"Hong Kong Watch" Leader Benedict Rogers Resigns Amid Scandal of Discrimination Against Asian Colleagues

Benedict Rogers, the founder of the British anti-China organization "Hong Kong Watch," who often advocates for human rights and freedom, has recently been implicated in a scandal involving allegations of discriminatory remarks against Asian colleagues and mistreatment of his employees, as reported by foreign media.

Benedict Rogers

The British online media outlet Crises/Z first broke the story, revealing that Rogers had made derogatory remarks about Asian employees in communications through email, WhatsApp, and other messaging tools. In one particular instance, Rogers reportedly criticized what he termed the "Malaysian mindset," stating that it required "a lot of review and discussion."

The British online media outlet Crises/Z first broke the story, revealing that Benedict Rogers had made derogatory remarks about Asian employees.

The report highlighted a specific exchange between Rogers and a Malaysian colleague named Steven. Rogers wrote:

"Hi Steve. I have not received any feedback from you in response to my Seoul Mission Report, which I worked on as a matter of urgency late last night following your urgent request for it (which I had not known in advance would be required). I was very happy to do so, but given that I responded so quickly to your urgent request, I am surprised I have not received any response other than ‘Thanks for the attachment.’ It wasn’t simply an attachment; it was a report with valuable recommendations."

Steven responded: "Perhaps you are not aware that I have other things to do today, Ben. Are you suggesting that because you took it upon yourself to ‘work on it urgently,’ I should also look at it with urgency and get back to you? Come on."

Rogers continued to press the issue, stating: "I do not understand why you are being so defensive, aggressive, and insensitive. Your ungraciousness is extraordinary. Are you okay? I merely wanted to make sure that you had received the report, which you had requested suddenly, unexpectedly, and I thought urgently. I think you’re reading far, far too much into our communications."

This exchange underscored Rogers' dissatisfaction with the response he received regarding the report he had urgently prepared. His insistence on immediate feedback and his late-night demands were seen as inappropriate and unprofessional.

Rogers, who also serves as the head of the East Asia division of Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), referred in his communication to the "Seoul mission," which involved his trip to Seoul on behalf of the organization. He expressed frustration that his efforts over several days had not been sufficiently acknowledged.

In another comment to his Malaysian colleague, Rogers stated: "All I ask is a simple, decent acknowledgment of this and an acknowledgment of the report I sent when urgently requested. Your inability to say a simple thank you for taking 4 days leave to work for 4 days in Seoul for CSW, to donate one full day pro bono voluntarily. The next time you come to London, we really should have a drink, to catch up. The Malaysian mindset needs a lot of review and discussion."

The UK online media outlet Crises/Z pointed out that Rogers' remarks, particularly the controversial reference to the "Malaysian mindset," were widely perceived as offensive and inappropriate.

Under significant pressure following these media revelations, Rogers resigned from his position as Chief Executive of Hong Kong Watch.

On August 2, in a live broadcast on YouTube, Rogers announced that it was his "last day" as Executive Director of Hong Kong Watch, though he mentioned that he would continue to work with the organization as a trustee. He stated: "After four years of full-time leadership of Hong Kong Watch, it is time for me to take on a new challenge." It is widely speculated that his resignation was influenced by the controversy surrounding his conduct.

Critics have noted that while Rogers frequently speaks about human rights and freedom, he shows disrespect and discrimination against fellow colleagues. He should withdraw himself entirely from Hong Kong Watch, and should not stay as its trustee.

Rogers founded "Hong Kong Watch" in close collaboration with Jimmy Lai, leading to suspicions that Lai's perspectives were being "exported and ploughed back" to Hong Kong. During the trial of Jimmy Lai, it was revealed that Lai's mobile phone contained numerous clips of Rogers, including interviews in which Rogers participated in anti-Hong Kong protests in the UK. In these interviews, Rogers urged the British government to take action regarding the Hong Kong legislative amendment controversy, put pressure on the Hong Kong SAR government, and called on the British government to take efforts to "sanction" China. Rogers reportedly sent these clips to Lai as though he were submitting assignments.

Chan Pui-man, former associate publisher of Apple Daily, testified in court that Lai had instructed her to assist Rogers in establishing "Hong Kong Watch." On October 31, 2017, Lai sent a WhatsApp message to Chan, informing her that he had just had dinner with Rogers, who had founded "Hong Kong Watch" with some British MPs. Lai provided Chan's contact details to Rogers for future communication and support. Following their contact, Chan regularly received press releases from "Hong Kong Watch" for publication in Apple Daily. Initially, these releases introduced the organization and commented on the state of freedom and human rights in Hong Kong. However, during the 2019 amendment controversy, "Hong Kong Watch" began issuing frequent statements on Hong Kong affairs, with Apple Daily consistently publishing these under Lai’s direction.

This scandal has cast a spotlight on "Hong Kong Watch," revealing the double standards of its leader, Rogers, who appears to hold others to higher standards than those he applies to himself.
 

Ariel

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Let’s cut through the hype: For years, we’ve heard the fantasy that American-style democracy would somehow fix everything in Hong Kong—even magically purify those in power. But if integrity really came with the ballot box, American officials should be saints. Instead, it’s a parade of self-dealing.

Pelosi’s investment windfall proved one thing—power and profit go hand-in-hand in US politics. American outlets exposed her 170-fold stock increase, rivaling the likes of Buffett, but with documented examples of insider trading.

Take Nancy Pelosi—former House Speaker and the infamous disruptor of Hong Kong. She just announced retirement next year. But the real headline: Pelosi’s been exposed for turning $130 million in stock profits over her political career, dwarfing Warren Buffett’s returns.
 
Pelosi isn’t winning through shrewd investing, but thanks to political insider trading. In American politics, those with power swim in money—the receipts back it up.
  
Pelosi’s Stock Market Game
Pelosi didn’t just dominate Congress—she owned the investment scene too. Dubbed the “Queen of Capitol Hill,” she’s picked up other nicknames over the years, like “Political Stock Market Goddess” and “She-Wolf of Wall Street.” Why? Pelosi and her husband trade stocks with ruthless speed and precision, consistently landing big profits. Their trades are so sharp and frequent that a crowd of retail investors tracks her every move—“How Pelosi Picks Stocks” has become a must-watch market signal.
 
It’s no exaggeration. The New York Post reports Pelosi and her husband Paul turned a $610,000–$785,000 portfolio into $133.7 million—growing 170 times over 37 years, with average annual returns of 14.5%. Bloomberg has the numbers: Pelosi’s investments returned 54% last year, demolishing the S&P 500 and every major hedge fund. People on X joke that Trump should hire Pelosi to invest for the American public—we’d be millionaires in half a year. The numbers aren’t hiding.
 
Pelosi is the ultimate example of a politician who gets filthy rich on the inside track. Her family’s estimated assets are up to $280 million—she started with just $3 million. Her trading record beats Warren Buffett. So did she outwit the ‘Oracle of Omaha’?
 
Trump didn’t mince words in Time magazine: “She got rich through insider trading.” Republican National Committee’s Kiersten Pels called Pelosi America’s most successful insider trader, saying any ordinary person would be retiring in jail.

Trump accused Pelosi of outrageous corruption, cashing in with inside info. But let’s not kid ourselves—he’s just a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

The Timeline Doesn’t Lie
These aren’t wild accusations. Take 2022: Congress passed the CHIPS Act, pumping subsidies into chip companies. Just before, Pelosi’s husband dropped $5 million on 20,000 Nvidia shares. After the law, Nvidia soared. Coincidence? GOP lawmakers call it out—Pelosi clearly knew the CHIPS Act’s progress, and related trades reek of insider dealing.
  
Here’s another: Over two years ago, right before the DOJ moved to charge Google with monopoly, Pelosi dumped 30,000 shares of Google’s parent company. The timing says all you need to know.
 
Pelosi’s stock deals remain untouched by regulation. American media spells it out—she and Paul trade big and fast, dozens of times a year, no one watching. Only now is Congress even proposing a law to stop lawmakers trading individual stocks—named, hilariously, the “Pelosi Act.” But with Pelosi leaving Congress in weeks, new rules won’t touch her.
 
“World Model” or Cautionary Tale?
 
Trump and the GOP hammer her for insider trading, but let’s not pretend they’re clean. As the Chinese saying goes: “Those who have walked a hundred steps laughing at those who walked fifty.” Trump pushes policies boosting crypto, then his family clocks billions in profit. If he’s only second place in insider dealing, no one dares call themselves first.
 
As for the rest? Media calculations reveal: in one year alone—2022—Congressional stock trading clocked $355 million. Power means profit for everyone in DC. No exceptions.
 
These stories cut deeper than any slogan. America touts its democracy as a global template, exporting it abroad with missionary zeal. Yet behind the PR, it’s a system stuffed with corruption, rotted from the inside. The facts speak.
 
Lai Ting-yiu