Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

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

Blog

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

Blog

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

2024-08-26 15:55 Last Updated At:05-06 18:57

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)

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

Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.

Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".

Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.

Trump's Colonial Playbook

On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.

Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."

Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.

America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.

The British Double Standard

Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.

The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.

Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.

Silence on Venezuela

After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.

Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."

The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.

Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.

The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.

Lo Wing-hung

Recommended Articles