America has its “woke” culture. Now, Hong Kong BNO holders in the UK stage their own awakening – no talk of pronouns, just a gut-punch truth that Britain's no white knight, but a cold-blooded backstabber.
The latest London march exposed it raw. Protesters ditched the China super-embassy rage for a straight-up BNO gripe blast. They tore into the UK government for jacking up permanent residency rules – over-the-bridge, yank-the-ladders style, pure ruthless opportunism. Folks hunkered down nearly five years face the boot at the finish line, despair hitting like a brick. Even those political-asylum "brothers" who fled here seethe, staring down 40-year settlement waits, finally chewing the "discarded pawn" pill.
London's anti-embassy march flips to BNO fury fest – protesters unleash "Stop Selling Out Hong Kongers" banner, howling betrayal at UK.
This marks the eighth march. The first seven zeroed in on blocking China's new embassy, mixing in Tibetan separatists, Uyghur activists, and Taiwan independence pushers – thick anti-China stench. But Britain played dead fish, dodging a veto clash with Beijing; plus, the fight never touched relocated Hong Kong folks, so crowds withered. Organizers flipped the script with a triple-threat ploy: on top of the embassy plan, they added mourning of Wang Fuk Court fire victims, and demanding no BNO settlement tweaks. Straight from Hong Kong's July 1st mega-march playbook – prime crowd-padding, and it delivered again.
Rock-bottom turnouts haunted prior rallies – mere hundreds. This one exploded past 3,000. Eyewitnesses spot the shift: most showed for locked-in BNO settlement rules, drowning out flag-waving "Liberate Hong Kong" diehards and radical "brothers". Ordinary arrivals flooded in, turning the whole thing into peak BNO whinge central.
Yellow media corners a 40-year-old marcher with her 11-year-old son – tears flowing, story screaming typical. She's logged nearly five UK years, settlement due next June, but the government spikes the rules at her doorstep – wildly unfair. New bar: three years' work over £12,570 salary. She scraped by on savings at first, zero job record – where's the proof? Leaving Hong Kong ripped her roots clean; no fallback now. Britain rewrote the game and dead-ended her.
Another 50-year-old BNO holder vents to yellow media: deadline mid-next year, but casual gigs meant shaky pay – half a year left, zero shot. No degree, English miles from B2 – doom sealed, rage boiling over.
Marchers beam pure UK-government hate via slogans: banners blast "Stop Betraying Hong Kongers" and "Keir Starmer, don't be a traitor". Bellies full of fury, they slam Britain as ruthless exploiters who use people up and toss them aside. Yellow media comments? Zero pity: "You asked for it" – one of them cuts deep: "UK suckered you fools, drained your cash, now kicks you out" – knife-sharp truth.
Beysides BNO complainers there were refugee-fled "brothers" – their mess hits deeper lows. Wanted man Chung Hon-lam pipes up: 40-year settlement slog awaits. Consultation papers spell it: refugees need 20 UK years; and 20 more years for those without entry permit. He ramps up, slamming Britain for "betraying and selling out Hong Kong people who sacrificed most" – the black-riot rap-sheet "brothers".
Fugitive Chung Hon-lam blasts from rally front: UK demands 40-year settlement drag for his refugee ilk – "selling out those who sacrificed most.”
Chung Hon-lam bolts post-flight, endures asylum bureaucracy meat-grinder – approval wrung out after torment, but he's the lucky holdout in Britain. The real wreckage: "brothers" limbo-bound for asylum, deportation shadow looming. They've gulped full "discarded pawn" acid – no shock they're teeth-gnashing UK haters at the march.
BNO holders or asylum-chasing "brothers" – all see Britain's real face now, eyes wide open. But the path forward? Murky fog. Awakening stings hard.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
The most consequential national security trial yet to come is also the one with the most unanswered questions — and at the centre of it is a man who almost made it out.
Monday (Feb 23) was "Renri" (人日) — the seventh day of the Lunar New Year, meant to be a day of celebration for all people. But for the 12 defendants in the "35+ Subversion Case," there was nothing to celebrate. The Court of Appeal dismissed all their appeals against both conviction and sentencing in full. Unless they push it all the way to the Court of Final Appeal, this case is done. That brings two of the three major national security cases to a close — the other being the Jimmy Lai trial. What remains is the Joshua Wong case, expected to go to trial around mid-year. Like Lai's, it reaches into the highest levels of American politics, and it will almost certainly expose a trove of behind-the-scenes dealings that will shake Hong Kong to its core. The trial is close enough that the details don't need spelling out here. But one mystery absolutely does: Wong was once Washington's darling — so why did he never make it out, while his co-conspirator Nathan Law did? An investigative report by American journalists cracked open the story.
Wong's trial is the last big national security case standing — and the most explosive one yet. How did he never make it out?
Wong's role in the Occupy Central movement and the 2019 unrest needs no introduction. In June last year, while already serving a prison term at Stanley Prison on sedition charges, he was arrested again and charged under the Hong Kong National Security Law with conspiracy to collude with foreign forces to endanger national security. His second pre-trial review at the Magistrates' Court came on 21 November last year, with the next hearing set for 6 March; the full trial at the High Court is expected to begin around mid-year. This case carries weight every bit as significant as the Jimmy Lai trial — the spotlight it commands will be enormous.
The Charges Are Grave
The prosecution alleges that between July and November 2020, Wong — together with Nathan Law and others yet to be identified — conspired in Hong Kong to solicit foreign governments and institutions to impose sanctions against the Hong Kong SAR and the People's Republic of China, and to seriously obstruct the government in enacting and enforcing its laws and policies. The charges carry a potential sentence of life imprisonment. What exactly Wong and Law did, and which foreign officials were involved, the prosecution will lay out in full when the trial begins.
The public has long asked some uncomfortable questions. Did Joshua Wong ever consider fleeing before or after the National Security Law came into force at the end of June 2020? If so, why did it never happen? Did the US government try to help him get out? An investigative report by two American journalists answered part of the puzzle — and sources familiar with the matter, when contacted by Hong Kong media, broadly confirmed what it said.
Wong Begged Washington for Help
The night before the National Security Law took effect, Wong reached out through a senator's adviser to appeal directly to President Trump for help. At the same time, he sent an email to then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, explicitly asking to be helped to "travel to the United States to seek political asylum, by whatever means necessary". That email tells you everything. Wong knew exactly how dangerous his situation had become — and he was betting his future on American goodwill.
Around the same time, Wong arranged to meet two officials from the US Consulate General in Hong Kong at St. John's Building, directly across the street from the consulate. He made clear he wanted to walk in and seek refuge. He was turned away on the spot. When Pompeo saw the email, he consulted with his staff and arrived at the same conclusion: letting Wong through the consulate doors was simply not an option — Washington feared Beijing would retaliate by forcing the US consulate in Hong Kong to close entirely.
State Department officials went further, exploring a covert plan to smuggle Wong out of Hong Kong by sea — routing him through Taiwan or the Philippines before eventually reaching the United States. That option was killed too, on the grounds that any such attempt would very likely be intercepted by Chinese authorities, triggering a diplomatic crisis. When the accounting was done, American interests won out — and Joshua Wong was coldly abandoned.
By that point, Nathan Law had already made it out. Seizing Pompeo's visit to London, Law met the Secretary of State privately and raised the question of rescuing Wong one more time — and was once again turned away without sympathy. In September 2020, Wong was arrested on sedition charges and imprisoned two months later. Any remaining window for escape had sealed shut.
Law Moved Fast — and Made It
Nathan Law is named as a co-conspirator in the charges against Wong — meaning that if arrested, they face the same jeopardy. But Law proved far more calculating than Wong. Shortly before the National Security Law took effect, he quietly slipped away, eventually confirming his presence in the United Kingdom on 13 July 2020. He even staged a moment of wistful sentiment, declaring: "With this parting, I do not yet know when I shall return... May glory come soon!" — words that, in the circumstances, could not have sounded more hollow.
Same charges, same case — but Law ran, and Wong didn't. One man made it out clean. The other is still paying the price.
Joshua Wong — sharp-witted all his life — took one step too many in trusting the Americans, and that delay cost him everything. The US government, in the name of "national interest," discarded him without hesitation. As his trial approaches, the reality is this: placing any further faith in American support would be the last illusion he can afford.
Lai Ting-yiu
