by the German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann.

Spiral of silence theory stipulates that individuals have a fear of isolation, which results from the idea that a social group or the society in general might isolate, neglect, or exclude members due to the members' opinions. This fear of isolation consequently leads to remaining silent instead of voicing opinions. Media is an important factor that relates to both the dominant idea and people's perception of the dominant idea.


The following steps summarize how the process works:

  1. We can distinguish between fields where the opinions and attitudes involved are static, and fields where those opinions and attitudes are subject to changes... Where opinions are relatively definite and static for example, customs one has to express or act according to this opinion in public or run the risk of becoming isolated. In contrast, where opinions are in flux, or disputed, the individual will try to find out which opinion he can express without becoming isolated.
  2. Individuals who, when observing their environments, notice that their own personal opinion is spreading and is taken over by others, will voice this opinion self-confidently in public. On the other hand, individuals who notice that their own opinions are losing ground will be inclined to adopt a more reserved attitude when expressing their opinions in public.
  3. It follows from this that, as the representatives of the first opinion talk quite a lot while the representatives of the second opinion remain silent, there is a definite influence on the environment: an opinion that is being reinforced in this way appears stronger than it really is, while an opinion suppressed as described will seem to be weaker than it is in reality.
  4. The result is a spiral process which prompts other individuals to perceive the changes in opinion and follow suit, until one opinion has become established as the prevailing attitude while the other opinion will be pushed back and rejected by everybody with the exception of the hard core that nevertheless sticks to that opinion.

This process of formation, change and reinforcement of public opinion. The tendency of the one to speak up and the other to be silent starts off a spiraling process which increasingly establishes one opinion as the dominant one. Over time, these changing perceptions establish one opinion as predominant one and they change from the liquid state to a solid norm.

Nazi Propaganda: The Nazi Party used the Spiral of Silence in their favor as they constantly bombarded the public with the images and ideas which they were trying to popularize. They were giving the masses an impression that everyone was in compliance with their ideals and if one was not, punishment was sure to ensue. ... A large number of Germans were more indifferent than supportive to the Nazi idea of Aryan race superiority. They were not all-in or all-out which led to a more passive stance on the discrimination. The Nazi government realized the impact of peer pressure, especially in youths, and used it to gain support.

If you feel differently but you are too afraid to speak up, then you will be voiceless on all that happens afterwards. You will share the blame.

(Oriental Daily) September 3, 2015

Recently, the court decided that 17 defendants accused of contempt of court during Occupy Mongkok will be released because the Department of Justice was unable to follow the procedures to issue the summons on time. This was absolutely incredible. Occupy Central was the single most significant event in recent Hong Kong history, and it is also basic procedure to file documents on a timely basis. It is incredible that the Department of Justice could commit such a basic error. Nobody can believe this, unless someone deliberately let defendants off.

It has been rumored that the Department of Justice was infested with Yellow Ribbons. During the Occupy Central period, many Department of Justice openly wore yellow ribbons to work. They ignored the standard protocol that public servants should be politically neutral. While the higher-ups were aware of this problem, they couldn't do anything because not even Secretary of Justice Rimsky Yuen could do anything. During Occupy Central, the police made numerous arrests. It is rumored that many of those cases went into oblivion, because the Department of Justice declined to prosecute.

Is this true or not? That is hard to prove. But this most recent incident makes it hard to believe that the Department of Justice people did not deliberately stall or mishandle the cases. These are the hard facts.

The pro-China people have always said that the British colonial administration deliberately left a lot of government workers to enable them to continue their influence in Hong Kong. Thus, many government departments worked to obstruct the central government in conjunction with the pan-democrats and foreign forces. The corruption charges against former Chief Executive Donald Tsang is an example. Such rumors have acquired greater support with the recent dismissal of contempt-of-court charges against the 17 Occupy Mong Kok individuals.

(Oriental Daily) August 31, 2015.

16-year-old Form 3 student Kwok Ho-bun and 21-year-old university student Chan Ming-fung were accused of assaulting a police officer and obstructing police business on March 8, 2015 in Tuen Mun.

The magistrate said that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent with the videos that were presented. For example, the police testified that he saw Kwok throwing a water bottle from 7 meters away and therefore went up to arrest him. At the time, no one was between them. However, the video showed that there were quite a few people between them, which means that the witness did not enough room to spot Kwok throwing the bottle. In the video, Chan Ming-fung could not be seen to be pulling to free Kwok either.

(HKG Pao) September 1, 2015. (Oriental Daily) September 15, 2015. (Wen Wei Po) September 16, 2015.

On November 20, 2014, 31-year-old Tung Fat-yin allegedly got to know the 12-year-old boy victim in the Occupy Mongkok area. At the time, the boy was afraid of being punished by his parents for not doing his homework. Therefore he was roaming around the Occupy Mongkok area and got to know the defendant. It began raining, and the two entered an empty tent where the defendant placed his hand on the shoulders of the boy to talk. The boy had no money so he followed the defendant to the apartment of a friend in Yau Ma Ti district. As the two got to Sai Yeung Choi Street South, the defendant suddenly groped the private parts of the boy. Later that night in the Yau Ma Ti apartment, the boy got up at 4am to use the restroom when the defendant suddenly reached out to grab the genitals again. The defendant told the boy not to tell anyone. The boy was too tired and sleepy to leave. The missing boy's parents checked the Facebook of their son and suspected that he was with the defendant who was a most recent addition as Friend. They learned that the defendant worked with a gay organization on Nathan Road. So they went looking around that area and saw the two coming out of a building. They called the police to arrest the defendant.

On June 27, 2015, the defendant allegedly sexually molested a 14-year-old boy, whom he had gotten acquainted with over Facebook. At the time, the boy was staying in Caritas Hospital. The defendant visited the boy as the friend of the boy's guardian. During the visit, the defendant suddenly put his hand underneath the blanket and touched the private parts of the boy. The boy was scared and did not say anything immediately because he knew that the defendant is a Taekwondo expert. Several days later the boy told the doctor.

The defendant pleaded guilty on three counts of sexual assault in Kowloon City court. The defense claimed that the defendant did what he did out of "curiosity." The magistrate set sentencing on September 15 pending reports on the background and psychological conditions of the defendant. Meanwhile the defendant will continued to be held in detention.

The defendants' parents promised that they would take their son to see a psychiatrist. The father said that he felt ashamed that he did not bring up his son right. But the magistrate said that the defendant first became friendly with the boys before suddenly touching their genitals. As such, the action was premeditated and dishonest. Therefore the magistrate sentenced the defendant to 9 months in prison.

(Hong Kong Free Press) September 4, 2015.

A man has been found guilty of assaulting a police officer during the pro-democracy Occupy movement last year based on the testimony of the attacked police officer, which was deemed trustworthy. The verdict on Ho Man-chung, 36, came despite the two video clips submitted as evidence failed to show him carrying out the attack. Ho appeared in court on Friday on the charge of assaulting a police officer. He was charged after he ignored police warning and refused to leave Tamar Park, then was said to have pushed away a police officer last October.

Magistrate Chu Chung-keung, handing down a guilty verdict, said that although the two video clips submitted to the court as evidence failed to show the defendant pushing and swearing at the police officer as was alleged, the attacked police officer appeared trustworthy and did not hesitate under cross-examination.

Counsel for the defence argued for a lighter sentence, saying that Ho is currently unemployed and that the said police officer was not physically injured. The magistrate, however, said that assaulting a police officer was a serious offence. Ho was released on bail and the case was adjourned to September 21 for sentencing, after the magistrate reviewed reports on the defendant.

(Oriental Daily) September 4, 2015.  (Oriental Daily) August 19, 2015.  (HKG Pao) September 5, 2015.

36-year-old unemployed man Ho Mun-chung was accused of attacking police sergeant Yip Chun-bong in the early morning of October 15, 2014 in Admiralty.

36-year-old unemployed man Ho Mun-chung was accused of ignoring police warnings to leave the Lung Wo Road/Tamar Park area during a clearance. Furthermore, Hon was alleged to have pushed sergeant Yip Chun-bong in the chest, leading to a charge of assaulting a police officer.

The prosecution presented testimony that the defendant unbuttoned all his shirt buttons, bared his chest and challenged the police sergeant: "Shoot me!" The police sergeant testified that the defendant then pushed him in the chest. So the police sergeant yelled "Assaulting a police officer" and arrested the defendant with the help of his colleagues. Two other arresting police testified but they said that they did not see the defendant push Yip.

The defendant chose not to testify himself. The defense said that there was no evidence that the defendant participated in the Occupy Central movement. The location of the incident was far away from the Occupy Central area. Therefore the possibility cannot be excluded that the defendant was passing by the scene on his way home (at 2am on the October 15) and then Yip sprung out to tackle him. Furthermore Yip was not carrying out any clearance duties because there were only about a dozen individuals in total at the scene and none of them were disturbing the public order.

The magistrate said that the sergeant's testimony was clear and direct with no evasion. Therefore, he is a reliable witness. The defense presented two videos. In those videos, the defendant's hands were blocked from view. So the magistrate decided the videos neither proves nor disproves the culpability of the defendant. Therefore the overall evidence led to a guilty verdict.

The magistrate said that even though the defense presented two videos, it could not be determined whether the location was Tamar Park, or whether it was the time of the incident, or whether the defendant shoved the police sergeant. The magistrate chose to believe the sergeant and found the defendant guilty.

The defense pleaded in mitigation that the 36-year-old man was a graduate in mechanical engineering but is presently unemployed and living alone. The videos showed that the assault was not severe, the police sergeant was not injured and therefore the case was trivial. Since the defendant is now aware that assault is a serious action, he should be sentenced to either a fine or community service. Sentencing will be held on September 21 pending probation reports.

(Oriental Daily) September 21, 2015.

The defendant Ho Man-chung pleaded that while he has degrees from Hong Kong University and the University of Science and Technology, he wanted to lead his own lifestyle and therefore does not have a fixed job. At present, he is living in the offices of Citizens' Radio, but that doesn't mean that he could not perform community service. He emphasized that he is no homeless bum. He expressed regret at his crime and promises that he will be a law-biding citizen in future. The magistrate sentenced him to 120 hours of community service.

(Oriental Daily) September 22, 2015.

Last year, National People's Congress deputy secretary-general Li Fei came to the Asian Expo to explain the August 31st resolution. About 20 Civic Passion members demonstrated outside. Two of them were arrested: 26-year-old Ma Kai-chung and 22-year-old Chow Mun. Ma was charged with unlawful assembly, while Chow was charged with unlawful assembly and resisting arrest. The prosecution summoned the security manager Wong Tak-chun as witness. Wong testified that the two defendants traversed the table/barrier that they had set up for security checks and headed towards the metal barricades manned by the police. The closed circuit television had recorded the entire scene.

Ma Kai-chung and Chow Mun

(Wen Wei Po) September 22, 2015.

On September 1, 2014, about 20 Civic Passion members demonstrated outside the Asia Expo. Ma was the first to cross the security line while yelling "Down with the Communists!" Chow followed right behind to the police line, waving a flag and rattling the iron barricade. The two defendants pleaded not guilty at first. During the trial, the magistrate said that it was clear from the video that the two defendants were disturbing the peace and he failed to understand what the defense could be arguing about. On September 22 in court, the two defendants changed their plea to guilty.

The first defendant pleaded through his lawyer that this was a first-time offense in which nobody got turn, and he acted only out of his concern for Hong Kong and his political demands for "civil constitution, civil nomination." Therefore he hopes for a lenient sentence. The magistrate pointed out that while the people of Hong Kong have the right of assembly, it must be in accordance with the law and it must not disturb social peace and order. Sentencing will take place on October 14.

The second defendant continued to plead not guilty to the charge of resisting arrest. Undercover police officer Chow To testified that Chow Mun resisted repeatedly at Shui On Centre (Wan Chai). It took three police officers to subdue him. The trial will resume on September 23.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbPuiEK1fMM

(SCMP) Hong Kong's pan-democratic parties face dilemmas in November poll. April 7, 2015.

To politicise or not to politicise? That's the dilemma facing pan-democratic parties as Hongkongers go to the polls in November for the first time since last year's Occupy protests.

Some in the camp are keen to build on the passion generated by the 79 day sit-ins by focusing on big questions of democracy and Beijing's influence in the city. Many see parallels to 2003, when pan-democrats secured an overwhelming victory in the district council polls just months after 500,000 people took to the streets to fight a national security law. But others - mindful of the fact that many voters resented the youth-led protests and the disruption they brought - feel it would be better to run on a track record of hard work in the community rather than on grand questions of universal suffrage.

The former strategy is reflected in the mushrooming number of new groups of young people looking to take the momentum of the umbrella movement forward by chasing some of the 431 seats on 18 councils that are up for grabs on November 22. But incumbent district councillors - and even one of the founders of the Occupy Central movement - are not convinced.

"The Occupy protests somehow affected voters' impression of pan-democrats, but such negative sentiments have been fading out," one district councillor said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss his strategy. "We believe we could still win back these people's support, especially when [Chief Executive] Leung Chun-ying continues to make inappropriate remarks on democracy but politicising the election would only remind people of the inconvenience brought by the sit-ins."

Lo Kin-hei, a Southern District councillor and Democratic Party vice-chairman, agreed community work came first, unlike in the Legislative Council race where ideology played a bigger part. "Politics is only a side dish in a district council race," he said. "You have to perform as well as your rival in terms of community work, then politics perhaps can be an extra advantage for you if your voters share your stance."

Dr Chan Kin-man, one of the three co-founders of Occupy, agreed a politicised race would not guarantee a repeat of 2003. "Even those who didn't join the march back then had been supporting the cause and opposed legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law," Chan said, in reference to the clause of the mini-constitution under which the government tried to introduce anti-sedition legislation. "But the umbrella movement has indeed torn the city apart it might not lead to the outcome which the 2003 rally brought." He said introducing new ideas - including on how to improve the district councils, long criticised as ineffectual and too focused on minor issues - might yield better results than running on wider political questions. "I'm afraid the young people will turn more cynical should they have a severe setback in this election," he said.

Typical of the new groups is Youngspiration, an alliance formed recently by young people who met during Occupy and plan to contest at least eight seats. The groups present another dilemma for established parties. Many newcomers are prepared to run against other democracy supporters, saying that their ideologies differ. But the older parties still want friendly relations with the newcomers.

Bill Lay Yan-piau, secretary general of the Civic Party, said his party had run two advice seminars for about 10 such groups. "They are independent from us, but we are offering help because we hope that they will continue to embrace the democratic spirit of the movement, and that they will not attack the pan-democratic camp," Lay said. One of the seminars involved informing the groups about the legal aspects of running for election, while the other was on things they should take into account when setting up street booths in their neighbourhoods. But the party would not offer them money or manpower, Lay said. Instead it was looking to raise HK$1 million to support its 20 or so potential candidates. The party would invite some of the groups to join a so-called co-ordination mechanism that aims to prevent pan-democrats from running against each other.

(SCMP) Hong Kong post-Occupy young bloods eye up district council elections. April 15, 2015.

Political groups emerging from the Occupy sit-ins are evaluating whether to field candidates in November's district council polls - and whether they can separate themselves enough from the protest movement to be viewed by the electorate as people who could make a difference in community politics.

It's a new breed of politician who are making it clear their vision is not always the same as traditional democratic parties, and some say they won't necessarily conform to the practice of "coordinating" candidates to avoid splitting the pro-democracy vote in some constituencies. Some of the names of the groups highlight their willingness to ignore convention.

The inspiration behind these groups came from a post that appeared on the online forum hkgolden.com right after the 79-day sit-ins for democracy ended in December. Called the "18-district project", the post aimed to connect people who wanted to explore the possibility of running in the district polls.

About 10 groups aligned to different districts have since set up Facebook pages and begun reaching out to people.

One of them is Tsz Wan Chan Constructive Power, which is looking at Wong Tai Sin council. Currently, the pro-establishment Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong holds lion's share of the 29 council seats. The new group, most of whom live in the area, comprises about 10 members, one of whom is Brandy Cheng Yuen-ching. "We won't raise yellow umbrellas when we're working because, after all, not everyone supported the protests," said Cheng, 30, referring to the symbol of the Occupy movement. "But it is my belief that everyone has a right in their home affairs, and from there we build up the spirit of democracy."

With Occupy edged out of the manifestos, the focus is on micro-issues within the various neighbourhoods and "nativist" issues, riding on anti-mainland sentiments and Hongkongers' urge to assert their own cultural identity.

North of the Rings, with its name inspired by the Lord of the Rings novel, is working in Sheung Shui and Fanling in North District, which has seen an expansion of shops catering for parallel traders from Shenzhen, most notably pharmacies. "We hope our district will have more shops that serve the needs of locals," said Man So. So far about five people in this group are considering running. So said they were in touch with mainstream pan-democrats but insisted it was not an affiliate, despite Democrats and the Labour Party already expressing concerns about post-Occupy groups splitting the pan-democrat vote. "If we believe we have a higher chance of winning in a certain constituency, we would ask them to give way to us," So said.

Another new group, the East Kowloon Community, has its eyes on Kwun Tong District Council. It is drawing residents' attention to a decision by the council - again under DAB control - to build a HK$100 million musical fountain, arguing it is a waste of public money.

So far, none of the new groups has officially declared plans to run in the district polls. As Cheung Long-hin, of East Kowloon Community, said, they are "testing the water".

Tanya Chan, Civic Party vice-chairwoman, has been in touch with some of the groups. She said: "It would be good if they pooled their resources in one district and together think of new ideas on district management and the role of the councils - that way they can breathe new life into the political scene."

Back in 2003, another mass protest saw fired-up young activists form political groups. A decade on, they are warning newcomers inspired by Occupy to prepare to be disillusioned.

One major weakness of this last wave of groups was their tendency to be so loosely run as to be unsustainable, said Cheng Ki-kin, a founding member of Civic Act-up, which was formed with politician Cyd Ho Sau-lan's support after the half-million-strong rally on July 1, 2003, decrying plans to introduce national security laws. "Civic Act-up was so loosely organised that you did not feel you were part of it," Cheng, now a Wan Chai district councillor, said. "There was no regular meeting, and it seemed everyone was working independently and separately, especially after the 2003 [district council] elections." Cheng himself quit Civic Act-up soon after 2003, while Ho now serves as a Labour Party lawmaker after co-founding the new party in 2012.

"A loose organisation is difficult to sustain. You need a clear goal and a road map. Slogans such as genuine democracy are too abstract and clichd. What is it and how and when this can be achieved? No one seems to know, or care," he said. And the problem was not confined to Civic Act-up. "Many of the young groups were without a structure and could thus lose direction easily," he added.

Another former activist, Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu, noted that the leadership in last year's Occupy sit-ins was unclear.

The Federation of Students was one of the main groups that tried to rally the protesters but it was unpopular among some of the young occupiers.

"Being unorganised is perhaps an inevitable result because the rise of the new young groups is due to their mistrust of any organisation," said Yeung, who is now a barrister and chairman of the Civic Party's New Territories East branch. "They do not even want to be represented by the federation." Yeung was a core member of the now-defunct 7.1 People Pile, a pro-democracy group named after the 2003 big march. Its aim was to push for democracy by keeping up the spirit of "people power" that was demonstrated in the march. The group fielded three candidates in the 2003 district council polls. All were defeated.

One of those three defeated candidates, Bobo Yip Po-lam, called for patience. "I appreciate [the new post-Occupy groups'] efforts in trying to change the mindset of the people," said Yip, now a project officer with the Catholic Diocese's justice and peace commission. "But if your aim is to change a culture, you cannot just parachute into a constituency and ask people to vote for you. It takes time to see change. I would say, it may take six years."

Yeung agreed. "District councils are more about neighbourhood issues, not political ideology. You need to be on the spot to serve residents. Simply saying you are pro-democracy won't help much." Looking back at the 2003 polls, Yeung said it was unfair to judge whether the youth movement at the time was successful or not just by looking at the groups' electoral outcomes. "On the surface, we lost the elections and many of the groups faded out of the political scene. But the movement had sown the seeds. People have been enlightened and are more willing to fight for their rights by means of mass social movements."

(HKG Pao) August 21, 2015.

Recently the key radical figures have all disappeared from the Shopping Revolution activities. Our reporter watched the Shopping Revolutionaries around Sai Yeung Choi Street South several nights last week. Activist participants such as League of Social Democrats' Tam Tak-chi, Hong Kong Localism Power leaders Simon Sin and CK Ho, etc rarely made appearances. Only a number of unknown radical elements were seen loitering around.

Our source informed us that Simon Sin and CK Ho showed up last Saturday (August 15) in Lam Tin district. They dressed smartly, they bowed to citizens and said hello. This was a change from their regular image (see photo below).

Meanwhile Civic Passion leaders Wong Yeung-tat and Cheung Chung-tai as well as Hong Kong Indigenous leader Ray Wong are likely to enter the District Council elections (in 2015) and Legislative Council elections (in 2016). Therefore they have long gave up those physical clashes. Even if they did show up, they will quickly disappear after shouting a few slogans.

Our reporter interviewed a manager of a consumer electronics store in Sai Yeung Choi Street South. He said: "I hate them to death! They show up almost every night, so that both mainland and local customers go away. My business is worse now than during Occupy Mong Kok." The manager said that while the summer should be peak season, their revenues are down 30% this year. If things kept up this way, the owner may close the store.

(Oriental Daily) August 24, 2015.

After the Umbrella Movement was over, a number of "Umbrella Soldiers" plan to participate in the November 2015 District Council elections. They will run against the traditional pan-democrats. So far, "Umbrella Soldiers" are known to be clashing with pan-democrats in 14 districts.

This year, the Democratic Party will be fielding 94 candidates. In 2011, they fielded 132 candidates. In 2007, they fielded 108 candidates. Based upon previous experience, this time they are fielding their best and brightest. Of the 94 candidates, 40 are incumbents, 27 have run in previous elections and 27 are first-timers.

(HKG Pao) August 23, 2015. Also Wen Wei Po, August 22, 2015.

Recently a number of "Umbrella Soldier" organizations have claimed that they were contacted by a man named Anthony Cheng and offered to provide about $150,000 in funding to compete in designated districts which are not controlled by the pro-establishment camp.

One of the organizations Youngspiration published the contact information on their Facebook page. Another organization Shatin Community Network worked with Cable TV to uncover the case. After the case was exposed, the Umbrella Soldier organizations fell into mutual acrimony about people who publicized the case pre-maturely. Meanwhile the individual Anthony Cheng said that he is an Internet radio host and he wanted to test the resources of the various Umbrella Soldier organizations for a special program. That program was scheduled a month from now, but this is now impossible given the recent developments.

So who is Anthony Cheng? According to our report, he ran a talk show in which the guests are politicians and entertainers. Later on, he stopped his production due to a dispute with the sponsors and now he is making micro-movies (including sending his female actresses to sell alcohol at his sponsor's bar). Recently, Cheng is a host at the OurTV website, focusing on women's bust lines and bisexuality.

On his Facebook, he has shown pictures of Democratic Party chairwoman Emily Lau who is also a host at OurTV as well as Tam Tak-chi of the League of Social Democrats.

Cheng has hinted that a financier wanted to take over all the Localists organizations. He hinted that there is a money-taking procedure in which the applicant provides an "election participation proposal" to get a 25% advance; another 50% will come after the applicant files to run in the election; the final 25% will come after the election. The total amount is $150,000 per district. The applicant does not have to win, but needs to get 150 to 200 votes (not enough to win but may affect who the winner is). The applicant does not have to return any unspent campaign money.

After Cheng's involvement was exposed, both his Yellow Ribbon and Blue Ribbon friends "unfriended" him in large numbers.

According to one view, these so-called Umbrella Soldier organizations were largely unknown until this incident. Furthermore they did not call the police and chose instead to work with the media to do an undercover news story. This makes the whole incident look like a publicity stunt to smear the pro-establishment camp.

(SCMP) September 26, 2015.

A man has been charged by the Independent Commission Against Corruption for allegedly offering bribes totalling HK$550,000 to prospective candidates in the coming district council election.

Cheng Wing-kin, a 31-year-old waiter, will appear in Eastern Court this morning. Hes accused of offered advantages to four persons to stand as candidates, or get others to stand as candidates, in the November polls. He was arrested on Thursday and faces five counts of corrupt conduct in an election.

The ICAC investigation was triggered by a complaint. Two of the charges allege that Cheng, between Jul 8 and July 18 this year, offered advantages of HK$400,000 to a person to run for election in a specified geographical constituency, and to get another person to stand as a candidate. Cheng is also accused of offering HK$10,000 and two unspecified sums of money to three persons between July 12 and August 17 to induce them to get three others to run in three specified districts.

(SCMP) 'Tip of the iceberg': Warning from pan-democratic parties over 400 suspicious Hong Kong voter records. August 25, 2015.

Pan-democratic parties flocked to the election watchdog yesterday to lodge more complaints about the records of over 550 voters with suspicious or false residential addresses, warning they could be "the tip of the iceberg".

A flood of cases reported to the Registration and Electoral Office recently included complaints by residents of unknown people registering their home addresses for voting in the district council elections in November. Among new cases yesterday were voters registering addresses that do not exist, and seven or eight voters registering as living together in flats of 200 to 300 sq ft. In one case a voter claimed to be living in a hospital.

Mak Tak-ching of the Labour Party, who led colleagues to file 300 cases to the office, said such irregularities were widespread in constituencies including Tsuen Wan, Hung Hom, Sai Wan Ho and Ma On Shan. "We believe it is only the tip of the iceberg. The electoral office should take it seriously and proactively launch an investigation," Mak said.

Democratic Party community officer Winfield Chong Wing-fai, whose party reported about 50 suspected vote-planting cases, accused the office of laxity. "There is one case of a voter who registered a power distribution transformer station as the home address. This could not have been accepted in the first place if the office was serious about its work," said Chong.

The Post has previously reported on voters claiming they live in hotel rooms, the Cultural Centre, Tsim Sha Tsui, and parks. Civic Party lawmaker Claudia Mo Man-ching warned that such irregularities could erode confidence in the election system.

Yesterday was the last day for voters to check and update their particulars in order to vote in November, and for the public to report suspicious cases.

An office spokesman said all complaints would be handled in accordance with the law. A person who gives false or incorrect information in making a voter registration may face up to six months in jail and a HK$5,000 fine. Scores of people were convicted of registering false addresses in 2011.

The district council elections will be held on November 22. It will be the first general elections since the Occupy protests and the pan-democrats' rejection of the government's proposed reform for the 2017 chief executive election. The polls are seen as a key test of voters' reaction to the pan-democrats' tactics.

Meanwhile, the Privacy Commissioner reminded candidates not to use voters' personal data for electioneering activities without their consent. Since 2012 the office has received 200 complaints about such election-related offences. It said the data should be destroyed after completion of all the electioneering activities.

(SCMP) District councillors' addresses changed on register, raising fresh doubts on work of elections watchdog. September 1, 2015.

The elections watchdog is facing more scrutiny after two district councillors learned their registered addresses were changed without their consent. The pair affected were Nixie Lam Lam, a Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong member of Tsuen Wan District Council, and Lam Yuk-chun, a non-affiliated Southern district councillor, said DAB vice-chairman Horace Cheung Kwok-kwan. The DAB reported the cases to police.

It came to light when Lam checked her registration status online. Cheung warned that a change of address - which could be made by anyone with the voter's identity card number and name - could cause a person to miss a verification letter from the Registration and Electoral Office, leading to their voter registration being cancelled and making them ineligible to stand in November's district polls. "It is also a criminal act for anyone to fill in [a voter registration] with wrong information," said Ip Kwok-him, a DAB lawmaker who serves with Cheung on Central and Western District Council.

A series of irregularities have been spotted in the provisional register, raising doubts about the adequacy of the office's verification work after a flood of voter fraud cases at the last district polls four years ago.

Cheung said the DAB had found over 100 irregularities on the register for Central and Western, including 98 cases of voters claiming to live in commercial buildings or street-level shops, and 19 of people living in buildings vacant for redevelopment. Voters were also registered in a demolished building and on the 12th floor of a 10-storey building. Cheung said that instead of relying on letters and visiting voters to verify addresses, the watchdog should set up a database. "If a building is demolished or vacated for redevelopment, the Buildings Department [and the Urban Renewal Authority] would know The [office] should collect this information and match it against the electoral roll."

(Oriental Daily) September 1, 2015.

The Registration and Electoral Office had previously sent out registered letters to registered voters in order to verify their addresses. At this time, about 47,000 voters have their registration voided because they did not respond in time. Together with about 32,000 voters who are deceased, this means that a total of about 80,000 voters have left the voter rolls. By district, it appears that Wong Tai Sin at 253 and Kwun Tong at 240 are the most seriously affected. Since District Council elections are sometimes decided by one or two dozen votes, disenfranchised voters or losing District Councilors may be filing lawsuits to block the election results.

(Wen Wei Po) September 2, 2015.

Democratic Party vice-president Joshua Li

Voters were supposed to update their registration information by August 25. Many pan-democratic parties filed complaints against suspicious voters. In particular, Civic Party's Joshua Li filed 596 letters of objection against registered voters in the Mei Foo district (specifically, in Mei Foo Stage 5, Mei Foo Stage 6, Ching Lai Court, Nob Hill). Most of these objections were based upon either the number of different surnames per household or the use of seemingly non-existent addresses. The thresholds that Joshua Li chose to use were lower than what other political parties are using (to wit, Li objects to four different surnames in one family and it becomes the onus on that family to prove that all four persons are (1) real by submitting copies of their Hong Kong ID's and (2) actually reside there by showing bills with their names and addresses).

With so many people were affected and thus contacted by the authorities for verification, there was a blowback. The Civic Party has apologized to the real voters who were affected. So far Joshua Li has withdrawn his objections to 486 of those registered voters. However, he is persisting on objecting to the remaining households with more than different surnames per household or seemingly non-existent address.

(Oriental Daily) September 3, 2015.

Democratic Party vice-chairman and Shek Yam district councilor Andrew Wan Siu-kin was accused of mistakenly filing complaints at the Registration and Electoral Office against more than a dozen voters.

Yesterday Legislative Council Ben Chan Han-pan and others held a press conference together with four voters. The four voters were deeply disturbed to receive demands to appear in court to explain their voter status. One senior citizen burst into tears and said that she was so fearful that she couldn't eat or sleep.

Ben Chan said that he has received thirteen citizen complaints so far. Most of these are senior citizens who don't understand the legal issues and sought his help. As a result, they will have to appear in court to defend themselves. Chan wonders if someone has been abusing the system.

Meanwhile Democratic Party vice-chairman Andrew Wan denies that he is using the system against any persons. He emphasized that his complaints were completely based upon the validity of the addresses or the presence of multiple surnames at a single address. Other political parties make similar complaints, and so the Democratic Party should not be isolated for criticisms. Wan says that he will apologize to those voters who were erroneously affected, but only after he receives the relevant documentation.

Letter to request court appearance due to complaint about election registration fraud in which the complainant is listed as Andrew Wan.

(HKG Pao) 13 Kwai Ching residents contacted legislator Ben Chan for assistance. These included members of the neighborhood self-help committee, presidents and members of the apartment owners' committees, etc. Grandma Lam has been living in the Kwai Ching district for 15 years. Previously she was a volunteer for Andrew Wan and the Democratic Party. Recently she became a volunteer of the rival DAB party. Therefore Andrew Lam filed a complaint against her to make her lose her eligibility. When Grandma Lam got this letter, she was "so scared that she couldn't eat nor sleep." Other targets of Wan's complaints will have to take time off from work to show up in court to defend themselves.

(Oriental Daily) September 6, 2015.

Three pro-establishment district councilors (Lau Kwai-yung of Yuen Long, Lam Lam-tong of Tsuen Wan and Lam Yuk-chun of Hong Kong Island South) found that some unknown person(s) had changed their addresses on the Registration and Electoral Office without their knowledge, and this may cause them to lose their eligibility to run in the district council elections.

Lau Kwai-yung lived in Tin Hang Estate in Tin Shui Wai before she got married. Recently she found out that her home address has been moved from Yuen Long to Tin Shui Wai. She thinks that someone is using a trick to make her ineligible to run in the election. Fortunately she found out before the deadline. Yesterday, she found out from the Registration and Electoral Office that someone had forged her signature to fill out a change-of-address form. She intends to file a police report.

(Hong Kong Free Press) September 7, 2015.

A magistrate has slammed the Registration and Electoral Office for incompetence after a court reviewed hundreds of complaints relating to fraudulent or bogus particulars arising during the voter registration process. Many of the errors were a result of the offices incorrect inputting of data, the Sha Tin Magistrates Court heard on Monday.

Around twenty citizens accused of having provided fraudulent details attended court to defend themselves. In one case, it was found that a single address belonged to people with three different surnames because the voter, Ms Ho, lived with her husband and maternal grandmother, all of whom have different surnames. In another case, the court heard that people with five different surnames were found to be registered to one address because those who had moved away did not renew their details.

Magistrate Andrew Ma criticised the Registration and Electoral Office for causing confusion among voters and wasting the courts time and resources by inputting voter data incorrectly. The magistrate also said that some of the suspicious cases could be the doing of political groups who want to prevent those with opposing views from voting. Ma urged the office to address the issues immediately and praised voters for fulfilling their duty as citizens by highlighting the discrepancies through legal processes.

The voters were assisted by Legislative Councillor Ben Chan Han-pan, of the pro-establishment DAB party, who said that many of the accused were innocent senior citizens unfamiliar with the regulations and procedures related to the election process. He suspected that some people had been making complaints maliciously and abusing the reporting mechanism.

Under current procedures, the Registration and Electoral Office has to refer notice of objections made by complainants to a judge, who will resolve the matter through a hearing. The voter whose particulars were being questioned can then personally appear in court or act through a lawyer to confirm their registered address.

(dbc) September 8, 2015.

The Registration and Electoral Office stated that they will investigate when an address contains seven or more voters, and/or five or more different family names. They believe that Civic Party's Joshua Li's four different family names is too low a threshold. The magistrate concurred and said that the right to vote cannot be deprived unless there is evidence of voter fraud.

(Oriental Daily) September 8, 2015.

Joshua Li lodged a complaint against a family with four voters having different family names. The subject appeared in court to explain that the family consisted of a married couple with their son and daughter-in-law who have different family names. The court rejected the complaint. Civic Party secretary-general Lay Yan Piau had accompanied Joshua Li to court, and he apologized outside the court to the affected family.

(Oriental Daily) September 25, 2015.

Yesterday, the Democratic Party chief executive Lam Cheuk-ting called a press conference over their discovery of a number of suspicious voter registration records. They said that they just studied the official voter registry released today and found that a number of voters who were deemed to be suspicious (usually too many different family names at the same address) by the Registration and Electoral Office have now been split into two or three different addresses elsewhere in the district. The press conference was scheduled at 4pm at the Legislative Council.

When the reporters arrived, they saw workers quickly removed the banners on the back wall about the press conference. Soon Lam Cheuk-ting appeared and confessed that they made a mistake when they compared the old and the new voter registries. Specifically, when they copied the information from one spreadsheet to the other, they shifted one row so that the new and old were no longer aligned correctly. Therefore Lam said that the press conference has been called off, and he apologized at least six times to the reporters who showed up.

Internet comments:

- Usually, the District Council elections are a case of pan-democrats versus pro-establishment candidates. The Factor X this year comes from the post-Occupy Central "Parachutists". These are the Young Turks who came out of Occupy Central. They hate the pro-establishment camp, but they also think the traditional pan-democrats are sell-out. Therefore they will run t o gain political power at the grassroots level, namely the District Councils.

(Ta Kung Pao) August 25, 2015.

According to Democratic Party vice-chairman Andrew Wan Siu-kin, they will be sending forth 94 candidates in the District Council elections. This is less than the 132 last year, but want to use their limited resources on those candidates who have a chance. Last time, the Democratic Party chairman Albert Ho Chun-yan had to resign after so many of their candidates lost.

Wan said that there are about 200 pan-democrat candidates in the field, of which there are at least fourteen cases where post-Occupy Central "parachutists" are also running. Of these, eight are in districts in which Democratic Party candidates are running. Wan is pessimistic about reaching compromise, because the parachutists' idea about mediation is that the Democratic Party candidates should withdraw. Wan says that their party will field the candidates regardless.

- Joshua Li was forced to withdraw 486 of his 596 complaints? Only 2,000 to 3,000 people will likely vote in his district, but he wants to disqualify one-fourth of them? What was he thinking when he made the filing?  Where were the grown-up supervisors?
What are his prospects after alienating/offending a quarter of the voter base before the voting even begins? And those voters have friends and relatives living in the same district too.

- If the complaints against registered voters are systematically spread across the board, there may be no reason for concern. But if you are profiling by complaining against some and ignoring others, you can gain an advantage.

Here is an example of how it is done: The most typical profile of the pan-democratic voter is young, high-income and high education. Voter registration data only tell you about gender and age. Census information tells you about median income by sub-districts. So you target older voters in poorer sub-districts.  You don't have to purge them from voter rolls. You can simply intimidate them by making the voting process hell (namely, having to appear in court to prove that you are who you are). That will give you an advantage.

This is just the sort of that highly-educated people can come up with.

- A family with four different surnames? You live with you mother, mother-in-law and wife using their maiden names and you are criminalized.
- How do prove that you are yourself? That's more Orwellian than Orwell. But if you can't do that, Andrew Wan won't withdraw his complaint against you and you will never be able to vote.

- Andrew Wan can make fun of he pro-establishment camp of buying votes with their snake dinners, vegetarian meals, moon cakes and rice dumplings. But what does he do himself? A discount 2-day trip for Kwai Ching senior citizens to Zhuhai (People's Republic of China).

- Why is Andrew Wan so aggressive?

(SCMP) Hong Kong's pan-democrats look to regain control in Kwai Tsing in November polls. September 7, 2015.

To pan-democrats, Kwai Tsing is a sympathetic oasis of voters as it is the only one out of the 18 districts where the camp has the edge over their pro-establishment opponents.

However, they do not hold the top posts of chairman and deputy - as six appointed seats in the 35-member council tipped the balance of power to the government-friendly side, even though democrats won 15 out of 29 directly elected seats in 2011.

But as appointed seats will be abolished this year, the prodemocracy camp is now hoping to extend its advantage in the November polls and turn Kwai Tsing into the city's only district council that is not dominated by Beijing loyalists - a position it has held in the past.

Democratic Party vicechairman Andrew Wan Siu-kin, a Kwai Tsing district councillor, said the camp could realise the goal should it beat its opponents in two key constituencies - On Ho and Ching Fat. Opinion polls indicate that Democrat candidates are leading there.

"But it's a very, very tough battle," Wan admitted.

"The pro-establishment camp has been pouring way more resources into districts like Kwai Tsing - or Sham Shui Po - where the pan-democrats exert significant influence. They don't really care much about the districts where Beijing loyalists already enjoy the absolute advantage."

Kwai Tsing has long been regarded as the bridgehead for the pan-democrats. They won 23 out of 28 popularly elected seats in 2000. But over the past decade, the margin between the two camps has been narrowing, leaving the pan-democrats just one seat ahead in the last polls.

Wan, who beat his opponent by more than 1,000 votes in the 2011 race, said the current election atmosphere was the worst since he first ran in 2003.

He accused pro-Beijing aspirants of distorting the councillor-voter relationship by handing out extravagant free gifts, which he said was no different from indirectly "bribing voters".

"I also give out free gifts - such as moon cakes, Chinese New Year gift bags and festive dumplings for the Dragon Boat festival," he said. "But now the Beijing loyalists do not just do it at festivals but throughout the year, giving out free bags of rice weighing several kilograms and even electronic appliances I hope people can rate the aspirants by their ability and not by how many free gifts they offer."

Another district councillor, Tam Wai-chun of the Business and Professionals Alliance, said the council could be controlled by pan-democrats if her allies failed to stay united. "The pro-establishment camp does not necessarily have better electoral coordination as not many of us are in the same boat," she said.

In some constituencies, she said, more than one Beijing loyalist had indicated an intention to run, which could allow pan-democrats to reap the benefits of a multi-candidate contest.

Tam also hit back at Wan's accusation about giving out gifts, saying pan-democrats had done the same.

- Two pictures tell a thousand words about who is winning this public relations war.

Democratic Party led by vice-chairman Andrew Wan:
Democratic Party
Thorough investigation of voter registration
Protect election fairness

Crying grandma who used to work as a volunteer for the Democracy Party's Andrew Wan. Why is she scared? She's been receiving letters and phone calls from strangers, her apartment does not have a steel gate and she thinks someone might break the door down and kill her.

- Andrew Wan has a problem for his own re-election campaign and that is why he needs to do something to avoid getting pinned down on his negative image. (The Sun) September 4, 2013.

Last year, the Democratic Party felt that Andrew Wan was capable for running for Legislative Councilor, but he suddenly withdraw. Rumors abounded at the time that he was carrying an extramarital affair with a woman.

So now Andrew Wan has come out to defuse the time bomb by telling the media about this extramarital affair. He tells us that about five years ago before the 2008 Legco elections, he had just joined the Democratic Party. At the time, his marital situation was terrible as the couple kept quarreling all the time. At the time, he got to know a woman in her 20's and they carried on an affair for about six months. At the time, he had lost his mind and became totally unaware that this was wrong. He even let friends see the two openly. After six months, he realized that he couldn't continue. So he broke up with the woman and told his wife about the affair. His wife was very mad but eventually forgave him.

It is hard to say whether the voters will forgive him. He has come out clean with the media in the hope that they will. Otherwise, he may even lost his District Council position and thus any chance of reaching the Legislative Council.

In politics, your personal interest comes ahead of your party's interest which is ahead of your beliefs and principles. In order to bury his own negative image, Andrew Wan is willing to risk his party's and his pan-democrats' chances with an action that is generating negative publicity.

- Interestingly, Andrew Wan had a photo taken at Occupy Admiralty with the celebrity lifeguard who was a full-time marshal while on paid sick leave from the government. On his t-shirt are the words: "Eggs against the high wall, fasting for universal suffrage." The grannies are the eggs and Andrew Wan is the high wall here.

- Andrew Wan's nickname is "Fat Boy". His fasting was unsuccessful, both for himself and universal suffrage. He is as fat as ever and universal suffrage is nowhere thanks to the veto by the pan-democrats.

- (Wen Wei Po) September 14, 2015.

Yesterday a citizen told us that a large truck brought a large amount of moon cakes to the office of Andrew Wan. Democratic Party members Leung Wing-kuen and Lau Chi-kit were in charge of taking delivery. A man moving the moon cakes used a cart with Lau Chi-kit's telephone number printed on it. In the 2011 District Council elections, Leung Wing-kuen lost in the On Yam district to FTU's Leung Chi-wing, while Lau Chi-kit lost in Ching-Fat district to the unaffiliated Poon Siu-ping.

According to the photo provided by the citizen, three pallets full of boxes printed as "Mid-Autumn Festival Moon Cakes" and "1x40". This photo shows so far three pallets, with a total of (3 pallets) x (10 layers per pallet) x (4 boxes per layer) x (40 moon cakes per box) = 4,800 moon cakes.

This citizen said that whereas the Democratic Party likes to accuse the pro-establishment camp of using "Snake dinners, vegetarian dinners, moon cakes and rice dumplings" to buy votes and win elections, they are now also giving away large numbers of moon cakes themselves. "I think that the Democratic Party is courageous in criticizing others people, but incapable of criticizing themselves. They claim to be poor, but where do they get the money to give away so moon cakes? Suppose one moon cake costs $10. 4,800 moon cakes is $48,000."

This citizen said that in recent days, Andrew Wan has gotten a rotten reputation for harassing registered voters in Shek Yam district. So maybe he wants to give away large numbers of moon cakes so that the residents may forget his evil deeds.

This citizen said that Andrew Wan's office has a notice that he will give away packets of rice on September 30. "How so! The District Council election filing begins two days later. Is this bribery?" According to the information, the rice distribution is handled by Thailand Buddhist Culture, but people can get their tickets at the address Shek Yam Estate Yung Shek Building Ground Floor B Room. That happens to be Andrew Wan's office.

- Voter suppression is a universal human right and an international standard. It is more common than civil nomination of election candidates.

(EJinsight) August 19, 2015.

Alex Chow, Joshua Wong, Nathan Law and Derek Lam

Four student protesters are facing indictment for storming the Central Government Offices during last years democracy protests. They have been told by the police that they will be charged in court by the end of the month.

Apple Daily is reporting that Joshua Wong, convenor of student activist group Scholarism, will be indicted for taking part in an illegal assembly and inciting others to participate. Alex Chow, then leader of the Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) and its sitting secretary general, Nathan Law, will be prosecuted for either offense. A fourth protester, Scholarism member Derek Lam, faces a charge of common assault.

The charges stem from an incident in which activists climbed over a perimeter wall and occupied the East Wing forecourt of government headquarters on Sept. 26 last year, two days before the protests began.  

All four, who were held briefly under arrest by appointment, said they have no regrets.

Law, who faces a charge for inciting others to join an unlawful assembly, said in a Fecbook post Tuesday that the government does not distinguish between social activists and common criminals. No wonder the government sent cops from the Organized Crime and Triad Bureau when Scholarism members set up booths in the streets.

Chow called the charge against him political revenge, adding three other key HKFS members have not received calls from the police about any legal action.

Separately, Wong wrote on Facebook that its a joke that citizens have to face prosecution for entering an open public space. He said he hopes the democracy movement will find a new direction to stay alive as the first anniversary of the Sept. 28 protests draws closer.

(SCMP) Trio of Occupy Central student leaders charged over protest that sparked 79-day movement. August 27, 2015.

Three student leaders of last years Occupy protests in Hong Kong were charged by police today for their roles in a protest last year at government headquarters in the days leading up to the start of the movement.

Scholarism leader Joshua Wong Chi-fung, Federation of Students secretary general Nathan Law Kwun-Chung and his predecessor Alex Chow Yong-kang attended police headquarters in Wan Chai this morning to accept the charges. Wong said he was charged with taking part and inciting others to take part in an unlawful assembly. Chow said he was charged for taking part in an unlawful assembly while Law was charged for inciting others to take part in it.

The trio were among a group of students who broke into the forecourt of government headquarters in Admiralty on September 26 last year. The break-in came after students staged a class boycott for several days outside the building in protest against Beijings stringent framework on political reform. The break in triggered the 79-day Occupy protests two days later. Speaking before entering police headquarters this morning, Wong said: The break in was the best decision I made in the last four years.

Referring to the forecourt of the government headquarters, Wong said previous protests had been held there without incident. Civic Square had been a place where we gathered freely to protest against the national education curriculum and the free television licence decision. We were only trying to get into that place ... So this is a political prosecution, he added.

Wong declined to say whether he would plead guilty, but Law dropped a strong hint that he would not. We are jumping into this procedure today to expose [the injustice] in it. When the law is used to suppress the people, we will not bow down ... and show remorse or apologise just to get a milder penalty, Law said.

The activists will attend court on Wednesday.

Wongs lawyer Michael Vidler said he is considering asking the court to end the legal proceeding permanently because it was wrong to prosecute 11 months after the incident.

About 100 activists, including pan-democrat lawmakers, gathered outside police headquarters to show their support for the trio.

(EJinsight) Joshua Wong charged amid cries of persecution. August 28, 2015.

Hong Kong student leader Joshua Wong and two other democracy protesters were formally charged with illegal assembly Thursday amid cries of political persecution from their supporters. Police pressed charges against Wong, founder of student activist group Scholarism, as well as Alex Chow and Nathan Law, former and sitting chairman of the Hong Kong Federation of Students. They will stand trial in Eastern Magistrates Court on Sept. 2, accused of taking part in an unlawful assembly and inciting others to participate, according Apple Daily.

Supporters holding yellow umbrellas, symbol of last years street protests, chanted anti-police slogans as the trio arrived at police headquarters in Wan Chai for booking formalities. 

Chow said the trial is an opportunity to reiterate the values of the Umbrella Movement. But simply pleading guilty will cut short the civil disobedience campaign, he said. Chow said they plan to illustrate  in court the brutality of the government and how it failed to safeguard the peace and harmony of society. The Umbrella Movement started when the police unleashed tear gas bombs, which subsequently prompted hundreds of thousands of people to take to the streets, Chow said. He said those who ordered the use of tear gas should be prosecuted.

(SCMP) Case against Occupy protesters including Joshua Wong shouldnt have taken a year to get to court. September 2, 2015.

A magistrate yesterday told prosecutors it should not have taken them so long to bring Occupy protesters to court, as student leaders from the movement including Joshua Wong Chi-fung appeared before her almost a year after the pro-democracy protests began.

Principal Magistrate Bina Chainrai was speaking to the prosecutor in charge of the case against student Chui Tsz-chun, one of eight defendants pleading not guilty at Eastern Court to several charges related to events a day before the Occupy protest got into full swing in September.

The prosecutor said he would like to see the case dealt with soon as it was straightforward, to which Chainrai replied: If it is pretty straightforward, it should not take a year to prosecute.

In court yesterday, former Federation of Students secretary general Alex Chow Yong-kang, 25, faced one count of taking part in an unlawful assembly on September 26 and 27, while his successor, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, 22, faced one charge of inciting others to take part in an unlawful assembly on those days. Wong, 18, the convenor of student activist group Scholarism, faces both charges over alleged offences on September 26.

A protest outside government headquarters in Admiralty last September resulted in demonstrators storming the space outside the complex known as Civic Square, but the court has not heard whether the charges relate to those events.

However, Wong, when asked to make a plea, said: Citizens have the right to enter Civic Square.

Chainrai replied that the courts were not the place to %express his political views.

Wong was represented by Randy Shek, while Alvin Yeung appeared for the other two. Five other protesters Chau Kwan-ting, 29, Ngan Chin-fung, 24, Wong Ho, 35, Chui, 17, and Scholarisms Lam Shun-hin, 22 each face one count of common assault of policemen and security guards outside government headquarters and the Legislative Council on the same two days.

The magistrate adjourned the case against Joshua Wong, Chow and Law, which involves 51 witnesses, to October 30 for a pre-trial session. The rest are scheduled to attend their pre-trial session on October 5.

(Wen Wei Po) September 10, 2015.

Six persons from five families in Shek Yam district have gone down to file a complaint against Democratic Party vice-president Andrew Wan and others. These residents said that there was no way that Wan did not know that they still live there. After all, Wan's assistant came last month to contact them. Therefore there was absolutely no reason for Wan to report that they filed false address information to the Registration and Electoral Office. Under Hong Kong law, it is a crime to file false claims about the eligibility of a voter.

There six persons have also released a statement. Because Wan filed a complaint against them, they had to respond to the Registration and Electoral Office in a very short time and attend the court hearing. Furthermore, they have been harassed in person, by telephone calls and text messages. They were told to "watch themselves" and "don't overdo this." "Recently, some people have openly said that we are making something out of nothing and making unfounded charges. Even more ironically, they wondered why we didn't call the police. That is why we are angry."

The statement continued: "Everybody makes mistakes. The matter would be over if a sincere apology is offered. But someone insists on not apologizing and refuses to let the matter end. They keep shirking responsibility and in fact turn around the table. We are vexed. We are forced to ask the police for help, so that the law enforcement agencies can get to the truth."

Internet comments:

- This case is a no-brainer. Here is evidence in the form of the TVB news report ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyLqUrjlIpE)

0:23 Joshua Wong: I am now calling everybody let us all charge together into Civic Plaza.
0:32 Nathan Law: Everybody charge into Civic Plaza. The vanguard is already charging into Civic Plaza.

That would be the incitement.

Their presence in Civic Plaza would be the participation in an unlawful assembly. The police warned them that this was an unlawful assembly before arresting them.

- The relevant law is this: Cap 245 Public Order Ordinance s 18 Unlawful assembly

(1) When 3 or more persons, assembled together, conduct themselves in a disorderly, intimidating, insulting or provocative manner intended or likely to cause any person reasonably to fear that the persons so assembled will commit a breach of the peace, or will by such conduct provoke other persons to commit a breach of the peace, they are an unlawful assembly.
(2) It is immaterial that the original assembly was lawful if being assembled, they conduct themselves in such a manner as aforesaid.
(3) Any person who takes part in an assembly which is an unlawful assembly by virtue of subsection (1) shall be guilty of the offence of unlawful assembly and shall be liable-

(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for 5 years; and
(b) on summary conviction, to a fine at level 2 and to imprisonment for 3 years.

Whether Civic Plaza is "open public space" is not germane to the case.

- Somebody is not pleased but for other reasons:

(Oriental Daily) September 1, 2015

Roman Catholic Church Cardinal/Bishop Emeritus Joseph Zen Ze-Kiun said that he was "ashamed" that he has not been "contacted for an appointment to be arrested." He questioned whether the law is equal for everyone.

Who gives a fuck about a has-been and/or nobody? He does, obviously. Nobody else does, though.

- Joshua Wong said it is a joke that citizens have to face prosecution for entering an open public space.

--- The Legislative Council building is an open public space, therefore citizens can enter or leave at will.
--- Government House is an open public space, therefore citizens can enter or leave CY Leung's bedroom at will.
--- The Tsing Ma Bridge is an open public space, therefore citizens can enter or leave at will.
--- The Hong Kong International Airport is an open public space, therefore citizens can enter or leave at will.
... Anyway, the general idea is that you can enter or leave any place you want as soon as you declare it to be "open public space." That was the theoretical premise of Occupy Central. Democracy is so wonderful.

- Joshua Wong lives in South Horizons on Ap Lei Chau. Since the Ap Lei Chau Bridge is open public space, I can occupy it and stop all traffic.

More at Occupy Central 4.


Occupy Central Part 1, Occupy Central Part 2, Occupy Central Part 3, Occupy Central Part 4
Brief Comments
Blog Posts

Search WWW Search www.zonaeuropa.com

        Blogroll   Press