Pro and anti-Occupy Central protesters clash in Hong Kong in early October 2014. This unnarrated news footage suggests that there is neither love nor peace.

PAPA People Assisting Parents Association

© 2007-now
Bookmark and Share
PAPA logo
notice board blogger icon
New links

On 14 July 2015, the Supreme Court of B.C. handed down an unprecedented judgment J.P. v. British Columbia (Children and Family Development), 2015 BCSC 1216. This is the first case in Canadian legal history in which child protection workers are found liable for misfeasance in public office, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of the standard of care. Findings therein confirm our views and support the merit of our cause. Continuous litigations between JP and the MCFD are summarized in JP Aftermath. Our commentary on the Plecas Review Part 1: Decision Time was published on 4 January 2016. If you have evidence of misfeasance or abuse of children in foster care, please come forward and contact us.
Our site contains vast amount of information on child protective services (CPS). Please hover your mouse over the navigation icons below to access the most frequently sought information by various categories of browsers.
parents must read
  1. MCFD Tactics
  2. MCFD Surveillance
  3. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  4. Psychotherapy
  5. Flaws of CFCSA
  6. Absolute Power and Corruption
  7. Myths & Reality
  8. On-line Service Application
Media
  1. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  2. MCFD Tactics
  3. MCFD Surveillance
  4. MCFD & The First Nation
  5. Unreported Deaths of Albertan Foster Children
  6. Child Removal and Human Organ Harvesting
  7. Empirical and Statistical Data
  8. Child Removal Cases
  9. Video Archives
contact us
most popular
  1. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  2. MCFD & The First Nation
  3. The Child Protection Industry
  4. Unreported Deaths of Albertan Foster Children
  5. Our Comment on "When Talk Trumped Service"
  6. "The problem with Children’s Aid Societies" by Barbara Kay for National Post
  7. Powerful As God (2011 documentary)
  8. CPS Quotas: How Child Protective Services is Incentivized To Take Children video
  9. Documentary on the Child Protection Industry
  10. "The Child Abuse Laws Which Could Destroy Your Reputation"
  11. 3-part WLKY Target 32 Investigates (Kentucky, U.S.A.):
    1. "CPS Makes Shocking Allegations at 2 Moms Part 1 of 3"
    2. "CPS Does About Face, Accuses Parents Of Abuse Part 2 of 3"
    3. "CPS Makes More Disturbing Allegations Against Parents Part 3 of 3"
  12. "Child Protective System WLKY Louisville Part 1"; and
    "Child Protective System WLKY Louisville Part 2"
  13. Documentary on the Ministry of Children and Family Development Part 1 and Part 2
  14. "The Negative Effects of Foster Care on Removed Children" (Wikipedia)
  15. "Mass CPS corruption Part 2"
  16. "Deconstructing America Part 1" "Deconstructing America Part 2"
  17. "Death of a foster child Dontel Jeffers, Dorchester, Massachusetts, U.S.A. (Part 1)" "(Part 2)" ABC News
  18. U.S. Republican Senator Nancy Schaefer spoke on "child protective service" (CPS) corruption video
  19. "Children's Aid Society workers should be reined in" National Post
  20. Wrongful Removal of Christina Harrison's Baby
  21. Jessica Laboy case
  22. Removal of the 13 Gates Children in Texas, U.S.A.
  23. "Married to the State: How government colonizes the family"
    by Professor Stephen Baskerville (September 2009)
Table of Contents
  1. Introduction
  2. Background of the Movement
  3. Causes of the Disobedience Campaign
  4. Some Observations of the Campaign
  5. Covert Foreign Influence?
  6. How does the U.S. benefit from the chaos?
  7. The Role of Great Britain
  8. A Proxy War of Destabilization
  9. Methods used to induce mass fanatical pursuit of democracy
  10. Occupy Central and the Cultural Revolution
  11. Who are the winners?
  12. The Obama Administration's Pivot to Asia
  13. Our Anticipation if China adopts democracy
  14. Similarities between Occupy Central protesters and child protection workers
  15. Conclusion

Occupy Central with Love and Peace (讓愛與和平佔領中環 or 和平佔中)

Introduction

"Occupy Central (佔領中環 or 佔中)" (hereinafter known as "OC") is a civil disobedience campaign launched against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) Government headed by its Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Chun-ying Leung (梁振英 CY Leung) on 28 September 2014.

To most Canadians, the incident occurred suddenly when our media brought home news footages that showed thousands of Hong Kong people occupied the streets and were teargassed by riot police. Most of us have not seen so many people assembled before. We tend to believe that most people in Hong Kong are supporting the movement. We were told that people protested against the Hong Kong Government because their demand of democratic reform was denied. They have no choice but to resort to civil disobedience. Given our upbringing, this movement naturally wins sympathy and support from many Canadians.

Hong Kong is home of almost 300,000 Canadians. We have a vested interest to understand what is transpiring there. We will attempt to analyze the movement and its implications in light of international geopolitics, the economic and political landscape in Hong Kong. This web page serves to advance public knowledge on social issues, politics and governments. It bears no direct relevance with the child protection industry, save and except the section under the heading "Similarities between Occupy Central protesters and child protection workers" and part of "Conclusion". Cartoons, embedded videos and photos form an integral part of our presentation.

Background of the Movement

Apparently inspired by the Occupy Wall Street, the concept of OC is the brainchild of Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), Chan Kin-man (陳健民) and Reverend Chu Yiu-ming (朱耀明) in 2013. The campaign is programmed to commence on 1 October 2014, National Day of the People's Republic of China. The original design of the scheme is to mobilize peaceful demonstrators to occupy the Central District (a major commercial district in Hong Kong Island), hence paralyzing major commercial and financial activities to force the Hong Kong Government to agree to granting "true" democracy. They are prepared to accept legal consequence. Assuming that the judiciary will have difficult to trial some many cases within a reasonable time, they bet that they will not be held legally responsible for their action.

Since the former British colony was returned to China in 1997, large scale protests have been successful to compel the Hong Kong SAR Government to postpone legislation of controversial laws, such as the National Security Law in 2003 (under Article 23 to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People's Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies) and the introduction of moral and national education (a school curriculum proposed by the Education Bureau of Hong Kong) in 2012. There is reason to believe that the Hong Kong SAR Government, under the silent condonation from Beijing, will budge.

According to the Hong Kong Basic Law signed between the Chinese and British governments on 19 December 1984, Chief Executive is supposed to be produced by way of universal suffrage. Beijing agreed to a universal suffrage but restricted candidacy to those considered patriotic to China. On 31 August 2014, the National People's Congress (the largest parliamentary body in the world) formalized this decision. Only candidates supporting the Chinese central government would be eligible for the chief executive election in Hong Kong. Such stipulation is labeled as candidate pre-screening and attracts criticism from various political parties. Critics allege that Beijing only allows a fake democracy.

On 28 September 2014 at 1.40 a.m. Hong Kong local time, the campaign was launched two days earlier than scheduled when some student activists protested outside Hong Kong's Central Government Complex. Chaos quickly spread to other residential areas such as Causeway Bay, Mong Kok and Canton Road (see map on the left). This is a classic surprise tactic used in war. Both the Hong Kong Government and people are caught unprepared for the sudden expansion of occupied areas to residential districts.

Protesters comprise of people from all walks of life and all ages. Young children are used as human shield to protect their protesting parents. They occupied major traffic routes, blocked traffic (including emergency vehicles), set up barricades, engaged into verbal and physical confrontations with those who disagree with them. When angry citizens reasoned with them, they sang Happy Birthday song so that no one could hear what their opponents said. Wearing protective gears, protesters raised the hands and charged police lines. They use umbrellas to shield police pepper spray. This earns the unofficial name Umbrella Revolution for the movement.

To restore law and order, the Hong Kong SAR Government agreed to allow protesters to continue their assembly in designated parks and squares. At the point of writing, protesters refused to leave and continue their unlawful occupation of roads and streets, which inevitably blocks traffic and disrupt the normal life of most Hong Kong citizens.

Causes of the Disobedience Campaign

On the surface, it appears that the cause of the campaign is to seek universal suffrage on candidates nominated by the people of Hong Kong, not by Beijing. In fact, it is a power struggle between the pro Beijing camp and the pro democracy camp who knows that their members stand no chance of becoming the Chief Executive under the Beijing approved framework. Supporters of the two camps comprise of:


The Pro Occupy Central camp

Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.
Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.

The Anti Occupy Central camp (aka the pro Beijing camp)


From a broader perspective, people take their grievance to the streets because of their hopelessness in buying a decent home and the ever-growing influence of mainlander Chinese on the economy and the culture of Hong Kong. The underlying reasons are a serious shortage of land and an economy that becomes more and more dependent on China. Before the British left, Hong Kong is obliged to accept 150 immigrants a day from China and this continues to the present time. This puts immense pressure on housing, health care and other social services. Millions Chinese tourists who visit Hong Kong each year have driven the price of many daily commodities up. Some inappropriate behavior (like children urinating on the streets, cutting into line ups) of Chinese tourists offend the local people. Hong Kong has the highest population density on earth. There is not enough land to house its 7.5 million population. In recent years, real estate prices have gone so high that even university graduates can hardly afford to buy a small apartment suite about the size of an average Canadian bathroom. Wealth is unevenly distributed among various social classes, which is often a cause of turmoil in human history. This is what Beijing refers as high-level conflicts within the society and has instructed the Chief Executive to deal with them without delay.

Furthermore, some Chinese from the mainland deliberately come to Hong Kong to give birth. Under the laws of Hong Kong, their local born children will automatically become permanent residents and are entitled to free education and other applicable social services. Hong Kong parents resent competition for schools, health care services (especially maternity medical care) and even daily consumer products like baby formula. Some express their anger by going to major tourist shopping areas to yell "Locust go home" (a disrespectful name given to Chinese tourists from the mainland). This uncommon intra-racial discrimination is seldom found elsewhere.

Chief executives before Leung failed to solve the housing problem in Hong Kong. After taking office in 2012, Leung makes his best effort to build more social housing. Acquisition of land, either by reclamation or using land in regional parks, often meet objections from environmentalist groups. Judicial reviews filed by these groups delay housing projects. Pan Democracy legislative council (Legco) members use delaying tactics such as:

  • deliberate absence in council meetings to ensure that statutory quorum is not met;
  • prolonging the debates (拉布) of government proposals, amendments proposed by pan democratic council members and funding applications, which often results in lengthening project completion time and increasing costs.

At the time OC broke out in 2014, government-run housing projects by and large remain status quo. This provides fertile ground to interested parties to sow seeds of discontent for the purpose to destabilize the SAR Government.

On another note, Hong Kong students generally do not have much sense of patriotism and national identity due to a lack of moral and national education. It follows that many Chinese Canadians from Hong Kong do not vote in Canada because political apathy is generally considered a wise choice. Furthermore, they are indoctrinated by too many Hollywood movies. Most of them do not identify themselves as Chinese or think that they are better than their fellow countrymen in China. Their teachers were brought up in a British colonial education that fosters acceptance and superiority of British rule. Many do not pledge their allegiance to China. We came across a Canadian Hong Kong Chinese in Richmond, British Columbia. He is in his late fifties and said that he would rather see Hong Kong ruled by the U.S. This reflects how successful British colonial education was in rendering Chinese subjects to lose their identity and allegiance. We hope that this fellow does not want Canada be ruled by the U.S.

Another interesting event before OC broke out is the ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) investigation of large sum of money paid to prominent OC leaders (like Lee Cheuk-yan of the Labour Party). The alleged financier is the Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Chee Ying Lai. Mr. Lai was educated up to grade 5. This self-made millionaire made his wealth in the garment and newspaper businesses. His right-hand man Mark Simon is the son of a veteran CIA officer and has worked for the U.S. naval intelligence. The South China Morning Post published an article on 5 August 2014 alleging that Lai has close ties with U.S. right-wing politicians. The article wrote: "Email exchanges between Simon and staff of the US consulate in Hong Kong show Lai joined James Cunningham, then consul-general in Hong Kong, for a boat trip on June 20, 2008. Lai, founder of Apple Daily, also had meetings with Cunningham's successors, Joseph Donovan and Clifford Hart. Lai also joined a lunch with then US consul-general Stephen Young, Democratic Party founder Martin Lee Chu-ming and Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun on March 14 last year. Simon's email exchange with former US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz also shows Lai and the former top US official travelled together to Myanmar twice - in October 2012 and June last year. Documents leaked two weeks ago show Lai paid Wolfowitz US$75,000 for his help with projects in Myanmar."

Lai is a high profile advocate of democracy and a vocal critic of the People's Republic of China government. What other common interests does he share with his American friends other than this?

Some Observations of the Campaign

OC protesters were driven away by angry Hong Kong citizens in many areas. Western media is so lopsided that news of this nature will NOT be broadcast. This video receives vigorous organized attacks from OC cyber propaganda team as a damage control measure.
Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.
A music video that contains footage of Ken Tsang (a Hong Kong social worker) reportedly spraying urine onto the police and punched the cop arresting him to provoke action (video timer 3:14 to 3:37).

Despite its chaotic appearance, the campaign is a meticulously planned, well organized and brilliantly executed operation directed by invisible hands. The following observations shed light on the nature of the movement:

  • Some, if not many, protesters are fanatics. In their twisted logic, they want police protection when confronted by their fellow citizens and demand that the police act when they are under attack. Meanwhile, they want the police to stay put all illegal activities such as blocking major traffic routes, prohibiting local residents to use the street to go home. Seeking selective law enforcement amounts to obstruction of justice. These tunnel view fanatics are completely self-centered.
  • The most disturbing observation is using young children as human shield by some protesters in front of police line (photo embedded here shown children studying in front of police line). This is a tactic imparted by Taiwanese independence advocates who shared their protest experience in Taiwan with OC leaders and financiers. Parents of these young children alleged that they want their children to learn democracy. How can children learn politics at such young age, especially from irresponsible parents?
  • Some protesters and leaders received counter riot police training before OC broke out (see photos on the right).
  • Foreign media (most notably CNN, BCC, Japanese Nikkei News and some Taiwanese TV) and some religious leaders in Hong Kong all shift into high gear to foster domestic and foreign public opinions in favor of OC. Damages and disturbance of peace created by protesters are tactfully mitigated or omitted. Police wrongdoings provoked by humiliating acts like urine spraying are deliberately magnified. Confrontations with angry citizens whose livelihood deprived and normal life affected are seldom broadcast. This is what western media called "professional journalism".
  • News of celebrities (like Chow Yuen Fat, Tony Leung Chiu Wai, Anthony Wong) supporting OC received media highlight, while celebrities (like Jacky Chan, Jordan Chan 陳小春, Bo Bo Fung) who criticized the rambunctious movement received much less media coverage.
  • Protesters provoke the police by charging at them with their hands raised, pull unknown liquor (reportedly urine) on them. There are always some protesters filming the provocation. They will hit a jackpot if some cops act inappropriately and fall prey on the traps they set forth.
  • There are always a small number of female protesters accompanying major confrontational actions against the police or anti OC citizens. These female protesters will yell for sexual assault to ensure that the police will act in their favor and to deter their opponents from acting against them.
  • Logistic supply to occupied areas are impressive. Protesters are provided with food and water. Removed barricades are promptly replenished. They are provided with huge TV in occupied areas to watch live transmission of the meeting between student leaders and government officials.
  • Due to fear of weapons delivered to front line police, protesters inspected police vehicles carrying food to cops on duty before OC road blocks. Law breakers inspecting vehicles of law enforcer is a unusual phenomenon seldom found elsewhere.
  • Like the youngest-ever Nobel Prize recipient Malala Yousafzai, icons are needed as activists to lead the movement. Joshua Wong, a dork-looking kid, made Times Magazine cover figure and frequently appears on news to strengthen his leadership position.
  • The Guardian published a news titled "Hong Kong chief executive was paid £4m by Australian company" on 8 October 2014. The payment is legal and does not constitute a conflict of interest in Leung's capacity as the Chief Executive. Why this old damaging news conveniently surfaced at the height of OC? What is the hidden agenda of western media? Are western journalists really professional, impartial and objective as they claim? Above all, who has control of global electronic communications? NSA whistleblower Mr. Edward Snowden has given us some insights when he went public in June 2013. It is safe to contend that all communications of religious leaders, politicians, businessmen, activists and intellectuals worldwide are being monitored, recorded and stored in super computers deep underground. Helpful and harmful news will conveniently surface at the most critical moments to suit American agenda. Information is a very powerful weapon to preserve American hegemony. It could be used to assist or to dispose influential people.
  • Some OC leaders wear black T-shirt with a "Freedom Now" slogan. Hong Kong enjoys a high degree in freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and freedom to move. Even social unrest and chaos are tolerated. What else could one ask for more from their government? If Canadians fly an ISIS flag, occupy major traffic route and demand their head of state to resign, they will face treason charge.
  • Chief executive CY Leung is demonized by various pan democratic leaders and protesters. His resignation is among the primary demands, which bears little bearing in the pursuit of democracy.
  • Some OC protesters waved Taiwan and Hong Kong British colonial flags and displayed anti-China political slogans to embarrass and provoke authorities.
  • Many OC leaders and pan democratic Legco members are foreign passport holders. They may take residency outside Hong Kong and can seek protection from foreign embassies when necessary.
  • Protesters are well organized. They exhibit a good division of labour and duties. We observed protesters playing the following roles serving different functions:
    1. scouts looking for police advance routes;
    2. coordinators using social media such as Whatsapp and Facebook to direct activities, for instance, student leader Joshua Wong Chi-fung (黃之鋒) often reads text messages on his cell phone when speaking to his mob in front of TV camera;
    3. behind-the-screen analysts collecting intelligence that keeps leaders and their front-line colonels well informed on the latest developments;
    4. protesters with young children act as human shield to deter police action;
    5. protesters with video recording devices to catch wrongdoings that could be used for propaganda purposes;
    6. female protesters prepared for physical contacts to lay traps for sexual assault charges against adversaries who confront their actions;
    7. some protesters are aggressive, they are prepared to martyrized themselves and shed blood after provoking the police and rilvaries to act, injuries will be used as evidence of police brutality in media and in lawsuits
    8. appear to have ranks with hierarchical authorities, ie. leaders and followers structure, they call strategic planning meetings on a regular basis with pan democracy Legco members and movement financiers who have substantial foreign ties.
  • Both sides use popular cultures and pop songs to further their causes and to raise morale.
  • Leaders from religions (mainly Catholic and Christian) common in the West are actively involved. One of the movement leaders Reverend Chu Yiu-ming is the minister of Chai Wan Baptist Church in Hong Kong.

Like most colour revolution that occurred in recent years, both sides of the campaign extensively use social media (like Youtube, Whatsapp, Facebook) to solicit support, to spread messages and to organize activities. Numerous uninvited messages are received if you have electronic contacts with people in Hong Kong. This new battlefield provides CIA and NSA analysts a front row view of what is transpiring in the streets of Hong Kong. Be mindful that all electronic means of communication are monitoring by the U.S. Social media are open invitations of submission of information from unsuspecting users. The American intelligence community must be very busy lately.

These observations are not incidental. OC is a meticulously planned, well organized and brilliantly executed systematic subversion attack on a government from multiple angles. Well being of a society is used as a weapon to beat a government into submission. This is not possible without training, financial backing and above all ideology indoctrination over a period of time. Who would have an interest to do this? At the local level, people are unhappy with the government who have more faith in democracy and are of the opinion that they will have more say in government in such political structure. Of course, pan democratic politicians would like to gain more solid ground to further their political career. Their ambition of becoming the top dog in the Hong Kong Government will not be realized under the Beijing approved reform. They naturally have a self-serving interest to pursue a system that fits their agenda.

At the international level, who want to see chaos and turmoil in Hong Kong? What are they up to? How are they going to benefit from such scheme, if it exists? What are their goals and strategy?

Dr. Michael Pillsbury admitted that U.S. funded democracy movement in Hong Kong
Jamie Metzl, an American bureaucrat, mocked the allegation of American involvement in the 2014 Occupy Central

Covert Foreign Influence?

There are suggestions that OC is masterminded by foreign powers. Hong Kong Chief Executive CY Leung echoed the foregoing but did not name who. Critics of conspiracy theory often ask for evidence. On 21 October 2014, Leung told foreign reporters in an interview that he will find the appropriate avenue to disseminate evidence in due course. He further added he is not speculating but is saying that there is foreign influence. As the Chief Executive, Leung asserted it is his duty to be aware of foreign interference and he has evidence to support his position.

Shortly after, White House spokewoman Marie Harf, who began her federal government career in the CIA’s Directorate of Intelligence as an analyst on Middle East leadership issues, denied that the U.S. is behind the movement in a press conference. Social media like Youtube are flooded with video interviews of U.S. bureaucrats (such as the one on the left with Jame Metzl) beating the same drum. Student spokeman in Hong Kong immediately dismissed Leung's allegation as a diversionary ruse to diffuse public attention from the focus of universal suffrage demand.

In early October 2014, Dr. Michael Pillsbury (former Reagan administration official) admitted that the U.S. is partially involved and funds millions of dollar in programs to help democracy in Hong Kong (video of his interview is on the top left). He misled his audience by alleging that anti OC people speak Mandarin and therefore are from China. He paralleled anti OC folks with Russians infiltrating into Ukraine pretending to be Ukrainians. Most anti OC people are local Hong Kong residents whose livelihood is seriously affected by the chaos. After all, being Mandarin speaking does not necessarily mean that they are not from Hong Kong. Hong Kong admits 150 Chinese from Mainland China each day. He can fool Americans, not the Chinese.

This political duplicity will permit the U.S. to admit either way to suit its position in the future. In a TV interview on 26 October 2014, Associate Professor Simon Xu Hui Shen (沈旭暉), Faculty of Social Science, Hong Kong Chinese University ruled out the possible of U.S. involvement. He believed that funding to promote democracy from the U.S. State Department is insufficient to support a movement as large as OC. He obviously has overlooked the fundings provided by the CIA. Covert CIA fundings are on a different account outside the control of, and often unknown to American embassies.

Why political leaders refuse to show evidence when their conspiracy theory is challenged, if they really possess such evidence? The answer is simple. Disclosing such evidence will inevitably reveal or at least shed light on the identify of their assets and put them in harm's way. Be mindful that espionage is a war. Of course, some of them have no evidence and are bluffing conspiracy theory for political purposes.

Few people from the general public would have evidence to support Leung's position. Unless you have a death wish, no one will publish evidence of conspiracy to embarrass a super power. If you do, such action is suicidal. Hellfire missile from a drone will be raining down on where you last use your cell phone. Or, your whole family will conveniently die like a murder suicide with a smoking gun and a suicide note next to your corpse. To further analyze the notion of proof, let's turn to a biblical wisdom.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - His eternal power and divine nature -
have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." (Romans 1:20)

Some may think that this Bible verse requires blind faith. To us, this is common sense. Observant people would easily recognize that the campaign is a classic product of a covert proxy war of destabilization. Under the pretext of pursuit of democracy, all actions aim at inducing regime change. This is an act of war against a sovereign power. This relatively new form of warfare has been used many times before in Iran (1953), Tibet (1955 to now), Cuba (1959), South Vietnam (1963) and more recently in Georgia and Ukraine. Tactics used in cultivating favorable local social conditions, means of destabilization, and above all the final objective of overthrowing the current regime are very similar, if not the same. It seems that they all come from the same operating manual. "Covert United States foreign regime change actions" discussed a more complete list in greater details.

Cao Cao (曹操) (a Chinese military genius, brilliant politician and talented poet in the first century) taught his sons to identify hidden conspirators by asking who the true beneficiaries of the scheme are. Where does foreign influence, if any, come from? To answer this question, one must ask who want a weak and divided China? Many neighboring countries, especially those with territorial disputes, are threatened by a strong and united China. To name a few, Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, and the Philippines all have an interest to see a weak and divided China. However, such hostile endeavor requires financial and military strength of a superpower magnitude as backup support. The only nation that is both willing and able is the U.S. In fact, war of destabilization is part of the U.S. full dominance strategic plan published in 2000. Full dominance includes hegemony in political ideology - democracy, portrayed as the only political ideology that has received universal acceptance. Who is the univocal leader in the free and democratic world? Of course, the U.S.

How does the U.S. benefit from the chaos?

German economist William Engdahl spoke on his book Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

What motivates the U.S. to get involved at the risk of jeopardizing Sino-American relationship? How does chaos in Hong Kong serve American national interests? Since the disintegration of the Soviet Union on 26 December 1991, the U.S. is the only global superpower. The U.S. Navy has no worthy opponents in all oceans. By and large, America attained the sea power outlined in the book "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History" written by Captain A. T. Mahan, U.S. Navy in December 1889. Various American presidents declared that the U.S. will remain strong. The doctrine of full spectrum dominance was introduced long before OC occurred. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff published a strategic plan titled "Joint Vision 2020" in June 2000. The focus of the plan is to attain full spectrum dominance through interdependent application of dominant maneuver, precision engagement, focused logistics and full dimensional protection. Although this plan is largely military in nature, the strategic concepts of power projection and overseas presence and influence are equally important. In essence, it advocates hegemonic supremacy in every aspect. Incidentally, most pan democratic political parties in Hong Kong were founded after 2000.

Important national security documents are supposed to be top secret. Joint Vision 2020 is available on the internet. Is this a sham? Be mindful that an open document does not necessarily reflect the full intent or real course of actions of the U.S. planners. War is based on deception. This document could be used to solicit financial support from the U.S. Congress, boost American morale, mislead and/or to induce its potential rivalries to engage in resource draining defence programs calculated to bankrupt these nations through competition. The Reagan administration in the 1980s used the announcement of a star war program to incite the Soviet Union to spend massive financial resources to compete against a non-exist program, which eventually caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, the motive of the U.S. is clear: to maintain its hegemony (to remain strong in their own words) at all costs. Risky endeavors including preemptive strike and the risk of nuclear holocaust are options open to American presidents. Some U.S. think tanks (such as John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago) believe that maintaining hegemony is vital to national security (watch his video below under the heading "The Obama Administration's Pivot to Asia"). The U.S. benefits from a disrupted Hong Kong in the following aspects:

  1. Financial Benefits
    1. Preserving the reserve status of the U.S. dollar

      To preserve the reserve status of the U.S. dollar so that America may continue paying its national debt and buying real goods and services abroad by printing paper money, international demand of the greenbacks must be secured either by strengthening the American economy and/or weakening the currencies of major economic powers. The 2012–2013 Cypriot financial crisis unveiled the Greek government-debt crisis had created financial disturbance in the Eurozone. Convenient downgrading of the Cypriot government's bond credit rating to junk status by American credit rating agencies curbed Eurozone nations to replace the greenbacks by Euro dollars in international trade settlements.

      Hong Kong is a major financial centre in the Far East with a well developed stock market. China relies on Hong Kong to strengthen its financial ties worldwide. Social unrest will inevitably weaken Hong Kong's position as a financial centre, hence destabilizing the Hong Kong dollars and the Chinese Yuan. This will increase desire of trading partners to settle account with the greenbacks instead of local currencies.

    2. Potential gain in the Hong Kong stock exchange when crisis breaks out

      There is no foreign exchange control in Hong Kong. Parties with controlling influence on when to launch a social unrest will gain an upper hand akin to insider trading information in making huge profit in the stock market. Selling short and investing in index option would allow American speculators and OC leaders to earn a huge profit in a bear market. Since there is no capital gain tax in Hong Kong, profits made by American speculators is only taxable by the U.S. Government. Hong Kong and China receive no tax revenue from such speculation. OC leaders are stupid if they do not use this opportunity to make some ill-earned income. After OC broke out on 28 September 2014 (Sunday), the Hong Kong stock index (Hang Seng Index) dropped 449.2 in the next business day. Somebody must have made a lot of money.

      This is not the first time America takes advantage of geopolitical issues to squeeze money from a local economy. Predatory American financial speculator and millionaire philanthropist George Soros (Hungarian name: György Schwartz) had launched a well co-ordinated attack of Asian currencies to destabilize the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) economies in 1997. Most countries in the Far East suffered from a loss of demand and confidence throughout the region. Using its huge foreign exchange reserve, the Bank of China supported the counterattack on speculators. The Chinese intervention eventually drove off Soro.

  2. Political Benefits

    Waging covert proxy war of destabilization will result in zero American casualty and run a low risk of war. All casualties, if any, will be Chinese. From the American perspective, what could be better to spend a few bucks via National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and other secret funding avenues to motivate some Chinese fanatics to fight for an ideology that is going to weaken their nation and allow Americans to make a huge profit from their stock market? The U.S. wins despite what the Hong Kong Government does. There are only two options open to to Leung. One is to remove protesters by force, which will inevitably lead to bloodshed and attract more opposition from the people of Hong Kong and the American-led international community. If Beijing intervenes, the Americans will be pounding on the table in the United Nation and screaming for sanction. If Leung budges, China risks further destabilization in the future. Hong Kong will be under the control of the anti-Beijing camp and become a forward base to launch similar covert destabilization attack on China. Under the pretext of democracy or other seemingly just cause, destabilization attacks will likely be hitting the more prosperous China's eastern seaboard, where better educated and more affluent Chinese live. They are more susceptible to causes such as democracy, human rights and social justice.

    If the Hong Kong Government settles account after the chaos subsides, those who should be held responsible will be harbored by the U.S. Traitors will be treated as heroes and granted safe haven in America. The U.S. will play Mr. Nice Guy to harbor dissents who suffer persecution in pursuit of democracy.

    Another major benefit to the U.S. is to establish temperament profile on Chinese leaders. Americans use OC to test their bottom line, the Chinese counter measure strategy, their quality of decision making and their response time in handling crisis. Course of action is a reflection of personality trait of Chinese decision makers. Psychologists in the CIA are now busy analyzing developments of OC to establish a temperament profile for each Chinese leaders. Such profile is used to predict actions in the next round of conflict.

    A less prominent benefit often omitted by Canadian analysts is the issue of Taiwan. OC is used as proof that the "One Country Two Systems" concept does not work. This fosters Taiwanese public opinion to reject any peaceful reunion proposal. A separated Taiwan is vital to the U.S. from a military point of view. Advanced radar installed in Taiwan covers the entire China. Missiles positioned on the west coast of the island can strike Chinese soil within minutes. Above all, the so-called First Island Chain defence will be compromised if Taiwan reunions with China. Chinese warships and subs could enter the Pacific Ocean from the east coast of Taiwan and directly challenge the American naval power stationed in Guam and Hawaii. Status quo of political landscape on both sides of the Taiwan Strait will best serve American interests.

    The U.S. has no real interest in controlling a small city like Hong Kong. Its ultimate objective is China. Given the favorable foundation laid by the British before they left, Hong Kong is merely a forward base to launch further subversion on China. The U.S. will hit a jackpot if social unrest sparks to Mainland China and topples the Chinese regime without firing a shot. This is what Sun Tze (孫子) called victory without fighting, the highest success of strategy. This is the cheapest and safest course of action to maintain U.S. hegemony.

Does this risk war? Yes, as long as it is a conventional war, especially a proxy war, the U.S. benefits. War is a lucrative business. The U.S. is the largest military hardware exporter. War depletes materials and it means business to someone when war materials need to be replenished. Air strikes against ISIS targets in Iraq are primarily American weapons destroying American weapons seized by ISIS military personnel from the American installed Iraqi government. American weapon manufacturers always benefit when their products leave the warehouse. Somebody have paid for the orders.

The Role of Great Britain

OC is less likely to occur without the assistance of an important U.S. partner - the United Kingdom. Before they left Hong Kong on 1 July 1997, the British contributed significantly to the precipitation of a democratic movement like OC.

In the 155 years of British colonial rule, no Hong Kong governor was elected by the people of Hong Kong. All were appointed British politicians and bureaucrats, who had never lived in Hong Kong and knew nothing about the city. It is noteworthy to remark that the salary of Hong Kong governor was higher than that of the British prime minister. Since the governor represents the Crown, his salary is tax-free. This lucrative position is often a political payoff to those who are loyal and has major contributions to the ruling parting in the U.K. The last Governor of Hong Kong Christopher Patten is an example of the foregoing.

To China's dismay, the last British Governor of Hong Kong Christopher Patten unexpectedly launched the Hong Kong electoral reform in 1994. Virtually, every Hong Kong subject was able to vote for the so-called indirectly elected members of the Hong Kong Legislative Council. His measure attracted strong criticism from Beijing, which ironically raised his popularity to a level he had not previously enjoyed in the U.K.

Whenever Britain is forced to relinquish administration of its colonies, it often sowed seeds of discontent by either splitting up an ethnic homogeneous group or putting two adversarial groups together. For example, conflicts between India and Pakistan, Israel and Palestine, are products of this British practice. Tension, war, chaos, political instability and prolonged poverty are often created and become opportunities of exploitation to other nations. Since 98% of the population in Hong Kong are Chinese, there is little the British can do to divide them ethnically. British strategists were brilliant to introduce democracy before they left and created ideological difference that would distinguish Hong Kong Chinese from their fellow countrymen in the mainland. In the last few years of British rule, the Hong Kong government fostered political parties that are loyal to democracy (or more precisely to the West). This successfully drives a huge wedge between Hong Kong and China. After 17 years of waiting, their effort finally paid off when OC broke out.

The news footage above confirms surveillance of social services on John Fowler who lost his daughter at the age of 4 months because of a false allegation made by his 11-year old step son. After five years of legal action, Mr. Fowler got his daughter back. He was angry that his family was torn apart.
Victims of British imperialism around the world (above)
Hover your mouse to pause the slide show, to view photo description or to access links if your mouse point turns from an arrow to a finger.
The "Opium War" (1997) is a Chinese movie (in English and Chinese with English subtitle) reenacting what had transpired in 1840 based on historical accounts.

When people asked why the British, who adamantly advocates democracy in Hong Kong, did not grant full democracy while they ruled the colony, the British alleged that plan of democratic reform was proposed by various British Hong Kong governors as early as Mark Aitchison Young (the British Hong Kong Governor who ruled before and after the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong from 1941 to 1945). According to the British, all plans of democratic reform were opposed by China and therefore the hands of the British are tied. In another words, blame China not good old England.

Declassified British diplomatic documents are conveniently found by the International New York Times. The article written by Andrew Jacobs titled "Hong Kong Democracy Standoff, Circa 1960" was published on 27 October 2014 (archived on the right). The news was aired in the Hong Kong TVB news program on 28 October 2014 (the second time on similar issues in less than a month, the first time on 4 October 2014). This news is only published in the international version of New York Times. The target readers are clearly Chinese, not local Americans. The article reiterated that Beijing threatened Britain not to introduce popular elections, otherwise China will liberate the colony immediately. Chinese leaders mentioned in these documents are all dead now. Nobody can rebut the accuracy and authenticity of the British allegations. If the Chinese leadership did pressure Britain not to implement democracy reform, they had acted correctly to preserve stability and to prevent foreign subversion. The chaos of OC is precisely what they tried to avoid.

It is noteworthy to remark that these declassified British documents did not suggested that the British intended to grant full democracy to Hong Kong, similar to what OC protesters now seek (ie. Hong Kong governors must still be appointed by London). The British colonial government wanted to introduce some democratic elements to create more autonomy, ie. a more independent state of Hong Kong (similar to Singapore) under British control and influence. What China opposed are chaos and division of sovereign territory, not democracy per se. After so many decades of decline in power, Britain is still the most cunning, devious and hypocritical nation in the West.

On another note, state-sponsored child removal in the U.K. is one of the worst. The British government ruthlessly oppresses their own people. Watch the news footage (top video) on the left and hear the atrocity created by the child protection industry on a British family.

The British acquired the Hong Kong Island after winning the First Opium War in 1840. They took Kowloon and New Territory in subsequent imperialistic wars and forced the weak and corrupt Qing government to sign a number of unfair treaties. They came to China (and other British colonies) for the sole purpose of exploitation and to enslave its people for the benefits of the British Empire. To help Canadians to understand what British imperialism did to China since 1840, suppose China exports cocaine to Canada. Our government confiscates and burns their drugs. Alleging the right of free trade, China sends her armed force to beat us into submission, burns our heritage buildings, rapes our women and takes Vancouver Island as her colony. When Canada grows strong enough to retake Vancouver Island, they start preaching communism to the local people to ensure discontent and division after the takeover. How would we feel?

Hong Kong is not the sole victim of British imperialism. Canada, for example, is often drawn into confrontations to support her British master. Many Canadian soldiers died in the Battle of Hong Kong in December 1941 under incompetent British leadership and fought in a hopeless strategic situation. British commanders blamed our finest soldiers for not fighting well. In the Dieppe Raid (1942), Canadians were ordered by the British to charge first, took the brunt of the battle and suffered the highest casualties among all belligerents (907 killed, 586 wounded, 1946 captured) in northern France. Whenever, the British blue blood feel like coming to Canada for a vacation, they cost Canadian taxpayers an arm and a leg. India suffered similar exploitation under British imperialism. The biggest diamond in the crown of the British monarch Koh-i-Noor was transferred from the ownership of the Indian Empire to the British East India Company under the Treaty of Lahore in 1849. The only British preoccupation is to enslave conquered people under colonial rule, loot them and milk them dry.

Furthermore, when the Cultural Revolution broke out in 1966, the British government feared massive influx of Chinese from Hong Kong. The British parliament immediately amended the Immigration Act to prevent Hong Kong British passport holders from entering England. Despite Hong Kong British passports clearly require all governments to provide assistance to the passport holders in name of the Queen, England does not allow them to land on British soil without a valid visa. That was how England took care of overseas British subjects when they were in crisis. When did Great Britain care about the well being of her colonial people?

The 1.5 million Chinese artifacts, ancient paintings and books mostly held by museums and libraries in Britain and France are clearly stolen properties. Of course, British museums also house looted properties from countries all over the world. The British sold India-grown opium, described as a medicine to enhance longevity (福壽膏), in the past. Opium was not outlawed in Hong Kong until 1930's. This is large scale state-sponsored drugs trafficking backed by military might blessed with royal assent. It is noteworthy to add that the Chinese General Lin Zexu (林則徐), Special Imperial Commissioner, with the task of eradicating the opium trade wrote a letter to Queen Victoria requesting her assistance to end opium trade. Lin's letter was conveniently lost in transit. It is said that the British queen personally endorsed the Opium War. Her concern was not on the morality of opium trade but British commercial interests on "free trade". The British government took the position that it was not involved in the opium trade, which was a "free trade" conducted by private business. The British government sent troops to relieve defenseless British citizens trapped in China without water, food and medicine. Of course, when the Treaty of Nanking was concluded after China lost the War, one of the clauses was to pay damages to British and opium dealers were allowed to continue their hideous business. This is classic British hypocrisy.

British companies, like Jardine Matheson Holdings Limited (actively involved in opium trade in the 19th century in China), John Swire & Sons Co. Ltd. (the holding company of the Swire Groups that owns Cathay Pacific Airways and Swire Properties in Hong Kong), HSBC, make huge profit from the blood and sweat of the Hong Kong people. How could a nation of that caliber be trusted? Despite what they say on their lips, the best interests of Hong Kong people is never a British concern.

When they know that they have to relinquish administration and sovereignty of Hong Kong back to China, they began to implement democratic reform. The calculating intent is to sow seed of discontent and to destabilize Hong Kong in the future, not to enrich the Hong Kong society. Whatever the British advocates must be taken with skepticism and caution. We find accusation of British betrayal of democracy in Hong Kong laughable. The British government serves the interests of the British politicians, not its former second class subjects in Hong Kong.

A Proxy War of Destabilization: an act of war and a challenge of sovereignty

Below: In an interview (in Cantonese) of student leader Alex Wing Hong Chow below, his unconvincing defence of seeking selective law enforcement is absurd. Continuous occupation aims to force government to clear occupied areas by force, an excuse needed to mudsling the Hong Kong SAR Government as oppressive and unpopular. His ultimate objective is to destabilize under the pretext of a noble cause.
Hong Kong police arrested photojournalist Paula Bronstein after she stood on top of a car while covering chaos in Mongkok during a police and OC protesters stand-off. She later complained that her arrest deprived freedom of the press. Any vehicle owner will have a problem with her if she stands on top of one's car. Of course, the police is obliged to act. That's how unreasonable and offensive Western journalists are in Hong Kong.
Economics of war: U.S. Looted Thousands of Iraq's Cultural Treasures

U.S. President Barack Obama delivered a keynote speech at the 2014 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) CEO Summit in Beijing, capital of China, on 10 November 2014. He alleged that the U.S. welcomes rise of a prosperous, peaceful, stable China and wants China to do well. Several days later, he gave a speech in the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia on 15 November 2014 and stated that people in Hong Kong are speaking out for their universal rights. If democracy is a universal right, why not custody right of our own children? We want to add that custody of one's children is not a constitutional right in all English-speaking "free and democratic" nations. President Obama further asserted that failure to uphold universal human rights, denying justice to citizens and denying countries their full potential. Economic inequality and extreme poverty that are a recipe for instability.

Despite how you view it, OC has destabilized Hong Kong financially, socially and politically. It is a proxy war of destabilization masqueraded as a popular uprising in pursuit of democracy. Why do we believe that OC is a war of destabilization instead of a protest to seek democracy? The alleged issue in question is the pre-screening decision of the National People's Congress made on 31 August 2014. Hong Kong is not a country but a highly autonomous special administrative region in the People's Republic of China. According to the Hong Kong Basic Law, chief executive must be approved and appointed by the Chinese Central Government. No officials in the Hong Kong SAR Government can give what protesters seek. What if Hong Kong produces a chief executive who does not receive blessing from Beijing? The Hong Kong SAR Government will run into a constitutional crisis. To get the so-called "true" democracy sought by OC protesters, the decision of the National People's Congress must be reversed. OC protesters should be occupying streets in Beijing, not in Hong Kong. There are many sweet resting spots in Tienanmen Square waiting for them. OC Protesters are either cowards or their logic compass are so confused that we doubt whether they can find their way home after camping on the streets.

Furthermore, Leung’s resignation is among the primary demands of protesters. This has no bearing on their alleged cause because overruling the pre-screening decision of the National People's Congress is outside the power of the Hong Kong Chief Executive. Forced resignation, however, has the inevitable effect of destabilizing the Hong Kong SAR Government, reducing the credibility of any Beijing approved chief executive and flexing the muscle that large scale protest is capable to remove the top dog in government. This is the real unspoken objective of their demand, which is typical in international intrigue between states.

U.S.-led war of destabilization exhibited a methodology that involves the following steps:

  1. Infiltrate CIA agents masqueraded as visa students, tourists, volunteers, evangelists, businessmen, humanitarian aid workers, journalists into target country.
  2. Under the pretext of noble causes (such as democracy, human rights, anti-corruption, counter-terrorism, child protection) that nobody would oppose, set up non-profit organizations to recruit assets and direct actions.
  3. Recruit and control freedom and ideal pursuers, traitors, intellectuals, religious leaders, local politicians, journalists, teachers, military personnels by way of employment, business contracts, bribery and blackmail using evidence of their crimes or unethical activities (such as drugs usage, perverted sexual practices). As confirmed by Mr. Edward Snowden , the U.S. government is fully capable of and is doing the foregoing given its global surveillance and communication monitoring.
  4. Garner support from labour unions and religious bodies (including occults) by financial means.
  5. American corporations engage in predatory speculations in the target's financial and currency markets to extract profits and to destabilize the local economy.
  6. Select a colorful trademark and symbol for the forthcoming subversion masqueraded as revolution or spontaneous grassroots movement. For example, the Prague Spring in 1968, Velvet Revolution of Eastern European in 1989, Rose Revolution of Georgia in 2003, Cedar Revolution of Lebanon in 2005, Orange Revolution of Ukraine in 2014, Jasmine Revolution (aka Arab Spring) of in Arab countries starting from Tunisia and finally the Umbrella Revolution of Hong Kong in 2014.
  7. Start the revolution with mass demonstrations and protests against government corruption, lack of human rights or democracy or fraudulent election. Only an excuse with little or no evidence is needed to commence action.
  8. Protesters use English slogans during demonstrations to garner support from people of English speaking nations so that their politicians could act alleging popular demand.
  9. Previously recruited local politicians, intellectuals, religious leaders and union heads appeal to those who are dissatisfied to join the protest.
  10. American-led western media work in concern to create an impression that protesters are seeking a just cause and are forced to take their grievance to the streets because of injustice, lack of representation in corrupt government. Therefore, protesters represent majority views and receive support from the populace.
  11. Once global attention is drawn, instigate protesters to provoke local police or military to use force. Provoked violent responses are repeatedly broadcast in news and documentaries to create an image of suppression to weaken popular support of the target government.
  12. Paid actors and special duties protesters attack government officials, buildings or the police to provoke responses by force. Suppression by force is magnified by western journalists and social media to fabricate an illusion in the international community that the target government has lost popular support and is no longer a legal authority.
  13. U.S. politicians or officials seek economic sanction, no-fly zone, recognition of rebel government, air strike or military aid to rebels from United Nations.

If all the above fail, find an excuse (often counter terrorism or elimination of mass destructive weapons) for military intervention and collapse the target regime by military might. The last video on the right suggests that U.S. troops looted an unknown amount of gold and cultural treasures from Iraq during the invasion. No nation would start a war and risk the lives of its soldiers to promote an ideology. The real reasons are always money, natural resources, power and fame.

OC exhibits most of the foregoing. Protesters used the following shrewd tactics designed to attack credibility and effective functioning of government and its law enforcement force:

  • OC protesters use "non-violence" means (like raising their hands up and press their bodies towards police line) to provoke action and have supporters video taping the process. Footages suggesting police brutality will be broadcast by OC friendly media to garner public sympathy. This intends to compromise the credibility of Hong Kong's law enforcement. Fabricating a corrupt police force that acts against the will of people will further justify their cause. On the other hand, some protesters are using the soft approach to sweet talk front line cops to disobey their superior's orders, take off their uniforms and join them (see embedded photo).
  • Student leaders demand something that nobody in the Hong Kong SAR government could give. This will portray an illusion that the Hong Kong SAR government is repressive, a rubber stamp and running dog of Beijing. This intends to reduce the credibility of government.
  • Negative old news on Chief Executive (payment of £4m by Australian company in 2012 to Leung) conveniently surfaced to stir up sentiment that Leung is corrupt. This aims to attack his character and to further reduce his popularity.
  • Protesters allege that they will surrender themselves en mass after the movement ends and accept legal responsibility on all crimes committed. They know that the judiciary is unable to hear trials of so many accused within a reasonable time. No Hong Kong prison is big enough to house so many inmates. Practically, they do not need to fear legal consequences when so many of them break the law at the same time. After all, many of them wear face masks and helmets. Identification for criminal prosecution is difficult. It seems that they have been coached by lawyers. Be mindful that OC leader Benny Tai is a law professor in the Hong Kong University and many pan democratic Legco members who joined and supported OC are lawyers as well. It will pose a serious threat on the justice system if protesters walk free. If they surrender themselves and the government does not act immediately, it will be difficult to charge them again later. Their lawyers will argue government condones by remaining silent and take no action. This will have a detrimental effect on the Hong Kong justice system.
  • Pan democratic Legco members declared that they will continue to do anything under the sun to disrupt proper functioning of government. They will attack any Beijing approved Chief Executives and do not recognize their authority. Many gullible people fail to see the real cause of government inefficiency and support the real author of disorder.

Protesters provoked the police to use force. When a different view was raised, it often met a disapproving response of singing happy birthday song (which is a very childish and disrespectful way aiming to deprive the chance of airing opposite views) or worse violence. They disobeyed court injunction order to clear the streets granted on 21 October 2014. This not only challenges government authorities but also the judiciary. On 22 October 2014, protesters used social media to ask supporters to occupy the Hong Kong International Airport. Such provocative acts are calculated to induce actions from the police. Several Hong Kong cops fall prey when they beat up Civic Party member Ken Tsang Kin-chu (a protester and a social worker by trade) who strayed liquid of an unknown nature on approaching police (see music video under the heading "Some Observations of the Campaign"). Police mischief was caught on camera and widely broadcast by Western media. The cops involved are promptly suspended by the Hong Kong Police and may face criminal charge. Video footage of Tsang's mischief, however, cannot be found in Youtube.

Methods used to induce mass fanatical pursuit of democracy

First and foremost, money is the most powerful motivating factors. It is said that the U.S. had spent 50 billion U.S. dollars to induce the 2014 "revolution" in Ukraine to replace a pro-Russia Ukrainian president with a pro-American one. Many movement leaders are politicians, businessmen, religious leaders, union heads. They are highly motivated by money. The identity of OC financiers, the amount of funds involved and how money was used remain an unfinished assignment for the Hong Kong SAR Government and the Chinese Security Bureau.

An anecdote on the unfinished Soviet nuclear powered aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk in Ukraine

"Today is the happiest day of my life." C-in-C Pacific Fleet Chester W. Nimitz said after he received report of the sinking of
the Japanese aircraft carrier "Zuikaku (瑞鶴) in the Battle of Leyte Gulf on 25 October 1944

Speaking of Ukraine, most Canadians are not aware how the U.S. devised a brilliant but unethical scheme to dismantle an unfinished Soviet nuclear powered aircraft carrier in Ukraine. When the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, the Soviet Navy was building the 85,000-ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk in the Black Sea Shipyard. The incomplete carrier was the first nuclear-powered carrier which for the first time would have offered true blue water aviation capability for the Soviet Navy with a combat capacity comparable with that of the U.S. Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. It was equipped with 2 "Manyak" steam catapults for proficient aircraft launching. Steam catapult launching technology allows fighters to take off with full ammunition and fuel payload. Above all, early warning planes can take off to provide no blind spot radar coverage and direct air defence and air strike. Only the U.S. and the Soviet Union have this technology at the point of writing. China is said to be using the next generation electromagnetic aircraft launch system in her next carrier.

Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.

Due to financial difficulty, the 30% finished carrier was sitting in the Black Sea Shipyard after the Soviet Union became history. The Americans were not at ease until the incomplete carrier ceased to exist. During peacetime, bombing is out of question. So the U.S., with the collaboration of Norway, devised a fraudulent business scheme to deceive the Ukrainian ship builders to dismantle their carrier with their own hands.

The Norwegian government placed an order to build six large commercial ocean liners with the Black Sea Shipyard. The order would relieve financial difficulty of the Ukrainian ship building industry. The order was gladly accepted and the Norwegian government paid a deposit for the order. To build the ocean liners, shipyard occupied by the rusty Ulyanovsk would be needed. At the same time, a V.P. of an American corporation approached the shipyard and offered to buy scrap metal from the carrier at US$450 per ton above market price. Ukrainian shipyard workers who built the carrier were ordered to dismantle the ship.

After the carrier was turned into scrap metal, the American corporation sent a representative to advise that the contract was canceled. The Ukraine shipyard may either accept a nominal compensation according to the contract or to sell the metal at a below market price of US$150 per ton. The Norwegian government also advised that the ship building contract was canceled at their discretion and paid an insignificant cancellation damages. The Ukrainians finally decided to sell the scrap metal at the price offered by the Americans. With two deceitful business contracts and a small damages for breaching the contracts, the U.S. managed to get the Ukrainians to dismantle their own unfinished carrier. This concluded the fate of the first never-completed Soviet nuclear-powered carrier.

Furthermore, Ukraine inherited 19 Tupolev Tu-160 variable-geometry wing strategic bombers after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Due to a lack of funding to maintain an expensive strategic bomber force, Ukraine was desperate to dispose its Tu-160. The U.S. spent US$15 million as an incentive to Ukraine to destroy 10 of her 19 Tu-160. To the dismay of the Americans, 8 Ukraine owned Tu-160 were sold to the Russian government. The last Tu-160 was disarmed and is now on static display in the Poltava Museum of Long-Range Aviation. Hence, most of Ukraine strategic military assets were eliminated at a minimal cost to the U.S.

To maintain its hegemony, the U.S. will use not only military power but all unethical means that are only restricted by human imagination. Ukrainians who protested in the streets in 2014 and supported their pro-American leader in the poll obviously have not learned from the Ulyanovsk lesson. Perhaps, many of them are too young to remember this arcane incident. Likewise, Hong Kong, China and all other nations should learn from the Ukrainian experience. When free and democratic nations offer something allegedly to enrich or to benefit one's nation, be careful and vigilant. It is safe to contend that nations primarily focus on their own national interests. Why are they offering something allegedly good to their potential adversaries to weaken their strategic position? Question their motive first. This will reduce the chance of making serious mistakes and will help determining the appropriate course of action.

We are not suggesting that all OC protesters are paid to partake. Of course, some, perhaps many, of them are doing this without pay and on good faith that they are pursuing something noble. Methods used to induce fanatical pursuit of democracy are similar with those used in door-to-door sales marketing or evangelical techniques discussed below:

  1. Act like a Mr. Nice Guy messenger bringing promising good news

    Occupy the moral high ground and portray an illusion that democracy will put people in charge. All their grievances will be duly addressed. Point your fingers to the current regime, overthrow it and your problems will be solved.

  2. Make them want what the neighbors got

    This ruse appeals to the human weakness of being susceptible to peer pressure that men desire to have at least what their neighbors have. Your neighbors have it, why not you? Look, people in Taiwan, Japan and even backward Philippines are all enjoying democracy. Why not Chinese in the Mainland and Hong Kong?

  3. Get them to Mirror you

    All developed countries adopt democracy. People live a free and prosperous life. Even superpower like the U.S. practises democracy. Hong Kong should join the club. Note that the U.S. turns into a superpower not because of democracy but of other reasons beyond the scope of our discussion here.

  4. Propose solutions to fix problems created and interrupted by you

    Mislead people to believe that democracy is a universally accepted virtue, contains value of equity and a key to solutions of all socio-political problems. It is necessarily better to live in democracy. Anybody who objects democracy is a fool, an evil and an enemy of mankind. To religious folks, they will suggest that anti-democracy is anti Christian. In fact, the Christian Bible never advocates democracy. For instance, God never allows referendum to determine, say, whether or not homosexuality is right. God only allows a dictatorship under His almighty command. Many people fail to see that socio-political problems in Hong Kong cannot be solved by practicing democracy.

  5. Water down the price and do it now

    To get democracy from your unwilling government, the price is low. Go join Occupy Central now. There are free food and water provided. Meet some nice friends who share the same view there. If you do not do it now, you will lose your chance forever. The Caucasian man and child protesting in OC carrying a sign in Chinese that read "If you don't rise today, you cannot rise tomorrow." in the photo embedded herein speaks to this effect.

This is very much similar with ruses used to talk teens into taking drugs. Converted OC believers either act of their own accord or are told to recruit their friends and relatives to join. Whatsapp, Facebook and other social media are popular tools to spread messages quickly to a large number of people. Since the formation of OC in March 2013, many students (encouraged by their teachers) and young people are turned into die hard OC supporters. Of course, there are some older OC supporters who are brought up in the colonial era when China was poor, backward and preoccupied with political turmoil. They naturally fear communism and very much prefer to live under British colonial rule.

Photographic comparisons between Occupy Central protesters and Red Guards in Cultural Revolution

Occupy Central and the Cultural Revolution

Although much smaller in scale, social unrest created in OC is comparable to that of the Cultural Revolution in China from 1966 to 1976. It is a power struggle using fanatic students to achieve political objectives. The only difference is OC involves foreign influence.

After China's first Five-Year Plan, the Great Leap Forward and People's Communes failed, Mao Zedong stepped down from first line leadership. Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping took over and restored productivity. With support from the military, Mao launched the Revolution in May 1966 by using students and youth known as Red Guards to purge senior officials, teachers, intellectuals and anyone who could be linked to capitalism. Victims suffered a wide range of abuses including public humiliation, arbitrary imprisonment, torture to death or disabled, sustained harassment, and seizure of property.

The OC camp often draws analogy between the Cultural Revolution and the Hong Kong police in its fearmongering propaganda to garner support and portray that protesters are being persecuted and suppressed violently. There are indeed similarities between the two movements.

  • Both use political ideology (communism and democracy) to stir up mass movement for power struggle.
  • Both use immature youth and students and engage them in brainwashing political assemblies (be mindful that there are stages in occupied areas where OC speakers give instigating speech to stir up fanatical sentiment).
  • Both use violence, challenge authorities, compromise prestige and reputation of established facilities, destroy peace, law and order.
  • Both fabricate an enemy (in OC, the Hong Kong and Beijing government and CY Leung, in Cultural Revolution, Mao's enemies, capitalism and rightists) and use hatred as the motivating force.
  • Both accused adversaries as mafia and enemy of the people.
  • Both have far reaching negative impacts on society, economy, allegiance that take generations to heal.

Who are the winners?

Losers of the OC campaign are easy to identify. The livelihood of retailers in affected areas (except those who sell umbrellas, swim goggles and shrink wrap), taxi drivers, tram drivers, construction workers are seriously affected. Be mindful that there is no unemployment insurance in Hong Kong. Many of these workers would have no income if they do not work. Road blocking caused by the campaign is detrimental to their livelihood. Some of them have commenced legal actions against OC leaders and sue for damages. They should also seek court injunction to freeze their assets and seize their passports to minimize flight risk.

Productivity also suffers a serious blow when hundred of thousands people do nothing but camp on the street. Foundation of a law rule society is at stake. This could be fatal to the financial industry in Hong Kong, the only remaining competitive edge that supports the local economy, which requires stability and a reliable legal system. Other financial centres in the Far East, like Tokyo and Singapore, will benefit if Hong Kong falls.

Vancouver International Airport - Robert Dziekanski's Taser Death

Opinions are polarized up to the extent that life-long friends and family members having different opinions stop talking to one another. Society is divided. Populace of Hong Kong is further alienated from the local government and China. Such alienation could be a potential source of more serious social unrest in the future. China will be forced to make backup plans and reduce relying on Hong Kong as her international financial centre. Such policy shift will inevitably harm the overall Hong Kong's economic benefits and its relationship with the Mainland.

Hong Kong moive director Wong Jing severed friendship with actor Anthony Wong, Chapman To and actress Denise Ho because of different views on Occupy Central. Wong remarked on his Weibo (a blog common in Hong Kong): “I still support the police! They are enforcing their duties and you actually splash urine on them. You can’t complain if you are beaten to death! I feel the beating is too little!” Frankly, Canadian police will do the same and more. Remember the Polish immigrant Robert Dziekański Taser incident in Vancouver International Airport on 14 October 2007. An unknown amount of settlement was paid to the mother of the deceased at taxpayer's wagon shortly before the trial of his wrongful death. Mr. Dziekański did a lot less that the Civic Party member Ken Kin-chu Tsang (a social worker in Hong Kong by trade) who may have pulled urine on the police. Yet he was tasered to death right on site. None of the four Canadian cops who killed him was convicted at the point of writing. If protesters believe that there is no police brutality in democratic countries, they are very wrong.

Perhaps the most far reaching effect is the bad example set to the younger generation. Some Occupy Central supporters, participants and leaders are teachers, university professors and celebrities. Teenage children can easily be misled to believe that using illegal means to achieve an aim is morally acceptable and would not have to fear any legal consequences. Lost allegiance renders future Hong Kong citizens a liability to China. This will encourage anarchism and will render governance extremely difficult, despite who is in power. It is safe to contend that every Chinese, the Hong Kong Government and the Chinese central government are losers as they all suffer from this crisis.

There are many winners emerging from Occupy Central. First and foremost winner is of course the U.S. Americans must be laughing on the other side of the Pacific Ocean and are proud of their brilliant strategy to destabilize their most worrisome rivalry and potential enemy. Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines are happy to see a troubled China and are hopeful that a weakened China will take a meeker approach in dealing with territorial disputes.

Taiwan, a Chinese province considered by China, is also applauding the movement. Taiwanese media provide extensive coverage of the event and use it to suggest that the "One Country Two Systems" concept does not work. Their agenda is to remain status quo and prevent reunion with the Mainland. Due to American intervention and pro Taiwan independence movement, Taiwan remains a separate political entity. The innovative political concept of "One Country Two Systems" was proposed by the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) as a platform of peaceful reunion has not yet been realized.

Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.
war comparison

The Obama Administration's Pivot to Asia

After withdrawing U.S. troops from the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration implemented a new regional strategy called "Pivot to East Asia" in 2012. The U.S. will deploy 60% of its military strength in East Asia to enforce its China containment policy. This is a popular doctrine used during the Cold War. Forward naval and air bases in strategic locations like the Changi Naval Base in Singapore, naval base in Subic Bay and Clark Air Base in the Philippines are positioned to provide a rapid strike force on short notice. Such deployment is obviously intended to choke China's oil supply shipping route and to destroy her military base and radar sites on her eastern seaboard when hostility begins. Offensive weapons including long-range anti-submarine warfare (ASW) patrol aircraft the P-3C Orion are sold to Taiwan to enhance its military capacity.

Military and diplomatic ties with South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Australia, Myanmar (formerly Burma), India and even former enemy Vietnam are strengthened to an unprecedented level. Despite a lack of remorse and admission of wrongdoing on war crimes, Japan is allowed to revise its constitution. Its defence force may now engage in offensive military action. Japanese weapon manufacturers may now export military hardware. Multi-nation military exercises involving anti-submarine, anti-ballistic missile training become a frequent routine on the peripheral of China under the pretext of anti-terrorism. We are puzzled what terrorist groups possess submarines and ballistic missiles?

Furthermore, the U.S. maintains surveillance on all global communications on both friends and foes, engages in aggressive foreign policy (like inducing conflicts in South China Sea and rearming Japan and Taiwan to contain China), develops high tech weapons like the Northrop Grumman X-47B drones designed for carrier-based operations, the Zumwalt class destroyer DDG 1000 designed for multiple naval warfare purposes, 100,000-ton Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, Mach 10+ hypersonic missile delivery system for precise targeting and rapid delivery of weapons.

These are preparations of war and a prelude to preemptive strike. The U.S. estimates that China will have an economy as big as the American's and its military strength will be at par in 2020. We worry that the U.S. is repeating the mistake of Isoroku Yamamoto in 1941. Yamamoto and the U.S. president both face the dilemma of strike now or sit back and risk being excelled by a perceived enemy. Is China or America's insatiable desire to maintain hegemony a real enemy?

Occupy Central is an act of war. It aims at overthrowing a government and undermine the governance of a sovereign power. It could be considered as the first strike. What if China responds by arming enemies of the U.S. and support them to conduct a proxy war? What if a Chinese tactical nuclear weapon is conveniently lost to a terrorist group hostile to America? Be mindful that there are no shortage of enemies hostile to the U.S. around the globe. World peace will be at risk. Given our strong ties with the U.S. and England, Canada will inevitably be drawn in. The terrorist hit-and-run attack that killed a Canadian soldier in Quebec on 21 October 2014 and the gun shot that killed a soldier at a national war memorial in Ottawa on 22 October 2014 are wake up calls. Does our current foreign policy and participation in the U.S. led air strike against ISIS serve our best interests? Or is it jeopardizing our safety at home and when we travel abroad?

The video on the right is the speech of an American think tank on why China cannot rise peacefully in 2012. We watched his long speech twice. But We cannot find any solid evidence to support his argument. On the contrary, his speech clearly explains why the U.S. cannot live in peace with another rising power.

The most disturbing point is the speaker's notion on treating the large size of population as a threat to American hegemony. He said in Ottawa that if the population of Canada or Brazil rises to a disturbing level, America will not be happy. How arrogant. What are they going to do when this happens? Nuke us? Given this mentality, the U.S. certainly finds the presence of 1.3 billion Chinese on this earth threatening. It follows that to maintain U.S. hegemony, the size of population of any potential rivalry (such as China, India and Brazil) must be contained within American comfort zone. How? This sheds light on why America owns the largest mass destruction weapon arsenal. This is a very dangerous proposition.

In addition to its formidable military might, the U.S. uses the following independent non-military tools to preserve its hegemony or full spectrum dominance:

  1. Financial
    1. the reserve status of the U.S. dollar that allows America to take profit on the spread of foreign exchange rates and to create an unlimited demand of the greenbacks independent of the U.S. economy, hence the ability to pay national debt and purchase real goods and services abroad by printing paper money;
    2. predatory arbitrage and speculative activities of Wall Street moguls to take advantage of price difference in currency and stock markets that will destabilize regional economy;
    3. U.S. monopoly of credit rating agencies that could destroy the ability to debt finance in foreign governments by lowering their credit ratings, often in conjunction with derogatory news conveniently leaks through media.
  2. Political and Legal
    1. U.S. veto power in the U.N. security council;
    2. leadership in military and economic pacts with nations around the world;
    3. strong influence on international and maritime laws according to American value and legal beliefs.
  1. Control of Information, Technology and Natural Resources
    1. the media which control information to both foreign and domestic populace;
    2. global surveillance and open invitation to submit information from unsuspecting parties by way of social media (like Facebook, Whatsapp, e-mail, ... etc.) to obtain and control information that could used be against influential people or parties at the most critical moments often conveniently leaks through media, hence controlling them either by elimination or collaboration (unveiling of CY Leung's receipt of payment of an Australian company in 2012 is an example of this ruse to embarrass and mudsling target public figures);
    3. eventual dominance of oil and energy by consuming resources of other nations first while preserving its own reserve;
    4. cyber control of computers that use American made operating systems to either disable or direct them to attack target websites;
    5. control of food production through genetic engineering by rendering food products from foreign competitors uncompetitive.
  2. Ideological and Cultural
    1. spearhead export of the political ideology of "democracy" successfully marketed as a universal right by subtle domestic and international indoctrination;
    2. use leadership on social engineering (such as child protection, gay movement, woman rights) to mislead people to believe in pseudo science and harmful social movements for the purpose of cultural assimilation;
    3. subtle indoctrination to market and impose American culture and value via movies, songs, books, magazines and TV programs.

One may argue that the aforesaid dominance requires cooperation from independent businesses. It is simply impossible. The Patriot Act signed into law by President George W. Bush on 26 October 2001 obliged every American citizen (including corporate citizen) to work with the U.S. government, rendering the dominance a reality more than a decade ago.

The U.S. has declared a policy to remain strong for another one hundred years. It is certain that the American president a century later would like another hundred years of hegemony. Like endeavors to seek immortality, history has proven that attempts to preserve an everlasting hegemony are bounded to fail. Ability to live peacefully with other nations and share world resources fairly is more realistic and responsible survival strategy in a nuclear world.

Our Anticipation if China adopts democracy

Choices for the people of Hong Kong

During the APEC Beijing summit in November 2014, U.S. President Obama unequivocally told his Chinese host President Xi that the U.S. government has no involvement in fostering the Occupy Central protest. This is a classic lawyer's art of speech. Of course, the U.S. Government has no involvement, but the American non profit organization NED has.

OC is an Anglo-American joint effort of premeditated war of destabilization aiming to induce regime change. Covert subverter creates a problem by fostering discontent under the pretext of democratic reform. Proxy financier supports and trains local politicians and student leaders who interpret problems and suggest solutions. Western media provide lopsided coverage to garner worldwide support. Front-line running dogs keep mudslinging and provoking authorities for the purpose of prolonging chaos and await opportunities to further their cause.

If OC protesters are successful to force democracy in Hong Kong, China will inevitably be more vulnerable to western subversion. Hong Kong will become a bridgehead for foreign powers to launch similar destabilization campaigns against Mainland China. With a population of 1.3 billion and 56 ethic groups, democracy is a disaster to governance. Representatives of 1.3 billion people in western standard could be in the magnitude of millions. If each of them seek a 5-minute debate time in parliament, the assembly will take years before making a decision. Such inefficient democratic system will paralyze government and allow amble opportunities for foreign powers to divide and conquer. Cost of election alone could be unbearable in the long run.

If China adopts democracy, we estimate that the nation will be divided and weakened in less than 20 years. Taiwan will never reunion. Some western provinces, like Tibet and Xinjiang, will become independent and join American-led military pact. U.S. missiles will be deployed on China's western border and her space centers can be destroyed within minutes after hostility begins. China's water source and rare earth deposits will be open to foreign control. Post 2014 Ukraine is a good preview of what China will be if the latter adopts western democracy. China will be subjugated to what it was like in the late Qing Dynasty. The Chinese government will be forced to be subrvient due to a lack of economic and military strength to protect her legitimate rights and to repel foreign exploitation.

China will also lose the lion share, if not all, of her natural resources in the South China Sea and the East Sea. Chinese will eventually bear a high price of natural resources (especially energy) dictated by foreign powers.

Chaos in Hong Kong is a wake up call that regime change induced by demand of democracy is often masterminded by foreign powers. It is an invasive war of a non-military nature. Foreign induced destabilization caused by civil disobedience, attack on head of state and government bureaucracy, undermining the judiciary, compromising armed force, paralyzing economy amounts to an act of war. The perpetrator will suffer no harm. Only people from victimized country will bear all the adverse consequences. It must be rectified promptly and decisively before fanatic minority OC protesters manage to convince the populace that they represent the majority view and interests.

Since the First Opium War in 1840, China had suffered massive foreign exploitation. Imperialistic wars resulted in heavy Chinese casualties and loss of sovereignty. Chinese suffered from prolonged poverty. Some migrated to foreign countries to earn a living by doing dangerous jobs, like railway workers. Be mindful that the completion of the Trans Canada railway to the Pacific Coast was largely built by Chinese workers. Many lost their lives during the construction and faced discriminatory government policy (such as the head tax and the Chinese Exclusion Immigration Act in 1923) after. The founding of the People's Republic in 1949 marked a new era for the nation to expel all foreign powers out of Chinese territory. Decade of social turmoil during the Cultural Revolution kicked the nation back twenty years in progress. OC, if left unchecked, will have an adverse effect no less than that of the Cultural Revolution.

In the last thirty years of economic reform, China has achieved great success and ascended from a backward nation to a near super power. When the nation finally gets back on its feet, OC occurred and posed a serious threat to the future and security of the nation. Chinese only have two choices. Support their government and continue to pursue stability, prosperity and progress or to submit to the demand of some Western influenced democratic fanatics who, inadvertently or not, aid the nation's adversary to reduce China back to what it was a century ago. Of course, the Chinese dream of national rejuvenation, improvement of people’s livelihoods, prosperity, construction of a better society and military strengthening is dialectically an American nightmare.

Similarities between Occupy Central protesters and child protection workers

Returning to the main theme of our association, most, if not all, English-speaking free and democratic nations have oppressive and barbaric child protection law that grants government absolute power to remove children under the pretext of child welfare and protection. Tax dollars, public ignorance and apathy spawn a child protection industry. This opens government to corruption and racketeering. Service providers of the child protection industry resorts to unorthodox ruses to obtain custody of removed children for job security and business opportunities. We note the following similarities between Occupy Central protesters and child protection workers (click the blue text below to view details):
Occupy Central; MCFD; CPS; Democracy is a universal right; child protection; 佔中;
  1. hijack a noble cause
  2. using children as pawns
  3. perpetrator plays victim
  4. selective law enforcement
  1. oppressive and invasive actions
  2. harm to society
  3. twisted logic
  4. false allegation of popular support and representing majority view
  1. betrayal of the alleged cause
  2. mislead the populace with bogus information
  3. propaganda
more details

Conclusion

In our interactions with pro Occupy Central supporters in Hong Kong and in Canada, whenever we hold a different opinion, we are criticized as ignorant, radical communist, tunnel viewed dolt or not qualify to comment. In Hong Kong, some fanatics accuse their opponents as mafia if they wear a surgical mask. Those who support the Hong Kong Government are labeled Beijing ass-kissers. In response to these expected accusations, we declare that we are not mafia, communism believers or a paid Beijing mouthpiece. We receive no funding from any level of Canadian governments and derive no monetary benefits from voicing our opinions on this issue. We draw our conclusions based on our observations of what has transpired, analysis in light of history and our conviction to pursue truth. We publish our views for the purpose of advancing public knowledge on government, war and geopolitics. We believe that responsible freedom of speech is our right, which is also an important component in democracy.

"Democracy is the worst. Endless talking and listening to every stupid opinion. And everybody's vote counts, no matter how crippled or black or female they are. Democracy is flawed and imperfect."
(script of Admiral General Haffaz Aladeen played by Sacha Baron Cohen in the American movie The Dictator, 2012)

The movie script above is sarcastic and fictional. But it does reflect some flaws in democracy. There is no guarantee that an elected official is more superior or will serve people better. Elections are an expensive exercise and are often won by political parties that have stronger financial backings from corporations and special interests financiers. Corruption and racketeering could legally exist in democratic governments. There are oppressive laws made primarily to benefit some government bureaucrats and service providers. Atrocities created by oppressive child protection law in "free and democratic" governments are evidence of the foregoing. Oppressed parents who have lost their children to state-sponsored child removal have more grievance than any OC protesters could have possibly. We are talking about losing our children, our own flesh and blood, when child protection workers fabricate evidence to remove them from our care. Lopsided and lengthy legal proceedings allows lawyers to plunder families until they go bankrupt. Some removed children were raped or killed in foster care. Many of them spend their childhood life in foster care where there is no parental love and care. Some were adopted to total strangers. The adoption process presents more money making opportunities to service providers under the child welfare banner. Yet, we will not take our grievances to the streets and impose inconvenience or deprive the livelihood of our fellow Canadians. We believe in lawful and peaceful pursuit of meaningful ameliorative reform. Integrity, honesty, law abiding, openness are imperative in our cause to build a safer future for our children, not activities that cause chaos and social disorder. We will not reduce ourselves to the same level of our opponents by using blackmailing tactics, which are precisely the tactics OC planners are using. They hijacked peace, social order and economic well being of Hong Kong as pawns to blackmail government to implement political reform that opens Hong Kong and China to foreign subversion.

Despite its flaws, we support democracy. But we will not export it to other nations. Democracy is not perfect and is not always suitable to all nations. An elected assembly could trample a man's right as much as a tyranny. Child protection industry is an inhumane, oppressive and barbaric product created in most English-speaking free and democratic nations. We are living witnesses of the foregoing. OC protesters will be very disappointed if they pursue their "pseudo democracy" for the purpose of enhancing safety and freedom. They should immigrate to English-speaking democratic nations to pursue their dreams. There are some sweet child protection and national security laws awaiting them.

On 24 October 2014, OC leaders are contemplating a referendum on occupied areas to determine whether they should accept the government proposal to end the crisis. On 25 October 2014, the referendum was changed to determine whether protesters should accept or reject decision of the National People's Congress made on 31 August 2014. According to their design, only those who support the movement are allowed to vote within occupied areas. There is no minimum age requirement. It is like calling a vote on same sex marriage in a gay pride parade. This is a blatant manipulation of voting result using a carefully selected voter base. This reveals the ignorance of their understanding of democracy and the shrewd fabrication of pseudo democratic result to further their agenda. Before we finished writing this page, OC leaders announced that the referendum was called off due to unclear message delivered to their supporters. It is easy to comprehend the disaster it will bring if these people form government.

The word democracy in Chinese (民主) is very misleading. It literally means people in charge. It is always the leaders, not the people, who are in charge. If protesters want to be in charge, they should pursue leadership positions within the established leadership election framework of their place of residency.

The following misconceptions on democracy are notable in the OC camp:

  • Protesters alleged that there is no candidate pre-screening in a true democracy. Candidate pre-screening is common in every political party in the West. For instance, Canadian Liberal Party (federal) leader Justin Trudeau was sued by thwarted Liberal candidate Christine Innes for not allowing her to run for a Liberal nomination in any riding in April 2014. Since political candidate pre-screening is not actionable in law, she commenced her proceedings on defamation.
  • Protesters believe that universal suffrage standard must include citizen nomination. There is no such universal standard. Each democratic country has its own law governing election. Election laws are different everywhere. In reality, independent candidates often stand a very small chance of success in election. Rare birds get elected because of some unusual circumstances. For instance, the late Chuck Cadman of Surrey North in British Columbia got elected as a member of parliament because his 16-year-old son Jesse was stabbed to death in a random street attack by a group of young people in 1992. People supported him to seek reform in the justice system to deal with young offenders.
OC is a well planned and well coordinated multiple-angle attack aiming to destabilize and overthrow a regime under the pretext of a noble cause. It simultaneously attacks:
  • social stability (induce polarized opinion to tear society apart and use mass movement to destroy allegiance);
  • financial and economic stability (choose major commercial and tourist areas to occupy to maximize damage);
  • fundamental value and faith in the current regime (demand Chief Executive to resign citing lack of popular support);
  • the authority of judiciary and law enforcement (disobey high court orders to clear the streets, mudsling police working with mafia to attack peaceful protesters, criticize police of using excessive force when using such force is absolutely necessary and reasonable in view of the violence encountered);
  • the capability, credibility and reputation of pro-government officials and head of state (incidental coverage of Leung's receipt of payment of an Australian company in 2012).
US vs China A documentary (made between 2006 and 2009) on the bilateral relationship between China and the U.S. This old documentary contains some obsolete informaiton and is mainly military in nature. It does not discuss another form of American warfare: non-military war of destabilization using target country's own people, but reflects the mentality of American strategic planners.

The attitude of of late James Roderick Lilley (李潔明), former head of the CIA in Asia, former U.S. ambassador to Taiwan, Korea and China is noteworthy. Mr. Liley was born in Qingdao, China. But he is no friend of his birthplace.

The teeth of this non-military subversive machine bite best under the following conditions:
  1. a desire for democratic reform that appears to be fair, better and alleged to be universally accepted;
  2. discontent among people in target country because of dissatisfaction in society and government such as uneven distribution of wealth, shortage of affordable housing, lack a bright future;
  3. freedom of the press to manipulate public opinion, including control of local journalist associations and reporters;
  4. freedom of religion to turn religious believers into protesters;
  5. a free economy with no exchange control where predatory stock and currency exchange speculations may operate without much government control;
  6. a democracy-friendly education system where other political systems are considered oppressive and unpopular;
  7. a cultural environment open to foreign influence, where foreign movies, newspaper, journals, books, Youtube, Whatsapp, Facebook are easily accessible by most people in target country;
  8. young, naive and gullible students that can be turned into fanatics easily through subtle indoctrination and a small financial motivation;
  9. local politicians that have no chance to gain larger success in the current political framework;
  10. lack of powerful and credible political figures who can exert determining influence to stop chaos and to restore order.

All the above conditions are present in Hong Kong.

In retrospect, failure to institute national security law in 2003 and patriotic education in 2012 largely facilitates OC. Conspirators and traitors cannot be charged of treason. Students will continue to be deprived of patriotic education, which is vital to foster solidarity in a nation. This is indeed a very well planned operation that has begun a long time ago.

Countermeasures to combat similar treacherous acts in Hong Kong

OC is just the first wave of attack. Whoever controlling the movement is not going to stop there. Next time, the pretext could be child protection, environmental conservation or gay rights protection. So far, conspirators and perpetrators receive little punishment. Although many people in Hong Kong become impatient with their disturbance and begin to see the real nature of the riot, OC organizers have successfully stirred up sympathetic sentiment from the West to support their movement. At the same time, western journalists ruthlessly mudsling China as an unpopular dictatorship despised by her own people and has refused to answer popular demand.

In our humble opinion, the black hand behind the curtain appears to have a strong influence, if not direct control, on the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union (香港教育專業人員協會), Hong Kong Journalists Association (香港記者協會) and some religious bodies. Democratic movement has garnered fanatical support from a small minority of Hong Kong people. Under subversive influence from various fractions, the next generation will become less patriotic (or even anti-Chinese), more skeptical on the current regime and more incline to adopt Western-style democracy. University graduates opening yellow umbrellas during convocation and creating chaos to disrupt anti Occupy Central individuals when they receive their degrees is a sign of this cancerous tumor. The British has successfully planted the seed of discontent deeply in the soil of Hong Kong before they left. Fertilized by American funds, fabled political ideology, seditious acts masqueraded in noble cause, effective brainwashing propaganda and education, proxies of the black hand will eventually turn Hong Kong into a forward base to launch similar war of destabilization against China. These proxies includes local politicians who can go nowhere to further their ambition under Chinese controlled political framework, educators who have an intrinsic fear and hatred of communism, student leaders who have a fanatical zeal to pursue unrealistic ideals.

Failure to implement effective countermeasures is an open invitation of more invasive endeavors. The following countermeasures may provide a strong deterrent of future aggression masqueraded in any form and shape. Foreign powers will think twice before they test the water of how far they could go again. Collaborators will face severe penalties for their treacherous acts that jeopardize national security and sovereignty.

  1. Immediate declaration that China considers any foreign induced or influenced destabilization activities or attempted activities in any form an act of war (or at least an act of aggression) and a first strike. Any nations who cross the line drawn will risk retaliation.
  2. According to the Hong Kong Basic Law, national defence and foreign affairs are the mandate of the Beijing Central Government. Therefore, national security law in Mainland China is applicable and enforceable in Hong Kong at the appropriate timing until Article 23 is legislated by the Hong Kong SAR Government.
  3. Patriotism is an integral part of national security. By the same token, moral and national education are mandatory in all levels of education in Hong Kong as a measure to enhance national security and to prevent foreign subversion.
  4. Land in Mainland China will be made available for Hong Kong social housing projects with transportation infra structures linking Hong Kong built in the relief program, similar with the Hengqin Island (橫琴島) program in Macau. Neilingding Dao (內伶仃島) and land or artificial islands along the new Hong Kong Zhuhai Macau Bridge are possible choices.
  5. Treason is a high crime. Chinese foreign passport holders committing such crime will be treated like ordinary Chinese citizens and will not be entitled to protection from foreign embassies. Perpetrators, collaborators and traitors will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of Chinese national security laws in Chinese courts.
  6. Teachers, college lecturers, university professors who fail to carry out their proper teaching duties in educational institutes will be fired immediately. On-line coaching and lectures given in occupied areas are not proper performance of teaching duties.
  7. Students who fail to return to school to complete their academic programs will be expelled immediately.

How to implement the foregoing requires political wisdom and careful timing. No responsible sovereign power should leave any territory null of national security law, hence rendering its law enforcement powerless to combat foreign infiltration and compromise national security. If Hong Kong people indefinitely refuse to fulfill the obligation to legislate Article 23, enforcing Chinese national security law in Hong Kong as an interim solution is completely justified in view of the social unrest created by OC.

The ultimate solution to curb foreign subversion in form of democratic movement is to provide an environment in which most citizens live affluently in decent housing, see a promising future, share the success of economic development and above all the same patriotic value. Coagulation of unity will follow.

Canadians are led to believe that Occupy Central protesters are seeking a democracy similar with ours. Not quite. They pursue a "dictatorial democracy", namely, an ideology that rejects all other views different from their own. What protesters seek is a self-centered ideology akin to fanatic communism during the Cultural Revolution, Nazism and Islamic fundamentalism. Their barbaric actions prove beyond a reasonable doubt that democracy will not serve Hong Kong well. Imagine leaders elected by people of this caliber, people of Hong Kong should shudder.

Mischief of Pan Democratic Legco Members during Council meetings. These people are leading Occupy Central where there is no love and peace but only hatred, violence and chaos.
Occupy Central mob surrounded the PLA headquarter in Hong Kong on 18 Oct 2014. Protesters holding British Hong Kong colonial flag attempted to charge into the PLA HQ before OC broke out. No Chinese should commit such treacherous act. Under the current law, such act of treason cannot be charged. This suggested that National Security Act and moral and national education are desperately needed in Hong Kong.

Most Canadians are not aware that many pan democratic Legco members in Hong Kong are preoccupied with yelling insulting slur and displaying sarcastic political signs during council meetings. Throwing bananas or paper at government officials is a common scene whenever some of these members present. Chair of the Legco has no choice but to order their removal. Some deliberately absent themselves from council meetings to ensure that statutory quorum is not met and force meeting abortion. It appears that they only have one objective: to disrupt proper government functioning and to mount character attack on non democratic Legco members and government officials, hence destabilizing the Hong Kong SAR Government.

Their constituencies elect them to serve their best interests in government, not to create chaos or to overthrow government. Like some Taiwanese council members who fought with their political opponents in parliamentary session, these politicians are international laugh stock. Ironically, their boisterous actions prove that Hong Kong is not ready for democracy. Only dolts will select people with this attitude to represent them in government. Be mindful that tolerance of different opinions, respect of law and freedom of speech are fundamental in democracy.

After the attack of Parliament in Ottawa, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave an impressive speech on 23 October 2014. He said that members of opposition parties are his opponents, not his enemies. We are all Canadians. Hatred, lawlessness and destructive behavior qualify Occupy Central protesters as traitors. To the Chinese, it is a mutiny. We are impressed by the self restraint of the Hong Kong police and above all, the Chinese Central Government in Beijing. At one point, a small contingent of Occupy Central mob assembled outside the People's Liberation Army (PLA) headquarter a few blocks away from the Central occupied area. This proves that protesters are doing everything they can to provoke bloodshed. What are they up to?

We oppose using any political ideology to destabilize a sovereign power. This amounts to an act of war because it aims at overthrowing, or at least undermining, a foreign government under the pretext of a noble cause. Section 2 of the Canadian Criminal Code stipulates that a person commits treason in Canada if he or she uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province or conspires with any person to commit high treason. Section 2(d) states that even forming an intention to do anything that is high treason and manifests that intention by an overt act is a crime. Every democratic nation has its own national security law. Protesters in Hong Kong get away from criminal punishment because the same group of people managed to prevent the Hong Kong Government from legislating its own national security law pursuant to Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law in 2003. This further strengthens our belief that Occupy Central is a premeditated subversion. To Canadians who support Occupy Central, how would you feel if China covertly supports and funds Quebec separatism under the pretext of protecting French Canadian unique culture and identity? Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.

The greatest enemy of nuclear super powers is war itself. An impulsive act or a miscalculation could easily lead to a nuclear holocaust. Western media are zealous to portray an aggressive China using her military might to bullying her neighbors. On the contrary, we see a very tolerant China exercising remarkable self-restraint. At the international level, China's nuclear weapon use policy is not to strike first and will not use nuclear weapon on countries that own no nuclear arsenal. This policy will oblige China to fight very underhanded in military conflicts. China so far remains silent despite the fact that a subtle act of subversion has already begun.

Protesters and their leaders alleged that they will surrender to police after the movement ends. Many protesters are wearing face masks and goggles when committing crimes of violence, contempt of court and property damage. They cannot be identified, and hence evade legal responsibility. Allegation of accepting legal consequence is false and hypocritical. Leaders and those who reveal their identifies are counting on the fact that the Hong Kong judiciary will not be able to hear trials of thousands of people in a reasonable time. The only practical option is not to prosecute them. They will walk free on their high treason crime (which technically cannot be charged due to a lack of national security legislation) and all other wrongdoings committed against the people of Hong Kong. High profile leaders will seek punishment and martyrized themselves to gain political assets. What a shrewd and despicable scheme.

The Hong Kong Government should arrest them en mass. Use video footage to seek public assistance to identify lawbreakers and as evidence to prosecute them. Some people will scream of persecution by Terreur blanche (more commonly known as White Terror in Hong Kong). Crimes are crimes. Law rule society is a core value in all civilized nations. The British Columbia Government did the same to rioters who committed looting, arson and property damage during the 2011 Vancouver Stanley Cup riot. This is no White Terror but just law enforcement. This will at least get them an arrest record, if not a criminal record. All major leaders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of law. Their passports seized and assets frozen to minimize flight risk and to secure damages claims from civil lawsuits filed. Note that seizing passports of its citizens is a common practice in democratic countries including Canada to prevent them from leaving the country to conduct activities like terrorism. Students and lecturers who refused to resume school activities before a deadline will be dismissed for good.

News coverage after 1,835,793 Hong Kong residents have signed petition against Occupy Central
Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.

Many Hong Kong Chinese are furious of this treacherous act. We found the Chinese poem above written by a Hong Kong Chinese. His insightful views and analysis suggest that not all people from Hong Kong brought up in British colonial education lack a sense of patriotism.

At the point of writing, Anti Occupy Central camp have obtained signatures from 1.85 million Hong Kong citizens demanding order be restored and occupied roads cleared without delay. Despite how vocal OC protesters are, it is safe to contend that they do not represent majority view. Continuous occupation proved that OC protesters do not obey the law in democracy that they must follow majority view. Their actions confirm beyond any reasonable doubt that democracy is not suitable in Hong Kong at this time. It further strengthens the belief that their hidden agenda is to destabilize Hong Kong by provoking government action to clear occupied areas and to induce regime change.

Contrary to the allegation of Occupy Central planners, there is absolutely no love or peace in the movement but only hatred, violence and disorder. After the campaign broke out, there are many strange and laughable phenomena in Hong Kong. Many people carry umbrellas and wear raincoats when it is not raining. Wearing surgical masks when going out become a routine. Some wear construction safety hats and swim goggles when they are neither construction workers nor going to swim. Some become obsessed with wrapping up their face and body with plastic cling wrap before they leave home. Whenever a different opinion is voiced, some people instinctively sing happy birthday song. Some schools kids now raise their hands to form a cross sign to say no. Law professors lead by example to break the law and allege that they will surrender to the police in due course while continuing to commit crimes. Thanks to the Americans. Next to the Cultural Revolution, they managed to create a social unrest that may take generations to heal.

Occupy Central is an eye-opening event. It is a subversive false flag operation akin to the Mukden Incident (1931) and Marco Polo Bridge Incident (1937) seeking an excuse to further aggression and to induce regime change, save and exempt OC is non-military, covert and using people in the target country. The essence of the scheme is to create a problem by taking advantage of differences and conflicts within a society, provoke a reaction from the target and use the reaction to accomplish some objectives and/or as an excuse to justify further action. It suggests how gullible people are before carefully devised mass movement scheme that serves a purpose totally different from its alleged cause. Will history remark these clowns as traitors or democratic reform heroes? It depends on whether China or the U.S. controls Hong Kong in the future. History is almost always written by the victor.

Incidentally, Occupy Central overshadowed a major historical event - the Battle of Jiawu (甲午戰爭) that occurred 120 years ago in 1894. 2014 is the one century anniversary of the Battle in Chinese year naming system. The battle gave the lesson that China must always be vigilant, properly prepared and equipped to fight foreign aggression, including espionage and non-military subversion. The Chinese poem titled "Jiawu Reflection" 《甲午反思》 on the left, written before Occupy Central broke out, reiterates historical events, analyzed current affairs and inspires patriotism, which could have prevented the movement if shared by more people in Hong Kong. Learning history will reduce the chance of making the same mistakes again.

Occupy Central Aftermath

top
Return to the top.

[This page was conceptualized on 16 October 2014, published on 2 November 2014, last revised 1 December 2014.]