What do you call a person who tries to bomb civilians?

Important question: what do you call people who try to bomb innocent civilians?

This is an amazing story.

I'll give you the facts – you decide on the answer.

A group of individuals, extremely well-financed by persons unknown, committed horrendous crimes – running bomb factories, gathering explosives for terrorist grade mass casualty attacks designed to kill Hong Kong people in Mongkok and Wan Chai, and plotting to kill "popo", slang for murdering police officers.

This is not in question. Most quickly admitted the crimes, and asked for bail, promising not to flee. Hong Kong has an unusually lenient legal system, so they were duly released. This was in the late summer of 2020.

But here's what happened next. Mysterious persons paid a fortune to people-smugglers to help them jump bail, and they got on a boat to go to Taiwan, a Chinese island province.

When they were rearrested, in the last week of August, the media had to think of a label for them.

Now we all know that if people planning terrorist-grade mass casualty attacks on innocent people had my color skin, looking something like this, they would be called terrorists, wannabe cop-killers, bombers and so on.

But here's the key fact. They weren't dark-skinned. Moreover, they were anti-China people associated with Hong Kong anti-China groups financed by the United States.

So here's how they were actually labelled.

The New York Times called them "activists".

The Washington Post called them "protesters"

The BBC called them "democracy activists".

The Wall St journal called them "Hong Kong residents" as if it's perfectly normal for residents of this city to blow it up!

The Hong Kong Free Press said they were "Hongkongers trying to flee".

Reuters said they were "young men".

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indicated they were heroes. They "deserved a hero's welcome". He added: "America stands with them."

So there we have it – people who literally tried to blow up innocent Hong Kong people with bombs in a mass casualty event  are presented to the world as activists and "hong kong residents" and even "heroes".

Now coming up to date, a related trial has opened, in which gang leaders have fully admitted their plan to create a mass casualty event in my home city – a dramatic plot to kill large numbers of innocent Hong Kong people. It was foiled by police, literally hours before it was due to take place.

Guess what?

The western mainstream media outlets have chosen not to cover the trial. So no one around the world is hearing about it.

Why not? Let's be honest here.

Most mainstream journalists covering Hong Kong and mainland China have abandoned journalism. They have become propagandists with an agenda to demonize China to justify a planned American war, and the trial doesn't fit that narrative.

But you know what? Journalism is too important to let these people kill it.

The truth is important. A lie is still a lie even if the whole world believes it, and the truth is still the truth if even just one person believes it.

So you and I have to step in and do that job. We are the media now.

by Nury Vittachi

Lai See(利是)

** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **

Every mainstream news agency was this week reporting that the European Union is using US$1.6 billion from seized Russian assets "to support Ukraine", focusing on "defence and reconstruction". But it's not true.

The small print of actual statement, not quoted by the media, shows that the European Union is taking the entire sum of money, rightfully belonging to the Russian people, for itself.

SELF-PAYMENT FACILITY

Ninety per cent of the cash actually goes to a fund known as the EPF. This technically stands for "European Peace Facility" but the name is the opposite of what it does: it is a weapons financing operation—for EU self-payment.

European countries take money from the EPC when they want reimbursement for arms and ammunition (often not the best quality) they have already sent to Ukraine.

The remaining ten per cent also goes to the European Union, directly to the EU budget. This money is also earmarked for war purposes, providing weapons for Ukraine to use against Russia.

MONEY 'FOR SUPPLY OF WEAPONS'

However, the EU has said that a fraction of the 10 per cent MAY be diverted to reconstruction if countries don’t want "their share" of the Russian cash used for military purposes.

This allows EU leader Ursula von der Leyen to claim that the money is for Ukraine to use for reconstruction when in fact it will be 95 to 100 per cent used for weapons and military expenses.

The details are clearly outlined in the 21 May European Union statement detailing the forthcoming use of the Russian money. Key sentence:

"In 2024, 90% will be devoted to the supply of military equipment through the assistance measures funded under the EPF and 10% for the EU budget."

The statement quotes EU official Věra Jourová: "This initiative not only aids Ukraine in its recovery but also underscores our commitment to upholding international law and justice." Her title is Vice-President for Values and Transparency.

LOSS OF TRUST

The EU move is fraught with danger. The European Union's population is just six per cent of the world, and many other regions and countries across the globe have expressed dismay at the use of the Russians' money in this way. Saudi Arabia, for example, warned that it would sell some or all of its European debt if the move went ahead, Bloomberg reported.

Other analysts have expressed concern that the EU move would gravely reduce trust in the west, and show the rest of the world that de-dollarization must be speeded up.

by Nury Vittachi