IQ Test for Americans

Email received this morning:

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
United States Department of the Treasury
Over 130 million Americans will receive refunds as part of The White House program to jumpstart the economy. Our records indicate that you are qualified to receive the 2008 Economic Stimulus Refund.
The fastest and easiest way to receive your refund is by direct deposit to your checking/savings account. Please follow the link and fill out the form and submit before May 17th, 2008 to ensure that your refund will be processed as soon as possible.

etc., etc. Since I'm neither an American citizen nor a US taxpayer (who would want to be, considering the USA is one of only two countries in the world to tax its citizens on their worldwde income, even if they're non-resident?), it was easy for me to recognise this as an obvious phishing scam. But I wonder how many US taxpayers, eager to get their refund quickly, will fall for it and hand over their bank account details to a complete stranger?

The Race for the White House (geddit?)

Quote of the Day:

"Hillary Clinton ended Tuesday night with a big victory in West Virginia, showing once again that old, white, poor, uneducated people really don't like young, witty, urbane, well-educated black men. Quelle surprise."

--Chip Collis, How Obama WON Tuesday, in The Huffington Post (also known as Huffpost), the essential blog for anyone interested in American politics.

Another Huffpost quote today:

"7% of the voters in West Virginia voted for John Edwards. Faced with a black man and a white woman, these voters chose a white man who isn't running. And these are Democrats."

--RJ Eskow, Even The Racists Are Deserting Hillary. Eskow goes on to say, "The 'black candidate is unelectable' discussion is one Democrats usually hold in private. In public they're supposed to say :'If you won't vote for my opponent because of his race, I don't want your vote.' (Wink, wink.) Hillary broke that rule..." "To succeed in politics, you have to deal with ugly facts sometimes. Here's one ugly fact: Some voters won't vote for a black man. Here's another: Some of the same voters won't vote for a woman. It's foolish to think you can advance the rights of one group by inflaming prejudices against another. The best way to fight racism or sexism is to fight all prejudice."

The irony here is that Edwards, the "white man who isn't running", endorsed Obama, the black man who is, after the primary. Bye bye, Hillary.

Meanwhile, following up yesterday's post, two news snippets from the BBC:
"Nearly 15,000 people died and 25,000 are still trapped in the earthquake that hit China, official media say."
"The UN sharply increases to 2.5m its estimate of those severely affected by Cyclone Nargis in Burma."

Another BBC report on the dire conditions in Burma here. And a quote from another BBC report yesterday:

"In the former capital Rangoon, itself badly damaged by the cyclone, one man summed up the frustrations of a nation. 'When we had demonstrations last year the soldiers were everywhere,' he said. 'Where are they now?'"

A Tale of Two Disasters: Compare and Contrast

I've been critical of China often enough in this blog - most recently only yesterday - so it's only fair that I should give the Chinese government credit when they get something right. There could hardly be a greater contrast than that between the handling of two natural disasters: the Sichuan earthquake and the Burmese cyclone.

Within hours of Monday's deadly earthquake in Sichuan Province, which has killed at least 12,000 people so far and left possibly hundreds of thousands homeless, the Chinese government had rushed rescue teams into the area, and 50,000 troops are hard at work locating survivors and clearing blocked roads to enable supplies to reach the area. Prime Minister Wen Jiabao was quickly on the scene to demonstrate the central government's concern and assess the situation for himself. China has also welcomed offers of assistance from overseas, and journalists are apparently free to visit and report on the earthquake zone.

"We must treasure every second and do our utmost to save survivors," Wen is quoted as saying - not a message that appears to have reached Burma, where the callous clique of bandits in uniform that runs the country is still hindering relief efforts, almost two weeks after Cyclone Nargis swept over coastal communities, killing more than 34,000 people according to the latest official figures (probably grossly understated).

Although as many as 1.5 million people now face homelessmess and the threat of disease and starvation, the Burmese regime continues to deny visas to international aid experts and to confiscate relief supplies arriving in the former capital Rangoon (Yangon) - reportedly either diverting them or relabelling them to appear to be from the Burmese military. The long standing ban on foreign reporters (who might tell the truth about conditions in the country) is also still firmly in place, with the government seemingly committing more resources to enforcing it than to solving the problems reported on.

Some aid is trickling through, but so inadequate and tardy has been the official response to the disaster that even the mormally impeccably doiplomatic United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, rarely directly critical of UN member governments, has described it as "unacceptably slow".

Meanwhile Burma's military rulers, whose greed, corruption and mismanagement have achieved the rare feat - rivalled by Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe - of transforming a country rich in natural resources from one of the wealthiest in its continent to among the world's poorest, remain holed up in paranoid seclusion in their isolated slave-labour-built new capital Naypyidaw, at the opposite end of the country from the storm-struck Irrawaddy Delta, showing no signs of any genuine concern for the plight of their people.

So, is this a case of "China good, Burma bad"? Well, not quite - real life is seldom that black and white. The murderous Burmese junta's main trading partner, and strongest overseas backer, is China...

P.S. Immediately after posting this, I turned to Spike's blog to find him saying something very similar, with the added thought that the US Government's response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 more closely resembled Burma's than China's - lest we forget.

Making It Better:
China donations - Oxfam Hong Kong
Burma donations - Hong Kong Red Cross

Interesting Reading

"If file sharing is destroying the music industry, then how did Warner Music Group increase its sales in the first quarter 7 per cent to $989 million?"

From the latest issue of (Bruce Springsteen biographer) Dave Marsh's periodic email newsletter Rock & Rap Confidential (just linking those two genres is already an unorthodox move). Sign up for it here.

"The severity of Chinese repression in Tibet since [1959] is well-documented. There is severe repression of Tibetan Buddhism, which in 1997 was labeled as a “foreign culture” Virtually all classes in secondary and higher education in Tibet are taught in Chinese not Tibetan, resulting in a high drop-out rate among Tibetans. Urban development has generally benefited Chinese immigrants, large numbers of whom have moved to Tibet and who are now about 12% of the population in the Tibet Administrative Region. Tibetans are routinely detained for long periods without charge or sentenced to long prison sentences for peacefully advocating independence or maintaining links with the Dalai Lama. Torture and ill-treatment in detention is widespread. Freedom of expression is severely restricted. Peaceful political demonstrations are invariably broken up and their participants arrested. Tibetan culture is treated as inferior to Chinese culture, and most key posts in the government and the economy are held by Chinese. Those few Tibetans who are able to enter Chinese government service do so at the cost of alienation from their own people and culture. Tibet’s environment and natural resources are ruthlessly exploited in the interests of China."

Hong Kong's Law Society commissioned Senior Counsel Paul Harris, an expert in constitutional law, to write an article examining the legal basis of the case for Tibetan independence, then chickened out of publishing it. Fortunately maverick publisher (and well known campaigner for the rights of minority shareholders) David Webb displayed more testicular fortitude - you can read the whole article on his site.

How Global Is That?

You may not have noticed that yesterday was the Global Day of Prayer, with prayer gatherings in many countries, including one at the Hong Kong Stadium.

Strangely, for an event that claims to be global, only the world's 2.1 billion Christians appear to have been invited to the party. Missing from the invitation list were 1.5 billion Muslims, 900 million Hindus, 376 million Buddhists, 23 million Sikhs, 14 million Jews, 7 million Baha'is, 4.2 million Jains, 4 million Shintoists, 2.6 million Parsees, 600 thousand Rastafarians, and hundreds of millions of other faiths (figures from this site). Now, if you could only get all that lot praying together, you might even get me to join in.

Just horsing about

Headline from today's South China Morning Post:

"The government said yesterday it would not welcome anyone who "seeks to damage the solemnity" of the Olympic Games in Hong Kong."

Solemnity? Excuse me? We're talking about a bunch of people riding horses around here, not a funeral ceremony.

If the epithet fits, wear it

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
--Dr Samuel Johnson

News reports of Friday's Olympic torch relay in Hong Kong stated that some peaceful protesters were physically threatened by elements of the pro-Beijing rentacrowd supporting the relay. "Goons and thugs", anyone?

In Macau's torch relay on Saturday, the ratio of athletes to Beijing toadies (19 out of 120) was even lower than in Hong Kong.

This site has some interesting points to make about the whole kerfuffle:

* The Olympic torch relay is not an ancient Greek tradition, but originated as a publicity stunt for Nazi Germany in 1936.

At that time, Germany's ally Japan was preparing for its bloody invasion of China, which resulted in millions of Chinese deaths. Today the 1936 Games are mainly remembered for two things: Leni Riefenstahl's magnificently crafted propaganda films, and black American sprinter Jesse Owens making a nonsense of Hitler's theories of white racial superiority.

* The Chinese translation of “Olympic flame” has misinterpreted it as “Olympic sacred flame”.

This is psychologically significant because it makes any protest against the torch relay not a political act, but an act of sacrilege. So an atheist regime has God on its side ...

Running Out of Ideas

It seems appropriate that it should be raining on the day of Hong Kong's Olympic torch relay, which is kicking off as I write. Leaving aside the issue of human rights in China, public interest in the event has already been severely dampened by the yawn-inspiring selection of 120 runners chosen to carry the torch.

While no one would dispute the right of first and last runners Lee Lai-Shan and Wong Kam-Po to participate, some of the others between them are odd choices indeed. Sports people get less than half the slots, with past medal winners for Hong Kong in the Asian Games and (before 1997) Commonwealth Games being left out in favour of an ill-assorted bunch of clapped-out pop singers (apparently representing "culture", the other half of HK Olympic boss Timothy Fok's LegCo constituency), big company bosses and never-clapped-in politicians. It's rumoured that even the Donald wanted to take part, but his advisers warned him (correctly) that this would be seen as one ego-trip too far.

Imagine you have trained your butt off to do your best for Hong Kong in your chosen sport, then find the Olympic torch being carried instead by the likes of grumpy old man Tsang Hin-Chi, whose only known exercise routine is to open his mouth to say "Yes" to Beijing and chide as unpatriotic those who disagree with him.

The reason given for selecting all these non-sporting figures is apparently to "represent the various sectors of the community". Apart from the glaring omission of major sections of the public (any trade union leaders? any democrats?), if the government really wanted to involve the community, they would have staged the relay yesterday when the community was on holiday and people could come out to show their support, not today when they're all back at work.

"Bah, humbug!" is the only appropriate response to this whole mismanaged event.

The Way You Do the Things You Do

Immediately following the horrific train accident in China a couple of days ago, Chinese authorities immediately dismissed two senior officials of the railway, then announced that an inquiry would be held to determine the cause of the crash.

Wouldn't it make more sense to hold the inquiry first to determine who was at fault before taking action against anyone? And if they already have a scapegoat to carry the can, why do they need an inquiry?

Meanwhile, following today's disastrous bus crash which saw (at last count) 18 people on their way to church here in Hong Kong come face to face with God sooner than they expected, transport officials insisted the road is safe because they've put up plenty of warning signs telling motorists not to exceed the speed limit. Yeah, knowing Hong Kong drivers, that would really stop them speeding ...

Made in China

You may think this is exaggerated, but as so often in life, reality outstrips fiction: the BBC reports that Tibetan flags used by anti-Olympic protesters may have been made in China.

Most Olympic protests have focused on Tibet, but the South Korean leg of the torch relay highlighted another stain on China's grubby human rights record - the forcible return of thousands of refugees who have fled repression and starvation in North Korea to a regime which is known to imprison and even execute them on their return.

Suffer Little Children

"What does it mean to speak of child protection", asked Pope Benedict on his recent US visit, "when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?"

It means that millions of people worldwide, unlike an alarmingly high percentage of Catholic priests, are able to enjoy erotica without being inspired to sexually abuse young children. The Church is supposed to aspire to higher standards, not blame its failings on society's temptations.

Stealing from the slightly richer to give to the poor

Trailer on TV for a coming current affairs programme (maybe the Pearl Report, but I wasn't really paying that much attention; this is from memory):

"Hong Kong's health system is breaking down under the pressures of an aging population and the rising cost of new medical technology. Who will pay to reform it, if not the middle classes?"

Er, the rich?

Uh-oh, what am I saying, forget I said that, don't even think about it.
This is Hong Kong.

China: a free country?

Other bloggers such as Spike have already criticised the Standard's absurd piece by one Mary Ma attacking plans for protests against the Hong Kong leg of the Olympic torch relay. Leaving aside the missing apostrophes throughout, starting with the heading, (which could be blamed on the paper being unable to afford a competent sub-editor), what does Ms Ma have to say?

In an article that could have (and possibly did) come straight out of the Chinese government's propaganda machine, Ms Ma come up with some classic lines:

"The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China ... is selfishly promoting its cause at the expense of an event treasured by everyone."

How selfish to put the rights of a billion people ahead of those of a few hundred people running and tossing balls around!

"Has anyone in the alliance stopped to consider other peoples [she really doesn't like apostrophes much, does she?] right to being treated with dignity?"

Like giving people sentenced to death the dignity of a fair trial first? Or giving 22 million people in Taiwan the dignity of being allowed to choose their own future without having missiles pointed at them by bullies who claim to be their own kin? Or giving Tibetan monks the dignity of being allowed to carry pictures of their respected religious leader without being arrested? Or giving journalists the dignity of being able to perform their job (as guaranteed by the Chinese constitution) without government interference or arrest? Or,going back a bit, giving unarmed protesters in 1989 the dignity of being able to demonstrate peacefully without being brutally attacked and killed by their own country's troops?

Yet perhaps it is too easy to snipe at China's numerous blatant human rights abuses (and no, I am not pretending that the West is perfect by comparison, as my past comments here on other matters show). Despite all this, the fact is that the majority of Chinese people today enjoy greater freedom than at any time in their country's history. China, after all, emerged from feudalism as recently as 1911, only to go through decades of warlordism, foreign invasion, civil war and Maoist dictatorship, culminating in the madness of the Cultural Revolution.

At the dawn of the 1980s, Chinese people had few choices in anything - perhaps they could choose to wear identical outfits in either grey or blue. They could not choose what to buy - there was almost nothing in the shops anyway. They could not even choose to marry without permission from their work unit (which they also did not choose).

Deng's Open Door policy changed all that. Today Chinese people are free to choose their own job, start a business, decide what to wear, what and where to study, travel or study overseas, marry whom and when they choose. They can make money and decide how to spend it. They can build or buy their own home. While not everyone has yet benefited from the changes, it is easy to forget how much things have been transformed in China in a single generation.

Chinese people still do not enjoy many of the freedoms taken for granted elsewhere: the right to plan their family; to practice their religion freely; free access to information. Yet there has truly been a quiet revolution in China over the past thirty years. The problem is how to ensure that this process continues on the right path. China saw hosting the Olympics as part of that path to modernity; facing criticism and protest also comes with the territory.

Living on the edge

As well as the UK, my recent trip took me to Prague for several days. Prague is amazing - simply one of the world's most beautiful cities anywhere. Many cities have attractive old centres, from Stockholm to Nara (and not forgetting our near neighbour Macau), but nowhere else have I seen such a massive concentration of beautifully preserved historic buildings over so large an area. Every corner you turn brings you to another architectural gem, some Gothic but most baroque in style.


The city has a lot more to offer visitors than just great architecture: numerous classical concerts every day; an array of museums varying from the xublime (Mozart Museum) to the ridiculous (Museum of Sex Machines), from the educational (Museum of Communism) to the disgusting (Museum of Mediaeval Torture Devices); some good restaurants; and of course, some of the world's finest beer, from the people who invented pilsner.

One thing I found interesting was that, being British, I had grown up during the Cold War thinking of everything east of the former Iron Curtain as "Eastern Europe", and therefore out of the mainstream of European life. The Czechs, however, do not view themselves as East Europeans at all, but as living in Middle Europe, at the very heart of European civilisation - which, both geographically and historically, they are:



Now, apart from being an interesting study in varying perceptions, what significance does this have to us here in Hong Kong? Only that, while we see ourselves as being in a pivotal position within the dynamic Asia Pacific Region, from the perspective of Beijing, far to the north, we probably appear to be way out on the southern fringes, and therefore relatively unimportant in the greater scheme of things.

I'm Dreaming of a White Easter

No posts recently as I've been on a trip to the UK. It should be the beginning of spring there, but I woke up on Easter Day to this:


As spring approaches, a reminder to English girls: midriff-baring fashions and a beer belly are not a good combination.
P.S. If you think I'm exaggerating, read this. (Thanks, Fumier.)

For Queen and Country

Proving that Gordon Brown is as much in love with superficial gestures as his predecessor, the latest daft idea to come out of Britain's New Labour image factory is for teenagers to swear an oath of allegiance to Queen and country. While citizens of more conformist nations such as the USA may enjoy such exercises, I have always regarded it as one of the great benefits of being British that one is free to decide one's own allegiances, including total opposition to the monarchy if one so wishes.

If the British government really wants Britons to be proud of their country, they could start by taking their collective head out of George W. Bush's backside and standing up for traditional British decency against the Bush regime's illegal wars and use of torture and kidnapping.

Don't forget to tune in for tomorrow's exciting episode...

Whenever there is a firework show in Hong Kong, which seems to be about three times a year these days, both local Chinese channels carry it live. No complaints about that - not everyone can get out to see it in person - but why the hell do they need to have several halfwit local presenters sitting there adding an inane unnecessary commentary? Especially as the show is already coordinated with a selection of music which makes a perfectly acceptable soundtrack by itself.

What is there to say about a firework show anyway? Oh look, there'a red one! Now a green one! Now a big bunch of sparkly whirly things! Just shut up and give our ears a rest!

I've had a go at ATV's professionaliusm recently, so it's TVB's turn today. On one of their innumerable Chinese period costume drama series last week, one episode ended with a man picking up a rock and standing over another man lying asleep, evidently with the intention of dropping the rock on him to crush his skull. Cut to credits...

Now the cliffhanger ending is a staple device of drama, from the old cowboy Saturday movie serials to Doctor Who. The idea obviously is to get the audience intrigued enough that they will tune in next time to see what happens to the character left facing imminent doom.

Well, that's the idea everywhere except Hong Kong. So what do TVB do next? Immediately follow up with a trailer for the following episode. An opportunity to ratchet up the drama level further? Well, no - they show the would-be killer changing his mind, dropping the rock on the ground and walking away. So, no need to watch that episode then. Idiots!

Post-Primary Plurality

I caught a brief excerpt on TV yesterday of Hillary Clinton speaking after her apparent comeback in the latest Democratic party primaries (though closer examination of the statistics shows that she has very little chance of beating Barack Obama to the party momination). In it, she said, "...at the end of the day we're going to be the nominee."

I'm puzzled by her use of the plural here. Is that a royal we, I wonder, from one who sometimes appears to see herself as the anointed future Queen of America? Or a "Bill and I" we? Or a "me and my team" we?

The Huffington Post points to a survey showing that either Clinton or Obama could beat John McBush (I call McCain that because he wants to perpetuate many of Bush's mistakes, especially the tragic and illegal war in Iraq), but by winning a different set of states. However, they don't examine the scenario of a joint Obama/Clinton ticket, which cannot be ruled out. After all, as this BBC headline from 27 February - "Democratic candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton attack each other's campaign tactics in their latest debate" - suggests, their differences are more over style (and conflicting egos) than policies.

Hello My Bai Ling

Another South China Morning Post headline:

Actress Bai Ling fined for disturbing peace
12:15pm Actress Bai Ling, arrested last month on suspicion of shoplifting at Los Angeles International Airport, was fined US$200 (HK$1,557) on Wednesday after pleading guilty to disturbing the peace.

AP has the story here.

I am puzzled by the media's regular use of the word "actress" to describe Bai Ling. Has anyone ever actually seen her act in anything, except a provocative manner designed to draw attention to herself?

What took you so long?

That's the only possible response to this news in today's South China Morning Post:

"Timely rethink on urban renewal strategy
The Urban Renewal Authority is considering giving residents a say in the fate of their old neighbourhoods, rather than dictating a redevelopment plan to them."

One can only hope they apply this to existing projects, not just to future ones, before every last remnant of this city's soul is eradicated.