May 31, 2020 – 5:40 am


Our costs will always be there. So readers who can donate towards the cost of the site, please open a Skrill account. Readers who wish to contribute to BigO will now have to use Skrill (click here). We are no longer able to use PayPal to receive donations. Register an account at Skrill. To make a payment, use this e-mail address as recipient’s e-mail address in Skrill: mail2[at] Looking forward to hearing from you.

+ + + + +

To reduce spamming, the BigO website is going through Cloudflare. What it does is scan your browser to ensure the visitor is not a spam. Do not be alarmed as this usually takes only a few seconds. Email us if you still have difficulty accessing the BigO site; or playing or downloading the tracks. If you know a better way of reducing spam, do let us know.

+ + + + +

Whose Hong Kong is it? By Thomas Hon Wing Polin.

May 22, 2020. The best, most hopeful day in the life of Hong Kong since its pro forma reunification with China in 1997.

The day Beijing decided to face down its premier Special Administrative Region’s legions of destructive, China-hating subversives - who call themselves “democrats” - and their allies in the Anglo-American Empire. The day real decolonization begins in Hong Kong. And the start of Hong Kong’s second, and true, return to its motherland.

It was the day the National People’s Congress, constitutionally China’s “highest organ of state power”, unfurled a national security law for the HKSAR. Designed specifically to check secession, subversion, foreign meddling and terrorist activity, it will be put to a vote before the NPC wraps up next week. The Congress’s Standing Committee will then work out the details and have it promulgated by July or August. [Update May 28, 2020: China’s National People’s Congress approves resolution to impose security law on Hong Kong - click here]

It was the lack of such legislation that had allowed the “pan-democrats” and their Anglo-US backers to riddle Hong Kong’s entire civic ecosystem with Sinophobia and disruption. Their most dramatic depredations were the Occupy Central uprising of 2014, the Mongkok riots of 2016 and, of course, the Black Terror color revolution that began last year.

National security legislation is required by Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law. But a bid by SAR authorities in 2003 to comply ended disastrously. Pan-subversives mobilized mass protests that not only derailed the effort but led to the chief executive’s resignation. Since then, no SAR government has dared touch this hottest of potatoes.

That’s a key reason Beijing has acted. According to political insiders, central authorities lost hope that the Hong Kong government was capable of passing Article 23 in the foreseeable future. And a national security law was clearly and urgently essential for Hong Kong, especially with color revolution still simmering and crucial elections to the legislature in September. Also, Washington seemed set to escalate its multidimensional war on China, and Hong Kong has become a primary arena.

When news of the NPC move broke, it took most by surprise. Twenty-three years of a hands-off policy towards Hong Kong had dulled people’s expectations of dramatic action by Beijing. For months, signs had been that the central government was incrementally tightening its laissez-faire approach. But the decision for the NPC to act was a well-kept secret. An important spur had been the two million supportive signatures gathered by patriotic Hong Kong lawmaker Junius Ho and the political group Politihk, headed by activist Innes Tang.

In Hong Kong, the NPC decision immediately set the cat among the “democrat” pigeons. Their political stalwarts tore their hair and foamed at the mouth, denouncing it. For the zillionth time, they solemnly pronounced the death of One Country, Two Systems in Hong Kong. The young and  intellectually-challenged among “pro-democracy” blackshirts frantically speculated in their favorite online forums. Hellish visions were conjured of the horrors Communist monsters were about to inflict on them. And rumors flew that the cost of a smuggled passage to Taiwan had risen severalfold.

Donald Trump threatened a “very strong” response, while Mike Pompeo threatened… something. The Eurominions chirped in unison.

But to the majority of Hong Kong’s long-suffering population, all seemed well under heaven.

Note: The author is a former senior editor at the international newsweekly Asiaweek (English) and founding editor of Yazhou Zhoukan (Chinese). The above article was posted at CounterPunch.

+ + + + +

  1. 3 Responses to “BEIJING ACTS ON HONG KONG”

  2. This has to be the worst thing I have seen by this Thomas Hon. He is paid by the Chinese government to say something which is utterly untrue and his attitude is of the lowest low. This one-sided article claiming “the majority of Hong Kong’s long-suffering population, all seemed well under heaven” is pure crap! Where is your conscience and judgement? When you check your bank account, I guess that is what made you do this prejudiced and totally misinformed article. Shame on you and get lost!

    By bert jansch on Jun 1, 2020

  3. For the past year, opinion polls have shown that 60-65 percent of the Hong Kong population - i.e. a clear majority - support the protesters, if not their sometimes violent tactics. Meanwhile, the ratings of the Chief Executive and the discredited Hong Kong Police Force have sunk to record lows. Considering that the Big O apparently stands up for democracy in Singapore, I am surprised to see you giving space to such blatantly dishonest PRC propaganda against dermocracy in Hong Kong.

    By Rod on Jun 28, 2020

  4. I am a co¢ksucker. A real serious co¢ksucker. I will suck co¢k all day and all night. I love co¢k. Love it! Love it!suck co¢k suck co¢k suck co¢k suck co¢k suck co¢k Hong kong co¢k tastes like fis sticks!

    By Nelson on Jun 30, 2020

Post a Comment