Besides the "creationism" issue we talked about earlier, another annoying thing happening around is the rise of Christian Right in Hong Kong, which was also discussed in the programme.
I will write an article ASAP on the rise of Christian Right, stay tuned!
Someone has to enlighten me regarding the remarks made by our CE Donald Tsang, our Honourable Henry Tang and Ambrose Lee, the chief of administration and chief of security in Hong Kong.
They, alongside our Honourable yet entirely negligible Legco Exco member Lau Kong Wah, claimed that the police officers will "bring impact to the positive image of the police force" by protesting in the street this Sunday concerning their pay structure review.
Although I still hold my belief that all civil servants are overpaid, and certainly don't want to see the money I got ripped off every year under the name "tax" goes to their blundered pay cheques, I am at the same time puzzled by the remarks made.
Why our coppers could damage their image by taking to the street?
Does the Hong Kong Police Academy (yes, Academy!) teach them how to surrender their freedom of expression?
Again, our overpaid government officials tried to hypnotise us with their moral myth, that there is an image of the police force that could be damaged by a street protest.
Alas! The myth goes like this: whenever people march on the street, the police officers should be the marshals around the corners. The whole picture will be terribly wrong and unpleasantly portrayed if the places are switched. That is THE image!
Now if there is one thing that yours truly really hate to see, is to see the man/tyranny/the bad guys/etc.. win, yeah but what could one do?
Here Ebrahim Yazdi's son explained on the Daily Show how his father is fearing for this fellow countrymen, and also plead for the general public to write their Iranian Embassy demanding explaination from the Iranian Goverment, as it seem internation spotlight would be an idea tool to help our fellow humankind in Iran. Please watch. http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=230713&title=ebrahim-yazdis-arrest
Still think there's nothing you can do? think again.
Let us DARE to show our support for liberty! Are you really just gonna sit there and let liberty wither again? Or you gonna be one of those who that gonna tell their grandkids that, YOU WERE PART OF THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION?
Is this not for the same reason you sit in Victory Park holding candle on every 4th June??
Write a letter, send an email, u can give them a call too if that's what gets you off. Demand an explanation from them, ask them what are they doing to their people.
Are you boys and girl having fun watching the Iranian election clusterfuck? I sure am!! Nothing more entertaining than seeing a foreign angry mob desperately trying to hold on to democracy, while at the same time not realizing the results really is as irrelevant as Darth Vader appearing on American idol (What?).
Forgive me if I seem ignorant (I am), but yours truly is failing to see the point in having a president when you have a appointed supreme leader at the same time?Say whatever you want about Ahmadinejad and his non-tie wearing ass, isn’t it really the guy with the crazy beard and sexy black turban(1) who is in charge. For fuck sakes! He has been since 1989!
Anyway, the Iranian has really outdone themselves I say! Last time an international election fraud that gain so much publicity had no burning cars and the police sure as hell weren’t shooting at the losing sides!(2) While some of you might have been too young/drunk /doped up/downloading music from Napster/licking your dot.com bubble burst wounds to remember what happened in 2000, I was wayyy too impressed by the drama 9 years ago.
Let us recap on what happened, shall we?
The year is 2000, after 2 successful(3) terms as the King of Freedom aka the President of the World, William ‘Bill’ Clinton left office and it is election season for the great country of USA !! Woot woot! Enter the red white and blue balloons and super cool rock star touring buses(4)!!! Roll over real news! Here come months of non-stop important election coverage on your news networks(5)!!!
Long story short, after months of primaries that filtered out unpopular/under-funded/ ugly/gay candidates, it was a contest between a future noble prize winner(6) and a post turtle(7)
It was a close election, closer than most would like to admit today (you voted for who in 2000? Prepared to be judged and called a redneck by the ‘righteous’ people!!! ) How did it end? Well, the candidates with the most popular vote ended up losing(8) that’s how it went. Shits happened right? RIGHT?!?!????
Cue the butt-hurts recounts and the mass media tomfoolery outrage, and the rest, as they say, were history/comedy.
Here, have some Colbert/Bush classic!!! Almost didn't happened becoz of Gore!
The US of A, at the pinnacle of democracy, yet with no national standard for conducting elections, states and municipalities are free to oversee voting as they see fits, ancient voting equipments(9), a confusing as fuck electoral college system(10), some would say the election was ripe for rigging. They would never admit it, but then they still haven’t admitted to the fact that they lied about Iraq neither.
While populist in Hong Kong are shouting for general election for the position of chief executive, it would be sensible to consider the fact that, the government of Hong Kong will always have a Supreme Overlord, and while it would seem to have achieved something to the extent of getting a win over your supreme overlord by having a general election. Just remember, having the right to vote does not necessary mean you have the power in your hand.
Footnotes from hell: (Are you enjoying reading this article up and down?? It just a trick I use to make it looks professional and meaningful!)
(1)Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is sexy by default, as all Ayatollah are. No comment from him regarding his relation to the Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla (rumoured to be Chris Jericho). Yet.
(2)As much as Dick Cheney would’ve like to.
(3)No comment on political success, entrainment wise it was a damn resounding success never seen before, until George W. Bush opened his mouth and tried to address the nation.
(6)For making a giant Power Point presentation about weather. blah..and they never give one to Ghandi (!)Fuck u Noble!
(7)You see a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle. You know he didn't get up there by himself. He doesn't belong there; he can't get anything done while he's up there; and you just want to help the poor, dumb thing down
(8)True Fact!! (The only one in this article!) Gore 48.38% Bush 47.87% http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm I wouldn’t bullshit you!!! I might bullshit you with moral myth-busting theories, but not election results!!!!! Friends just don’t do that to each other man.
(9)Almost two million ballots were ‘disqualified’ in the 2000 election because they registered multiple votes or none when run through vote-counting machines.PCCW take note, vote planting is just too complicated for this day and age.
Bunch of sex offenders have to camp under a bridge in Miami "because of a law which prohibits those who have sexually abused minors from living within 760m of anywhere children congregate". That means nowhere within the city of Miami but under that bridge.
People coming out of their correctional services because of the offense were dropped there. Some even got their driving license issued with the bridge as their address.
They are "imprisoned" in a place with condition worse than a proper prison. There is no water supply, no electricity, no sewage, no nothing.
Does that sound familiar to our fellas in Hong Kong?
Those from Mui Wo want Christian Zheng Sheng College nowhere near their home. Admit it, a local school for Mui Wo kids is an excuse. Somebody got their degrading comments taped (Our expat friend suggested searchlights to be installed!!!).
But you guys out there denouncing the Mui Wo people, make pretty sure that you are not only a hypocritical ass. Be prepared not to eat your own words when Zheng Sheng comes around your neighbourhood.
If most of us are only being hypocritical in this incident, than we can easily imagine that Zheng Sheng students will end up living in squalor like those sex offenders under the bridge.
If you want to live in a utopian society, now you got another choice besides Singapore, Miami welcomes you!
Like the creationism issue we talked about earlier, SCMP was the first newspaper having reported on another absurdity happened in this great city. Ming Pao's report came as late as today.
Of course, I'm late as well. Since I read the news from SCMP while taking shit days ago, I have spent some good time thinking about what to write about that. I finally decide that I should let you see it yourself.
Above is the original Hong Kong version movie poster.
Above is the "righted" version after our anti-smoking activists launched their complaint. I couldn't find the Hong Kong version, so I uploaded the French one. I saw the Hong Kong version in other places, and it's the same as the French one above.
Is the Coco in the second poster playing with what she picked out of her nose or something?
I have nothing against anti-smoking activists nor the various bans on smoking. But the above just looked so ridiculously odd.
I understand that the law bans any mentioning or presentation of smoking or tobacco in the public, hence, they did what they did above.
I hope we can be less panic on these kinds of things. I started smoking not because I had seen any celebrity holding a cigarette instead of picking his or her nose. I was curious as a young kid and it was readily available from my buddie. It's as simple as that.
If a kid could be influenced by the mere look at a cool picture, the kid will go for a puff eventually for any other reasons. You don't have to worry.
It might be ok to ban tobacco advertisement, but the above poster is definitely not a tobacco advertisement. It is only taken to be one by the definition of the law.
I have no better arguments to offer here, it's as clear as day.
Keep the teaching of creationism or intelligent design out of our science classroom.
Recently, some schools in Hong Kong have stated that they're going to include the teaching of creationism in the biology class. A bunch of scientists launched a sound complaint to the Education Bureau.
A worrying event came after. A group of 62 people, including school principals, teachers, scholars which included "scientists" of universities, submitted their letter to the Legco, claiming that the inclusion of creationism in the biology curriculum is ok.
Those principals and teachers are just, well, principals and teachers.
But I am extremely disappointed by those university "scientists" among them. I even think that these "scientists" should have their research grants and lectureships reviewed for their comments made. The respectable Professor Michael Reiss had to quit as director of education at the Royal Society just because of his misquoted advocacy for the teaching of creationism in classroom. I seriously think that the respective parties should check if these "scientists" deserve the name and most importantly, the financial resources they received intended for genuine scientific research.
Professor Reiss' true view, which I think is very sound, can be found in this 2007 BBC report.
I read their website carefully and agreed to most, if not all, of their arguments there. Therefore, I am not going to repeat here.
You might ask why. Isn't it better to include as much information as possible in the classroom, hence, giving our students a broader horizon on things?
But the fact is, we have different disciplines of knowledge with different natures. And it is important for our students to be taught the proper differentiation among these different knowledge disciplines. Different methods should be used in different types of knowledge.
For example, it is hopelessly stupid to ask students to appreciate a piece of literature by mathematical method. And you do not ask for a laboratory report in poetic form.
Creationism itself is not a problem. But disguising a teaching of faith as a scientific theory is what irritates me.
Students could be given the chance to discuss, read, and think about issues regarding faith and religion in school for sure. But never in the science classes.
It gives our young kids the impression that creationism is a scientific theory, which is undoubtedly wrong.
I urge the Education Bureau to look into this matter seriously, though I am pessimistic as usual on those bureaucrats there.
I signed the online petition by the Concern Group. I think you should do it, especially if you are a parent. Please do it before 30 June noon.
The Libertines Pub, Hong Kong invites you to suggest a Chinese name and tagline!
If the name or tagline you suggested are brilliant enough for us to really use it, you get a cold pint of beer on the house, and the chance to meet our contributors in person.
As an open libertine and an aggressive asshole, there're innumerable times where I made people around speechless, by openly challenge their comments on others' "sexual morality".
"It's so gross!!"
"You're such a sexual pervert!!"
Back in their bedrooms, do they all fuck in missionary position only, and even say a prayer beforehand?
I suspect not. I even suspect it's not in the bedroom...
I hope that our prolific psychologists will one day invent a kind of abnormality called hypocrisy. Setting heavenly "moral" standards for oneself and others publicly while letting anything goes privately sounded perverted to me.
I asked, with my perfect sincerity, why they think that something or certain person is perverted or gross. I respect the few of them who gave me their grounds for their comments, or their religious values behind their remarks. I only pity them for their lack of fun in life.
But the others are simply dumbfounded. They simply picked up the comments and judgements from others. Or, they thought that they ought to make such remarks, everybody does!
But I suspect the true reason is that they don't mean it.
If we all stop being sexual hypocrites, maybe the society as a whole could start meaningfully discuss sexuality, people could start seeking help openly when needed, and we can all stop being so perverted.
Of course I'm not saying that there is no sexual abnormality. There are people who are sick sexually and who needed help; there're clinical definitions for abnormality. But they are not immoral people. You don't morally condemn a cancer patient for being sick, the person is simply sick.
I wonder since when abnormality became a value-laden weapon for the hypocrites.
How I wish the Nina Wang court case ends immediately.
Every morning my redneck colleagues will start cursing Tony Chan for at least an hour from 0915, after reading the reports on the case which might only go well with their stinky breakfasts. Most people made a judgement before the court does, which deems the court battle so meaningless.
Almost all of them think that Tony Chan is the greedy man who ripped Wang off her fortune, and that the assets should goes to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation run by members of her family.
What if Wang and Chan were really romantically in love? Why not? It is for the court to settle the issue of Wang's wills; until the judgement says that Chan is lying, I don't see any ground for us to condemn him at all.
Just because Chan is 20 years younger, they're deprived of the right to be romantically in love and to intimately and sexually caress each other? Even if Chan was a gigolo who set himself a high standard in terms of money return and if Wang gladly and happily accepted the service, what bothers you guys at all?
The last one is really the question, why do we care?
Our curious fellas of course won't admit that they're just nosy. They say, because the estate can be better used as charity.
Do we know anything about the Chinachem Charity Trust, run by siblings of Wang, yet? Charity trust or foundation, just like any company or organisation, can also be run badly.
I do not intend in any sense or to any extent to suggest that the Trust was, is, or will be run badly. I actually do not know. I tried to google about the Trust, but found no website or whatever information about the Trust. I only want to bust the myth most of us have, that is, being charitable means being good. If a charitable organisation or trust is run badly, it can mean that every dollar you gave, only 10 cents or less will finally reach the hands of the needed.
So having a charitable trust on one side of the battle doesn't automatically ground their side a victory.
Could we shut the fuck up from now on and let the court do its job?