29 August 2009

Parents, don't get fooled by CCTVB!

While having a chill glass of beer at this Friday night, I saw this CCTVB evening news report regarding the public consultation on review of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance.

The Jade report told us that if the public will support, the PDPO could be reviewed so that parents can no longer access personal data of children without their consent. These personal data include medical records, criminal records, drug test results, and even common information which parents always get hold of like academic and discipline records at schools.

Our honourable legislators of course will seize the chance of commenting. Priscilla Leung Mei Fun opined that the review of PDPO shouldn't devastate the harmonious relationship between parents and their kids.

I hope that our honourable legislators were only lazy and had not read the consultation document, and were fooled by CCTVB into giving such non-sensical comments.

Parents, if you need to "access" your kids' "personal data" through a data user, like the school, because your kids don't even want to talk to you about their performances there, you failed disastrously already! If your kids will say "no" when asked whether you can check if they have made troubles at school, it's not about the PDPO destroying the harmonious relationship, but that's entirely your fault!

I am sure that the Jade report intended to scare the shit out of our parents regarding the recent drug test dispute. Their underlying message is actually way too clear: if students under 18 can freely say yes or no to the drug test, that means, if they have a full right to privacy like adults, it will become a slippery slope. It could imply that parents can no longer know what their kids are doing because of the evil idea called privacy.

All they want to say is that, privacy is the enemy of good parenting!

You may say I am cynical, but not like our honourable legislators, I did homework. Tell me why the Jade report put so much stress on the parents' right to access personal data of their kids, when that issue is only one of the 27 proposals mentioned in the consultation document, sharing less than 2 pages of the 86-page paper?

And most importantly, the proposal no. 14 (p. 52) arose from the following concerns:
  1. where the parent may abuse the data access mechanism to obtain the personal data of the child for the parent’s own purpose rather than making it “on behalf of” the child. For instance, an estranged parent may make a data access request to the school or social welfare organizations for his/her child’s location data to trace the whereabouts of the child or the other parent of the child;
  2. where a parent is suspected to have committed child abuse on his/her child; and
  3. where the child has expressed to the data user his/her disagreement to the disclosure of his/her personal data to his/her parents.
I do not read that the review is in any sense intended to handicap parents' care for their children.

So that is how CCTVB manipulated a news.

I checked Yahoo's Hong Kong news, the Ming Pao report there didn't even mention such issue. Funny how the TVB Pearl report on the consultation also didn't mention the "parents" issue at all.

The parents who watch Chinese news are dumber, they think?

28 August 2009

The Pub's voice is now Global!

Global Voices: The World is Talking, Are You Listening?
I am now a volunteer author of the Global Voices Online, you can read my debut article on my page there.

What the hell is Global Voices? Let's check it out:

Global Voices is a community of more than 200 bloggers around the world who work together to bring you translations and reports from blogs and citizen media everywhere, with emphasis on voices that are not ordinarily heard in international mainstream media. Extracted from: http://globalvoicesonline.org/about/

They "advocate for freedom of expression around the world and protect the rights of citizen journalists to report on events and opinions without fear of censorship or persecution". We certainly need that in Hong Kong now. We yet to know what will happen with this review of the Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance (COIAO); I smelled shit really. I am waiting for updates from that shit and am prepared to kick some asses here. Now, I can do that in GVO, too, I hope.

So if you read lots of blogs and are interested in reporting and translating those blogs entries into English for the global readership, drop Oiwan Lam a message.

24 August 2009

Know your Public Opinion Research: Did we say "yes" to those shits?

I came back on this side ok, though Eric told me that this side would become the other side in 38 years time when I was still there two days ago. Very discouraging for somebody looking forward to coming back on this side for days.

I will write another story on my experience on the Big Brother side soon, but let's talk about Public Opinion Research for a while.

They said "yes"?

I somehow managed to read the Hong Kong newspapers on the other side (don't ask how and don't tell if you know how! Orwellians are reading!) I was shocked when I see this news:

"70pc of pupils OK with drug tests: poll" in City3, SCMP, 22 August 2009

I went "HUH?!" in my hotel room.

The respectable Hong Kong Research Association interviewed 714 secondary school students and 638 parents of such students throughout Hong Kong. What the fuck is "Hong Kong Research Association"? Anybody heard of them before?

Ok, 70% of these students said ok if they're picked. Who're the parents? They're the parents of those students interviewed! One day, Hong Kong Research Association called, they asked for your mama or papa. They told your mama or papa that it' s a survey about drug test. They interviewed your parents. They asked your parents to pass the phone back to you and asked if you would say "yes" to a drug test. Your parents were standing next to you listening. You dare say "no"?

I have no professional knowledge on opinion survey, but that is a possible scenario everybody can think of. 47% of those students are in their form 1-3, while only 20% of them are from form 6-7. If the above scenario makes any sense to you, most of them from the junior forms would have answered "yes".

Wanting to know more about this respectable research institute, I looked at their past research projects as well:
  1. Have you given Donald Tsang a higher grade recently? This survey in August 09 said that we thought Donald Tsang had been doing better now in eight aspects out of 11! WTF? What did he do in the past months?
  2. Another improvement for Tsang in June 09? Shit, I must have gotten too high when I was young to have my memory damaged so much! What the hell did he do around that time?
  3. DAB did much better than other major political parties? This March 08 survey said so. Well, of course those other parties suck. But, DAB was really that much better? And DAB has been the best party all the way except around June 07?
  4. Being a responsible and respectable research institute, they followed the LSD saga closely. They had to do one, two, and three surveys against the LSD legislators. The Pub does not endorse any political party in Hong Kong, but was that a bit...suspicious?
Who're Hong Kong Research Association?

So, who're the Hong Kong Research Association? Of course they say they're not-for-profit. But who funded this association, which has the resources to conduct three to four surveys each month? Why don't they publish their accounts, like most not-for-profit organisations do nowadays? Who're the bosses behind?

Their Chairman is Thomas So. Who the hell is he? The secretary-general of Hong Kong New Generation Cultural Association, member of All-China Youth Federation, and an advocate for "one country two systems".

So now, did you say "yes" to drug test, and did you praise Donald Tsang and DAB?

The results of public opinion researches could be counter-intuitive at times. They will tell you it's scientific and you have to accept it, like it or not. But the case above shows that it's always nice to ask a bit more, and be a bit critical when looking at these surveys (or if you like, become sceptical and cynical like me; then you can join the Pub!).

Just want to share with you another story about public opinion survey, which the SCMP editor called "spin":

"No amount of spin can sell a poor policy" in Leaders, SCMP, 22 August 2009

Anybody gets the analogy here?


18 August 2009

The other side

I am going to take a break from the Pub starting from tomorrow. I got dispatched to work at the Big Brother's side.

If you do not see any updates here within next week, Orwellians, you know you can come and torture me in one of those labour camps.

Let's keep our fingers crossed.

15 August 2009

The importance of being hypocritical

I am among the "poor guys" who ride on train everyday (yes, I belong to the generation where KCR was KCR and not MTR!). If you're also among the "poor guys", you know very well what will happen and repeat itself everyday in those rides.

Those NOT-moving-inside-the-train-compartment (NMITC) assholes make me go berserk everyday. Everytime after I squeezed through these asses, I found the open space in there makes a damn good dance floor. These NMITC asses take different forms at times. They sometimes become NMTATBB asses (NOT-moving-their-asses-to-the-back-of-the-bus), sometimes LAPALEEF asses (lean-against-the-pole-and-let-everybody-else-falls). These asses should be fined for making the mass transportation system much less mass and much more dangerous.

But I am sure the majority of these assholes mouthed off condemning Chrissie Chau, compensated dating, and supported the dopey drug test.

I unequivocally call that hypocrisy.

Although I called myself a libertine, there're certain etiquette I truly believe in. Take the public transport as an example:
  1. Move your ass inside the train compartment or to the back of the bus and let others get in;
  2. Don't lean against the pole and show that you had a long day, everybody does;
  3. Don't spread your newspaper on others' face, or breast, to show that you care about what's happening. I saw most of you spent lots time reading how Stephy Tang sucks as an author, instead of the real news;
  4. Offer your seat to pregnant women and elders who are in serious danger because the LAPALEEF asses conquered all the poles.
You know, I believe when the Judgement Day comes, failure in observing the public transport etiquette counts! No matter how firmly you openly condemned my beloved Chrissie, marks would have been deducted for your behaviour in public transport! And you do the calculation. Do you have more chance to be a hypocrite and condemn others to gain points than taking public transport and getting points deducted?

Again on my redneck colleagues

Sometimes ago, I had lunch with a bunch of my redneck colleagues. A woman started talking about how suggestive are the pictures in Chrissie Chau's photo book. I asked, "so what?" Knowing that I was trying to kick start a debate that they could never win, that woman immediately replied, "nothing!......It's...ok!"

But then they carried on to discuss with great descriptive details the tits of Chrissie and the different ways they're shown in the book. I was so ashamed for two reasons. Firstly, I claimed to be a hardcore fan of Chrissie, but I had not paid as much attention to her boobs as they did. Secondly, I claimed to be a libertine, but I feel not as comfortable as they were in discussing a woman's tits openly. My trust in etiquette fails me again.

Another seemingly highly conservative (actually hypocritical) woman colleague spent days urging a guy to bring to the office his copy of the photo book of Chrissie Chau. On the fourth day, that guy gave in. You wouldn't believe how she enjoyed reading the book. As a hardcore fan, I only read that once online; I've never touched any hardcopy of it nor jerked off over it.

So these are the Hong Kong hypocrites we live with, and have to live with, everyday.

They consider that failure in observing etiquette is only minor offense; but selling a body sexually in whatever way is ten times EVIL!

For one thing, how do you weigh evil? In what unit? Why not offering a seat to elders is a lesser evil than showing your tits to make a fame?

Moreover, as I told you earlier, if evil is measurable, you asses are damned! Though failure in etiquette might be minor, but you do that at least twice a day, mostly six days a week, at least 24 days per month, arond 300 days per year...

Busy registration day in hell after the Judgement Day! Poor immigration officers in hell...

12 August 2009

Police sniffer dogs used for illegal searches on public, say campaigners

Check out The Guardian's report on the illegal use of sniffer dog for drug search:


Police sniffer dogs used for illegal searches on public, say campaigners
Lawyers and drugs campaigners say use of dogs is ineffective and potentially flouts human rights legislation

In case they will really bring the dogs into the school, HERE IS THE REPORT WHICH TELLS YOU IT WON'T WORK, HK GOV'T!!!

More worthwhile investment than drug test in schools

The multi-million dollars budget on drug test could be better used for educating the teachers and social workers on homosexuality.

Yesterday, SCMP reported that a survey had found "a third of openly gay students faced discrimination on campus".

I studied in a boy school, and I remember how I was discriminated by the openly gay/suspected gay schoolmates. For some reason, the gay usually scored higher marks and managed to get all the As in the HKCEE and HKALE. I could never join their study groups, maybe because I am straight. Or was it because I would have been a drag on their progress? I'm still puzzled, is it my sexuality or my academic results?

Anyway, it is not right for the gay to discriminate the straight, or vice versa. Our students should be educated on that.

But now the problem is, our teachers and social workers have no clue on how to do that. The youth group conducted the survey asked for more resources.

I agree that resources should be allocated, but we certainly need to be careful.

Make sure that the Society for Truth and Light won't get the funding from the government again.

Make sure that the education to the teachers, social workers, and students, won't become a spoon-feeding of certain rules, or worse, a "manual" on sexuality.

It's actually about liberating their minds, so that they can accept diversity and differences, and learn to respect others' choices.

It's not merely memorizing the "rule" says "homosexuality is ok", but why it is so. Teachers should be able to explain to students on how to tackle and consider the issue independently, instead of spoon-feeding the idea to them.

The Libertines Pub has been working on liberating your minds. So we're happy to accept the funding and take up the job on training our teachers and social workers. But the deal is, stop the fucking drug test and relocate the money to us, pal!

10 August 2009

Breaking News: Our Privacy Commissioner takes on Uncle Suen!

Before sharing the exciting breaking news on drug test, I urge you to join this Facebook group by the Youth Union against the test scheme. Having less than 300 people in a Facebook group is a shame, let's all join it here! And you know that it really works, as the media now reports on Facebook activities rather than real news.

This evening we heard this exciting news from TV. The Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, Mr Roderick Woo, wrote to Uncle Suen today "expressing his comments and concerns" on the drug test.

In his long-winded seven-page "confidential" letter (why it was classified in the first place, if they had intended to publish it?), our commissioner slapped Uncle Suen in the face with his ultimate deterrent: Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance.

Some important points in the letters are as follows:
  1. Parents or guardians cannot give consent to the test on behalf of their kids;
  2. The test subjects' (i.e. students') consent should be an informed decision. That means they know clearly what the purpose of collection is and how the data will be used. That also means they should know whether they will likely face criminal investigation (I told you earlier that it is never clear);
  3. Accuracy of test results should be assured as reasonably practicable (I told you million times that the test will not be accurate with the long list of substances leading to false positives);
  4. Data collected cannot be used for other purposes without consent of the subject (they are still not sure what to do with the results, I told you).
You can read the long-winded letter yourself if you're interested.

We're likely to see a halt to the test called soon. After all, that's politics. Politicians have every right to eat words.

But has Donald Tsang eaten too many words already? Drug test can't wait? My ass!

08 August 2009

When a law does more harm than good: America's unjust sex laws

This week The Economist told us how a law could do more harm than good.

In the country we all naively look upon as the role model, sex-offender registries are published online. The registries show not only the names, but the pictures of the sex-offenders and child-molesters.

So parents will know if any of them is around their neighbourhood.

The law and the registry system start to ridicule themselves soon after. Teenagers, who had consensual sex before they're legally allowed to, could be put on the registries. They're labelled as "sex offenders" for life. People don't care what they did, but would think that all of them on the registries are rape murderers.

In some states, these offenders on the list are banned from playgrounds, where children go, for life. Their own children in turn suffer with them. As the Pub shared with you earlier, the law also created a camp of homeless people living in squalor in Miami.

No politician dare say anything about this nonsense. They would only support more punishments which do not fit the crime, because people enjoy marginalising the "immoral".

The moral of this story is, with populist politicians, there is bound to be unjust laws.

07 August 2009

The Libertines Pub Summer Class: your drug test survival tips revision

Uncle Suen finally unveiled the "details" of the school drug test yesterday. There were both good and bad news for our junkie kids.

Before that, let's read what 練乙錚 thought about the test here, following what we shared with you yesterday. This might make the Pub more trustworthy somehow.

Good news

Here's the good news. They're only testing for five kinds of drugs. And they are:
  1. Ketamine
  2. Ice
  3. Ecstasy
  4. Marijuana (DAMN!)
  5. Cocaine
The Libertines Pub is now soliciting fund to speculate on cough syrup. We want to become the sole cough syrup provider in Hong Kong, because we see this once popular, legal, easy to obtain, and cheap, drug will have its come-back.

Moreover, they will let you pee alone in the washroom. Shop your fake pee online! Or simply get some from your little brother or sister.

After hearing about the good news, let's do some revision before hearing about the bad news.

Revision class on the survival tips the Pub provided weeks ago and still work after the great efforts of the government

Adults my ass! We paid millions of dollars to hire these bunch of AOs and bureau secretaries to come up with a drug test scheme which couldn't answer the cheats our kids worked out! Let's do our revision for the summer!

  1. Search for "how to pass a drug test?" online;
  2. Pick an easy to memorise name out of the list of substances which give you false positive results;
  3. Switch to other things (anything not on the list of five drugs above);
  4. It's ok to get high during summer holiday, Christmas holiday, and maybe Easter holiday too! You can manage to go back clean;
  5. Keep a little bottle of clean urine with you;
  6. Simply refuse the test and say: PRIVACY!
And for the bad news

If you get caught, nothing will happen kids! They will just report that to the Police Liaison Officer!

They said, you're not going to be interrogated. They would only ask you about the source of the drug.

I wonder if they would say "please" upon asking, too. Since when a Police Liaison Officer ceased to be a police constable and would constrain his/herself from interrogation and investigation?

Once a Police Liaison Officer is alerted on the result, it becomes a de facto criminal investigation, pal!

Are the kids gonna hear the rights upon the report to the police, then?


After all the mocking and joke survival tips the Libertines Pub presented in all these entries, I found that our government is totally hopeless for the whole shit. I grew nauseous and tired of following the issue, as it is as stupid as you can get!

Hong Kong Government, I beg you please, it's about our kids. Stop messing with them for your political hidden agenda, they're fucking innocent!

06 August 2009

The Libertines Pub is full of junkies, of course they will oppose drug tests...

If you think the Pub is only bullshit lamenting about the drug test, read the credible and respectable 練乙錚 on today's HKEJ.

We found the free link here.

Chinese article, sorry.

04 August 2009

You're not ready, but we are! One more survival tip on drug test from the Pub!

Bishop John Tong Hon did one interview to change the world! Now you know the real power (overpower) of the church!

Now everybody says that they're not ready, even the respectable chairman of the Action Committee Against Narcotics, who proposed the ridiculous travel restriction for kids to Shenzhen. Remember they told us that there would definitely be a "pilot" scheme in September for the unfortunate Tai Po kids? Tong Hon FTW!

But they're not going to kill the test yet, they postpone it to December. The Pub always cares about our junkie readers. It's not only important to get high, but it's also important to keep your ass in school (for whatever reason)! So now we give you one more survival tip on drug test.

Privacy rules!

They told us that they wouldn't force students to participate in drug tests, even if their parents had approved that. But they would follow-up to find out why the student refused that.

So if you're unluckily picked, simply refuse it.

If they ask you why later, tell them one single word that spells P.R.I.V.A.C.Y.

I am sure they will be dumbfounded. They expected students would confess or tell them about their confused lives and family problems. They pictured there would be a happy ending where teachers and social workers helped the kids to sort out all the problems and there came a new life.

Tell them it's about privacy, they won't know what to do next.

The chair of the Association for Secondary School Heads, Tai Po district, commented that they would handle students with positive drug test results just like other students with behavioural problems; so there won't be human rights or privacy issues.

I remember how they treated the students with behavioural problems when I was in school.

They have someone to send a note to the classroom. The teacher will read your name aloud and ask you to go to see the social worker immediately, or during lunch. There comes the giggles among the class.

That was the way they treated students with behavioural issues.

I am sure they know nothing about privacy. Use that to fight back, fellas! Get more ready than they are before December!

Revise the tips here as well!

03 August 2009

The flimsier Libertines Pub on SCMP

I decided not to give in to the Orwellians.

I wrote a letter to the editor of SCMP (like a junior secondary school kid).

It came out finally last week. It was the head letter to the editor of the day, meaning that it had a larger subject line than others and was placed in the middle of the section.

They edited my poor English there. They also made it less cynical and sarcastic than the original here.

Still, I am waiting for others to flood the SCMP post box with antagonistic letters towards mine, let's all read SCMP from now on.

Which version do you prefer?

01 August 2009

Way to go, Bishop John Tong Hon!!!

I suspect Bishop John Tong Hon reads the Libertines Pub.

He made it clear yesterday that "the Catholic Church would not support a voluntary drug-testing scheme for schoolchildren". (Again, login required from SCMP. I wondered why this news didn't make it to the A-section but a little left-hand bottom corner of page 4 of section C!!! The Standard didn't seem to have reported it at all.)

The head of the Catholics must have read this Pub entry. He is among a few of those "prominent" people in Hong Kong who realise that our kids are not idiots, though some of them could become a bit dazed and confused once in a while for the highs.

Anyway, as I told you principals are just, well, principals. Now those "managing" the local Catholic schools said that they would "consider having the school drop out of the scheme." Before the Bishop said anything, they had all rushed into nodding their obedient heads to the drug test.

Funny how obedient leaders didn't make obedient kids. They choose to sniff some ketamine instead.