Long-weekend links, for anyone with the energy

A bunch of banana-republic/show-trial stories… 

An optimistic defendant appeals against not having a jury in Hong Kong’s first NatSec trial.

Andy Li (maybe – no-one knows – being held incommunicado in a mental hospital) gets a government-appointed lawyer his family has never heard of. Apparently the counsel’s a company/land law specialist.

The government removes accused persons’ details from court charge sheets – so it will be harder for the press to find out whose cases are coming up.

And HKFP points out a (hardly surprising) contradiction arising from Hong Kong court decisions: clicking ‘like’ online is evidence of support where it will hurt pan-dems, but not evidence of support where it would benefit pan-dems.

RTHK’s new CCP-approved boss obviously relishes scrutinizing and micromanaging the broadcaster’s every minute of programming. Serious question: how does he find time to watch/listen to/read all the content? HKFP are valiantly trying to keep count of how many shows the guy has pulled. He now tells staff to withdraw entries to a human rights journalism awards event, presumably for fears the station’s work might be internationally recognized for high quality – heaven forbid. The organizers say ‘too late, you’re in’. Expect an angry ‘interfering in our affairs’ tantrum if RTHK wins an award.

For aficionados of Election Committee sub-sectors, an Apple Daily wrap-up of how Beijing will replace existing voters with state-linked and pro-Beijing groups. Since everything is already rigged and Beijing decides the result in advance, these changes are simply the CCP’s charming little way of saying to lawyers, accountants, tycoons and others: ‘We really really hate you’.

The number-one question as a LegCo ‘election’ looms – to boycott or not to boycott? (Incredibly, there are Democratic Party masochists who still can’t seem to make up their minds. The answer is ‘boycott’. I understand why the intemperate might prefer to mutilate their ballot, but a low turnout/shortage of candidates sends a bigger message.)

A Quartz bio of reporter, activist and heroine of 2019 Gwyneth Ho, now (guess this goes without saying) in jail. Speaking of 2019, I just happened across this reminder of June 16.

Neville Sarony in Asia Times on Hong Kong disciplined services’ transition to the funny/creepy/Prussian goose-step style of marching.

…George Orwell observed that the goose step was only used in countries where the population was too frightened to laugh at the military. 

A former top UK jurist on Beijing’s sanctions against Essex Court Chambers. 

The BBC’s Beijing correspondent has moved to Taiwan. Globular Times bids him a snotty farewell. Maybe the trend for foreign reporters to flee China for Renegade Province will lead to more and better coverage of Asia’s freest country.

From 60 Minutes, a look at how the WHO let China off the hook in investigating the origins of Covid-19.

ABC News in Oz on China’s new approaches – like ‘adding snark’ – to messaging against the West.

George Magnus on China’s ‘go-it-alone’ five-year plan.

A British lawmaker’s reaction to being put on Beijing’s Naughty List.

And for anyone with an interest in Serbia: China’s military boss thinks this is a cool time to visit the place, and how the country’s media is going pro-Beijing.

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Long-weekend links, for anyone with the energy

  1. HKJC Irregular says:

    ‘Larry the Lawless Lawyer’ – Beijing’s latest torture implement.

  2. Din Dan Che says:

    Serbs: a vengeful bunch. What an opportune time to give it back to Nato and the West after those air strikes.

  3. Mary Melville says:

    Re Boycott the election. Bear in mind that your name is crossed off on the list when you rock up to ballot station. So it would be easy to identify potential dissenters via the compilation of a list of the no-shows.
    Of course spoiled ballots come with their own risk as with advanced technology there are ways to identify the perpetrators.
    So damned you do, damned you don’t.

  4. Paul Lewis says:

    If a person is sanctioned by the Chinese government, and it’s citizens cannot do business with them, would that mean a restaurateur in the UK would be breaking Chinese law if they served them?
    It sounds like that would be the case.

  5. reductio says:

    According to the link, Chinese general Wei Fanghe states his visit is confirmation of a ‘steel partnership’ between the two countries. However, back in 2017 Vice Premier Wang Yang stated that the China Pakistan partnership is ‘stronger than steel’ so the West shouldn’t be worried unduly at this stage. According to reliable sources President Xi has a metallurgic chart in his office that gives degrees of partnership strength:

    North Korea: Carbonised speed-quenched tungsten (with sprinkles)
    Cambodia: Tungsten
    Pakistan: Harder than steel
    Serbia: Steel
    Hungary: iron
    Rest of EU: iron that’s been out in the rain too long and is going seriously rusty
    UK: tin pest
    US: Not even a metal. Jelly.
    Hong Kong: Piano wire. The kind dictators hang people with.

  6. Andrew Maxwell says:

    In his piece in The Spectator Nusrat Ghani writes: ‘dramatically illustrate the fundamental incompatibility of our two systems of government, and the vast cultural chasm between them.’ When referring to the sanctions imposed by the British Parliament, and then as a means of tit-for-tat retaliation by the CCP.

    These two systems of government cannot be juxtaposed and compared: the governmental systems in Europe, the USA and many other countries follow a democratic system. The END.

    There is no us and them in the CCP, China, just us. And if you don’t like how we do it, keep your eyes, ears and mouth firmly shut and you’ll be fine.

    In Britain it is possible, when a citizen feels strongly about a issue that could affect them directly, it is perfectly acceptable and expected in that country, for an aggrieved or disgruntled complainant to write directly to their parliamentary representative in their local authority (their MP, Member of Parliament) and express their feelings and discontent with the respective issue.

    It is not unlikely that the complainant will, in time, receive a response. A proper, detailed, formal official Government response. One that will usually include a ‘thanks’ to the author, for bringing the matter to the attention of the MP. And in many cases these issues raised are addressed, and in some cases, much improved. Or in cases where the matter at hand requires urgent attention, then the government will generally address the issues immediately. Chinese version of this process: go away, now. If you don’t you will regret it. Keep complaining and we’ll come after your family. Keep going further and we’ll tear down your house, throw you in jail and steal your money and your family’s money too.

    These 2 systems – if you can even call the CCP’s methods a system – should not sit down at the same table. They are oil and water. One is government for the people. The other one is total control of the people.

    Forget about cooperation with the CCP. They lie, they can’t help it. They cheat, and they have the agents everywhere all the time to carry out the CCP’s daily dirty work. The suspicion and mistrust is rife and a good tool to use to threaten and control the minions.

    They are evel and do NOT deserve a seat at this particular table.

  7. Mark Bradley says:

    @Andrew Maxwell fully agree. CCP deserve nothing but contempt

Comments are closed.