Gist of 28 Jan Press Conference, HKU VC & Council Chairman

Gist of 28 Jan Press Conference, HKU VC & Council Chairman (with responses from Pan-dem)

Original article of HKCT

The press conference was taken place in Hong Kong Bankers Club, the Landmark, Central. Press conferences of HKU are rarely held outside the campus, and the spokesperson of HKU said due to various consideration the PC was conducted outside the campus. It is not known whether Arthur Li is the person to book the venue. The time of the conference was at 15:15, but the HKU only notified journalists at 13:39, much shorter time than usual notifications. Both of them wore little white badges which read I LOVE HKU.

Arthur Li "gave the sinceriest [sic] apology to the Hong Kong citizens for a very small minority of students for their misbehaviour". These small number of students are rather like someone who was "poisoned by drugs and manipulated", thus their behaviour become very "unrational". He said it is important to find out condemn "who are the people behind who give the poision to our young people", as  "young people are very idealistic and they can be easily misled". He said Billy Fung was a liar, as he told a blatant lie as on Tuesday, the council agreed to form a review panel, but Fung misled other students by disseminating incorrect messages. When he repeated the message in Chinese, he also asked the public to think about "whether these people are acceptable".

Peter Mathieson said his predominant concern is about safety. He felt there was "invisible danger" and "real risk to life" and it was "physically dangerous" to him, other Council members and staff on Tuesday night (26 Jan), and he felt "absolutely unacceptable" for those who do not care abou safety. He believed there is no way to make progress on that night and engage in reasonable debate without injuries.

Arthur Li said all Council members agreed to set up a review panel but after the release of Newby report, which will be produced in a month or two. He pointed out Audrey Eu was there, and Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok (Arthur: Leung Lai-kwan), one of the strike committee member, is also the intern of Alan Leong, thus pointing fingers to the Civic Party, hence there are political interference. Li said if students want to see him, they can ask the vice-chancellor to arrange, instead of having a riot to force someone to see them immediately, as things have to be done orderly. "Johannes Chan incident is also a kind of interference", he said, as "Johannes Chan cannot sit on where Civic Party wants Chan to sit".

He disagreed with the reporter's view, which said CY Leung appointing him, a very unfavourable man considered by some students, is a kind of political interference, because the University Ordinance allows the chancellor to appoint people into the HKU Council. He said there are 170,000 alumni in total, and around 4,000 (3%) went to vote in which 97% opposed him; but the rest 97% did not say anything [about him], so "there is no problem".

Arthur Li thanked Wen Wei Po, since "his last statement was underhandedly leaked out, and Wen Wei Po has very kindly given him a year of free subscription". On another question from RTHK, he immediately said that the riot that night has "nothing to do with the Council", and he reprimanded the reporter to "reflect upon herself" as she asked whether it is inappropriate to allow policemen to enter the campus, "as this is very unreasonable" and "[we] shall not blame the policemen". The journalist from RTHK wanted to ask follow-up questions but was interrupted.

In answering being appointed as the HKU Council chairman, Arthur Li said "almost each and every relatives and friends ask him not to take this post", as this needs time and effort without pay and needs to be scolded. He said he took the post because "enough is enough", and "we need to stand up for decency", "to say what is fair and just". The journalist from Cable TV wanted to ask follow-up questions but was interrupted.

Arthur Li said they have to protect the reputation and privacy on Johannes Chan's case, so they did not disclose the reason not to put him as an SVP, but he asked the journalist from HK01 to go home and listen to the recording (which was leaked out online) and find out the reason.

He said he refused to make remarks on any individual student, but said "Billy Fung is a liar because he broke the confidentiality rule, and his integrity is in question". [which basically, is making remarks on an individual student]

Mathieson said, "The university will make every effort to cooperate with the police, not only on this issue". The police has requested to provide images of CCTV around a door which was said to be criminally damaged by students, and such images have been provided. A small group will be formed inside the council discussing on confidentiality, and Mathieson will be chairing that committee, and they might be new guidelines to be issued on confidentiality rule. As for disciplinary actions, he said the university has a set of established procedures to deal with.

The live signal of Cable TV, which we rely on this report, ended with English question, and was abruptly covered as the anchor repeated the gist of the PC in Cantonese, and therefore we cannot get through that question.

Response from Civic Party

In response to Arthur Li, Audrey Eu said she left HKU at 5pm that day, and went to the Civic Party HQ in North Point. Alan Leong, chief of the Civic Party, said it is political mudslinging on Civic Party, and predicted that it might be related to the NT East by-election soon. He said Civic Party has become the "No. 1 enemy" and "bete noire" of the central authorities and HKSARG. He demanded a formal apology from Arthur Li as he insulted HKU students. 

Speechless: View CCP's Stance on Lee Bo's Case from Global Times' Op-Ed

View CCP's Stance on Lee Bo's Case from Global Times' Op-Ed

Translated by Karen L., written by Speechless
Original: http://polymerhk.com/articles/2016/01/07/26322/ 

(Screen capture of Global Times)

Despite Global Times' editorials on uncertain whereabouts of Causeway Bay Books' associates went absurd, it is referential as to catching a glimpse of CCP's attitude over the incident.

In Abduction Rumours Scotched by Lee's Fax on 6 Jan, it says,

"Combining Hong Kong media's news reports, Lee Bo is well aware that the investigation he has been assisting in involves a serious matter. Causeway Bay Books, for years, had published and sold a great deal of books that are directed against politics in mainland China. Those books are filled with false content, maliciously attacking the country's political system, and have already brought along bad influences. Although the bookshop is located in Hong Kong, the harm it has done has reached across the border to mainland, for which Lee knows it very well. Personally Lee seems to be willing to handle this in a low profile, whereas Hong Kong media's hype is not doing any good on him and on his business. As to the collateral damage it carries, the oppositions are not going to make it up for anything."

In short, Causeway Bay Books is regarded by CCP as the source of chaos destructing the country's efficient management. Metaphorically speaking, it is a pain in the neck someone intends to get rid of as soon as possible. Disappearance of Lee Bo and his fellow workers, by simple deduction, is expected to be work done by CCP itself, so there's something to be condemned scathingly and a chance to "right the wrong". This so-called "willing" to assist in investigation is merely a lie that sounds nice.

On the next day, 7 Jan, in Speculation over HK Bookstore's Investigation Went Completely Wild, it further clarifies,

"first thing first, even though Causeway Bay Books is based in Hong Kong, the business, in a large extent, targets readers from mainland China – thus stepping one foot in Hong Kong and another in mainland China. It creates interference in the mainland's social order, undermining the foundation of stability. The reasonableness of the investigation therefore is solid, and it is in accordance with the law in China."

In this case, Xi Jinping's emphasis on "rule of law" is being implemented. How? Following the above extreme principle of thinking – bookstore as a means to shaken the stability and social order in China – relevant party being arrested and punished is simply a natural consequence.

People may indicate the fact that according to the Basic Law, CCP's officials have no authority in the jurisdiction of Hong Kong even in the condition that Hongkongers engage in activities which endanger CCP's regime. Or else, if this is not strictly followed, the Basic Law will equate to being null and void. That being so, "One Country, Two Systems" will turn into obliteration, of which it turns out CCP did respond to it.

It says in the Abduction Rumours Scotched by Lee's Fax,

"Hong Kong has practised capitalism, and the people there enjoy freedom of speech. Still, the Two Systems exists in the necessary condition – One Country. Accordingly, Hong Kong cannot be a hostile base where involves activities to overthrow the country's political system. Those extreme oppositions have forced their opinion to transform the Two Systems into an unlimited manner... Based on the wrong knowledge, they attempt aggressively to confront the central government by the radical tool of 'freedom of speech'."

 "One Country overrides Two Systems" is unquestionably CCP's stance that will not concede even an inch. Even though it is explicitly stated in the law that only Hong Kong law-enforcement personnel have the legal authority to enforce laws in Hong Kong, the impregnable position is not up to Basic Law. The absolute power decided that the stability of the party and the country secures the foremost importance. Therefore at the unusual time, Basic Law being treated as a doormat is not a problem at all. Besides, Lee Bo being captured by police from mainland China is so far a speculation; CCP would be like, "haven't been known; therefore, 'Two Systems' is still in effect."

It is further elaborated in Speculation over HK Bookstore's Investigation Went Completely Wild,

"it's certainly a no go if the mainland officials are to truss Lee Bo up and stuff him into some police car to get pass in the checking points. In general, there are some methods for the law-enforcement departments to avoid violation of law and at the same time undergo investigation – a win-win situation."

"One thing is important: there should not be any confrontation between the Basic Law in Hong Kong and Law of the People's Republic of China. The former shall not be exploited to shield someone or some organizations which are in an attempt to sabotage the country’s stability..."

"Those Hongkongers who are obsessed in the opposition of politics should indeed straighten out the essential meaning of 'One Country, Two Systems', quit the fantasy which 'Two Systems' dominates 'One Country', and throw away the assumption which Hong Kong can be safe whatever it does to harm the country's operations..."

Basically, CCP has already admitted that it is the police from mainland China who have taken Lee Bo, simply not with violence. Added with the unproven speculation on the police (or CPHK dare not), "One country, Two Systems" does "sustain". Thus, CCP seems to be confident that this is "a win-win situation". The following two paragraphs quoted from the editorial clarify CCP’s stance that "Two Systems" and "the Basic Law" shall make way for the country’s safety at a certain time.

As to whether Lee Bo can return to Hong Kong someday, Abduction Rumours Scotched by Lee's Fax said, "...Sooner or later, Lee Bo will have to go back to Hong Kong..." and from Speculation over HK Bookstore's Investigation Went Completely Wild, it said, "it seems we will have to wait for Lee Bo’s return and his personal explanation to the media." It is expected that the possibility of release is high, while "his personal explanation to the media" seems to indicate an upcoming press conference, so that the public will be relieved and go back to their lives once again.

If I’m not mistaken, Ng Leung-sing’s speech "those five bookstore guys must have been arrested of slipping across the border and visiting prostitutes" apparently does not meet CCP’s purpose. It is the Achilles’ heel of the loyalists – sycophant who couldn’t able to keep up with their master’s steps; no wonder Ng apologized for what he said the very next day.

Have a Look at Lee Bo's Case -- CY Leung's Statement

Have a Look at Lee Bo's Case -- CY Leung's Statement

Translated by Karen L., written by Post-90s Bullshit
Original: http://polymerhk.com/articles/2016/01/07/26327/

(Source: aTV News; CY Leung responding to Lee Bo's incident)

One by one, the employees and shareholders of Causeway Bay Books have gone missing. This includes Lee Bo who disappeared into thin air, for which the international world has shown their concern. The reason being that the books aim at the segment which is interested in dark secrets in China. It is suspected that the whole matter is CCP’s demonstration to violate “One Country, Two Systems” and interference against Hong Kong’s freedom of press.

Four days after Lee Bo went missing, CY Leung said that he will keep a close eye on the events, and indicated that law enforcement in Hong Kong can only be practiced by local officials, but not by officials from mainland China, otherwise it will be the violation of “One Country, Two Systems”.

Yes, CY Leung intended to emphasize that the “One Country, Two Systems” still stands, but nevertheless, from the experiences, such a statement symbolizes an alarm which we should be worried. It always turns out to be the opposite of what he says.

So far, it’s hardly to find examples to disprove this observation. Before the Handover, CY Leung once said that he thinks it’s wrong to send one’s children abroad for studies; but it is known to everyone that all three of his children have studied in England. He said that he himself is not a political material and that he will not run for the CE, but by the same token, he has become the CE now. What is more, in 1989, he expressed his discontent of the violent clearance against students at the Tiananmen Square. And you know the rest of the story.

Following the pattern, the more opposite you view of CY Leung’s “reassuring” statement, the closer it is to the truth. In the case of Lee Bo, CY Leung claimed that officials from mainland China have no authority to execute the law; perhaps, they have already been in Hong Kong lurking somewhere. It’s simply us being kept in the dark. As to whether CCP breaches “One Country, Two Systems”, I believe you've had the answer.

Atsuna: Grumpy Old Fart's Sophomoric Chunibyo

Grumpy Old Fart's Sophomoric Chunibyo

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by Atsuna

Original: https://atsunablog.wordpress.com/2015/12/29/%E6%B8%AF%E5%96%B1%E7%9A%84%E9%81%8E%E6%9C%9F%E4%B8%AD%E4%BA%8C%E7%97%85/ 

There are some kinds of "seniors" in the Chinese society:

1 - Some kind of old, grumpy bitches who compare your height, exam results, salary, relationship, marriage, your son, or your relative's son. They tread on others and, therefore, gain happiness.

2 - Some authoritative old farts who have their own opinion. They might not be fans of Chirs Chung, but are usually fans of the Democratic Party, holding "Greater China" thoughts. Some might even say that Raymond Wong Yuk-man still belongs to the People's Power, yet they will say "fighting for universal suffrage without screening" is too naive. Innocence is not the most unbearable thing, but rather, their sophomoric Chunibyo tone when they speak to you. Chunibyo is a Japanese phrase referring silly and arrogant behaviour during one's adolescence. Yet many know-it-all adults in their 50s or 60s are still that silly.

There isn't unprovoked love in the world, nor is there unprovoked faux pas. Behind those authoritative old farts, there are usually ordinary Hong Kong stories: a young grassroots movement benefitted from education reform and had witnessed the years when Hong Kong's economy flourished and China opened up. Hongkongers only needed to do so-called comprador work and laugh all the way to the bank. Some may have even gained their status because of the brain drain of the 1990s. They believe that the only reason for their success is "personal effort", instead of believing that the era helped them. There is a saying: "survival of the fittest". Those who succeeded might not be the best, but rather the fittest who followed the trend of the era.

In Chinese society, "premature youngsters" are sinned. Lin Yu-tang wrote this in his book, My Country and My People (1935):

The Chinese have a certain contempt for young enthusiasm and for new brooms that will sweep this universe clean. By laughing at that enthusiasm and at the belief that everything is possible in this world, Chinese society teaches the young to hold their tongues while their elders are speaking early on.

And even though the society is by no means similar to that era, Hong Kong is still very traditional overall. When students had a class strike for universal suffrage, what we earned was the nonchalant irony from those who had failed to guard Hong Kong, saying things like "If the undergrads want to make sacrifices, they shall quit the universities... Most Hongkongers do not want to be against Beijing, this is not good for Hong Kong." When they are old, they have nothing to be ashamed of. They do not want to be decent men themselves, and neither do they allow "the new brooms" to be decent. No wonder Lu Xun said Chinese people are "on a whim from their old age until their death - they have to occupy roads of youngsters, and breathe all the air of youngsters".

Lee Tien-ming, a philosophist, once said: "Everyone has his adolescence, if he is not dead; everyone loses his teenage years, if everything is well. After all, one should not be proud of his age, unless he has no other things to be proud of; and one should not feel inferior, unless this inferiority can help you forget other heavier inferiorities." This can be applied to those who think that they are young enough, and those who think that they are old enough.