China’s “New Squabbling Situation” (Lee Yee)
Yesterday, I mentioned that the US deterred the Soviet Union’s intention to employ nuclear weapons to attack China’s military base in 1969, and since then implemented a half-century policy of interactions with China. Although the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has always said that “the US will never give up their ambition to destroy our nation,” looking back at history, even when the Eight-Nation Alliance invaded China in the nineteenth century, the US did not make territorial claims from the Qing empire. Instead, it advocated “open doors to share the benefits equally” to avoid China being carved up. The US’ share of the Boxer’s indemnity has been gradually paid back through the training of Chinese talents and the studying of Chinese students in the US. The Rockefeller Foundation founded the Peking Union Medical College (PUMCH) in 1917, the predecessor of Tsinghua University, bringing modern western medicine into China. When the Second Sino-Japanese War broke out, a veteran American military aviator Claire Lee Chennault was hired as an aviation adviser and trainer in China. He organized the First American Volunteer Group (AVG) of the Republic of China Air Force, nicknamed the Flying Tigers, and assisted China in fighting against the Japanese in World War II.
In response to the anti-China speech given by the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a mainland Chinese netizen commented, “you needed education, they gave you Tsinghua University; you needed medical care, they gave you PUMCH; you needed to fight against Japan, they gave you the Flying Tigers; you needed to oppose the Soviet Union, they gave you a platform; you needed to open up, they gave you foreign funding; you needed trade, they gave you a trade surplus...You say that they have an endless ambition to destroy your nation, they will give it a try!” This is a very vivid description of how Sino-US relations have evolved so far.
Just a few days before Pompeo delivered his “Communist China and the Free World’s Future” speech, Chinese State Councilor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi also gave a long speech at the inaugural ceremony of the Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Studies Centre on July 20. The speech was titled, “Study and Implement Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Conscientiously and Break New Ground in Major-Country Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics." I share the URL here ( https://www.sohu.com/a/408705618_99900926 ) and strongly recommend readers to browse this masterpiece. Let’s see if anyone can tell me after reading it, what is the content of Wang’s three to four thousand words on “Xi’s Thought on Diplomacy,” and what specific facts were there about “breaking new ground in major-country diplomacy.” Nowadays, the daily news is about Western countries’ policies, acts, and speeches directed at China and Hong Kong. Mainland netizens have recently lined up the front-page headlines of the Chinese internal newspaper “Reference News,” and they were all, “China condemns…, China warns the UK…, China is resolute to fight back…” This is not at all a new diplomatic situation but a new squabbling situation.”
After reading Wang’s speech, why not make a comparison to see if this Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs, who has the same ranking as the US Secretary of State, is of the same caliber and merit as Pompeo? Then you will understand why the US now refuses to restart dialogue with China and only looks at China’s actions.
Looking at the successive Chinese foreign ministers after the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, with the exception of the time during the Cultural Revolution, Zhou Enlai, Chen Yi to Qian Qichen were all decent. I still remember that after the breakthrough in Sino-US relations in 1971, the New York Times columnist James Reston visited Zhou Enlai in China and their battle of words was brilliant. Why does the current foreign minister only speak empty words but know not what they are?
Of course, this is related to the current situation in China for the apotheosis of the core leader. In addition to the unknown “Xi Jinping’s Thought on Diplomacy,” there will be “Xi Jinping’s Thought on Economics, Education, Military…” one after another.
A netizen quoted Wang’s speech and left a comment, “Brown-nosing is linguistic corruption and spiritual bribery...The giver only has to expend dignity and cunning with words, and the recipient is rewarded with personality and public interests. It is consensual for both giver and taker, and they usually have a tacit understanding where they jointly commit an ugly conspiracy...In a totalitarian society, brown-nosing is a multiple outbreak and refractory Covid-19. After an organized and large-scale epidemic, it will eventually become an incurable disease of personality cult detrimental to the entire nation and society.”
German Protestant theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer said that “the nature of folly is a moral rather than an intellectual defect.” I believe this moral defect stems from a totalitarian system. When power becomes absolute, all those in power at various levels will, as Lu Xun said, “fawn upon their superiors and be overbearing upon those below.” The regime causes those with authority to never hear the true voice, how is this not stupid?
what is bribery 在 J.Pictures.FaLala Facebook 的最佳解答
https://www.facebook.com/1000044641306…/…/1283336315158494/…
【Say NO to extradition to Mainland China】反對修訂逃犯引渡條例
"You are safe now in Hong Kong. After the amendment to the Fugitive Ordinanceis passed, you are NO longer safe!" said Dr Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, Practising Barrister,former legislative councillor.
#請與您的海外朋友分享
Now, why should we be concerned about this amendment to the Fugitive Ordinance? Does it concern you? The answer is YES !
Now before this amendment proposed by the government, whatever you do in the Mainland, you cannot be surrendered to the Mainland for trial. The Mainland's hand cannot reach into Hong Kong to get you. But if this amendment is passed, then any person who is found in Hong Kong, that is to say, it includes even people in transit, people who are visiting, people who are doing business here. Everybody is affected.
If the Chief Executive forms an agreement with the Mainland authorities to surrender you to the Mainland, for crimes you are suspected to have committed in the Mainland or in Hong Kong, then you will no longer be safe.
Under the present law, you cannot be surrendered to the Mainland. If the amendment is passed, you are exposed to the risk of being surrendered to the Mainland. If you do not believe me, please have a look at the amendment bill. Please look at the opinion of the Bar Association. You will see immediately that this Ordinance, this amendment, does not only affect these dissidents in Hong Kong, people who are politically unwelcome. But it will reach to anybody who is in business, who happens to get on the wrong side of your competitors in the Mainland.
Of course, it is said in the Ordinance that nobody can be surrendered for trial of a political crime or a crime of a political nature. But so far, the Mainland has not charged anyone of a political nature crime, it will always be dressed under something which looks, quite packaged as some purely criminal matter, for example, bribery, fraud, forging documents, giving false accounts, all this kind of thing. All the rights lawyers in the Mainland are not on trial because they are trouble makers or that they defend rights. But they are accused of urging their clients to give false evidence. So do not think that you are safe.
The government says the Hong Kong Judiciary is independent and would protect your rights.
The Courts cannot do more than what the ordinance allows them to do. And the Courts have no power to refuse or to block your surrender, your extradition, because you are not going to get a fair trial in the Mainland. The Courts have no authority to judge whether or not the Mainland has a fair system of trial. Why is that? Under the present Ordinance, the existing law, you can only be sent anywhere if there is a standing extradition agreement between Hong Kong and the other place. But in the amendment they are proposing, you don’t need such a standing arrangement. You will not make a standing arrangement unless you are pretty confident that the other side has a fair system and protects human rights. But under the amendment, there is no mechanism.
We asked the Chief Executive a number of times, do you guarantee to us that if anybody is sent to the Mainland, that he or she would get a fair trial? The answer of the Chief Executive is that, “I do not comment on the legal system of another place.” I am sorry, it is not that you are not to make a comment, you are duty bound not to send anyone in Hong Kong into a place where you cannot guarantee that this person will have the minimum protection of a fair trial. This is Hong Kong's obligation under the international human rights treaties.
Your Chief Executive, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, is turning a blind eye to our responsibilities under the international human rights conventions. It affects everyone.
Remember, this amendment which is being proposed, is not about Hong Kong residents, it is about any person who is found in Hong Kong, if you are in transit, in the airport, you are found in Hong Kong and this would affect you. It means you are under a risk of being surrendered to the Mainland for their dark process of trial. I don’t say that this will happen to you tomorrow, but it will be a risk.
My question is, why do you allow yourself to be put under such a risk? What are these legislators doing in the Legislative Council? Why are they so keen to support the government to give away our rights? You are safe now in Hong Kong. After the bill is passed, you are NO longer safe!
#送中條例
#Fugitive #surrender #吳靄儀
what is bribery 在 蘇浩 Anthony So Facebook 的最佳貼文
【Say NO to extradition to Mainland China】反對修訂逃犯引渡條例
"You are safe now in Hong Kong. After the amendment to the Fugitive Ordinanceis passed, you are NO longer safe!" said Dr Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, Practising Barrister,former legislative councillor.
#請與您的海外朋友分享
Now, why should we be concerned about this amendment to the Fugitive Ordinance? Does it concern you? The answer is YES !
Now before this amendment proposed by the government, whatever you do in the Mainland, you cannot be surrendered to the Mainland for trial. The Mainland's hand cannot reach into Hong Kong to get you. But if this amendment is passed, then any person who is found in Hong Kong, that is to say, it includes even people in transit, people who are visiting, people who are doing business here. Everybody is affected.
If the Chief Executive forms an agreement with the Mainland authorities to surrender you to the Mainland, for crimes you are suspected to have committed in the Mainland or in Hong Kong, then you will no longer be safe.
Under the present law, you cannot be surrendered to the Mainland. If the amendment is passed, you are exposed to the risk of being surrendered to the Mainland. If you do not believe me, please have a look at the amendment bill. Please look at the opinion of the Bar Association. You will see immediately that this Ordinance, this amendment, does not only affect these dissidents in Hong Kong, people who are politically unwelcome. But it will reach to anybody who is in business, who happens to get on the wrong side of your competitors in the Mainland.
Of course, it is said in the Ordinance that nobody can be surrendered for trial of a political crime or a crime of a political nature. But so far, the Mainland has not charged anyone of a political nature crime, it will always be dressed under something which looks, quite packaged as some purely criminal matter, for example, bribery, fraud, forging documents, giving false accounts, all this kind of thing. All the rights lawyers in the Mainland are not on trial because they are trouble makers or that they defend rights. But they are accused of urging their clients to give false evidence. So do not think that you are safe.
The government says the Hong Kong Judiciary is independent and would protect your rights.
The Courts cannot do more than what the ordinance allows them to do. And the Courts have no power to refuse or to block your surrender, your extradition, because you are not going to get a fair trial in the Mainland. The Courts have no authority to judge whether or not the Mainland has a fair system of trial. Why is that? Under the present Ordinance, the existing law, you can only be sent anywhere if there is a standing extradition agreement between Hong Kong and the other place. But in the amendment they are proposing, you don’t need such a standing arrangement. You will not make a standing arrangement unless you are pretty confident that the other side has a fair system and protects human rights. But under the amendment, there is no mechanism.
We asked the Chief Executive a number of times, do you guarantee to us that if anybody is sent to the Mainland, that he or she would get a fair trial? The answer of the Chief Executive is that, “I do not comment on the legal system of another place.” I am sorry, it is not that you are not to make a comment, you are duty bound not to send anyone in Hong Kong into a place where you cannot guarantee that this person will have the minimum protection of a fair trial. This is Hong Kong's obligation under the international human rights treaties.
Your Chief Executive, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, is turning a blind eye to our responsibilities under the international human rights conventions. It affects everyone.
Remember, this amendment which is being proposed, is not about Hong Kong residents, it is about any person who is found in Hong Kong, if you are in transit, in the airport, you are found in Hong Kong and this would affect you. It means you are under a risk of being surrendered to the Mainland for their dark process of trial. I don’t say that this will happen to you tomorrow, but it will be a risk.
My question is, why do you allow yourself to be put under such a risk? What are these legislators doing in the Legislative Council? Why are they so keen to support the government to give away our rights? You are safe now in Hong Kong. After the bill is passed, you are NO longer safe!
#送中條例
#Fugitive #surrender #吳靄儀