|
July 1, 2003 marks the sixth anniversary of Hong Kong's return to the motherland. On that day some people sang and danced in celebration of the anniversary, while others held a demonstration in streets. Such a contrast presents vividly the diversification of the Hong Kong society on one hand, but on the other, it shows clearly that Hong Kong remains still a place full of freedom and democracy. Practices in the past six years have irrefutably testified to this fact.
In today's Hong Kong, the easiest thing for one to do is to stage a demonstration, which might be disagreeable. If one is dissatisfied for any reason important or trifling, one may demonstrate, streamer in hand while shouting slogans. No wonder that some citizens in Hong Kong say disapprovingly that the city has almost reduced to "a metropolis of protests", which besmears its image in the world. A good many people, of course, take a different point of view that such a phenomenon rightly indicates Hong Kong has full freedom for people to air their opinions.
Nonetheless, many citizens are quite dissatisfied with those who decked out in black, holding a black flag for protests on the returning day. It can be well believed that only a handful of demonstrators are out of hostility towards Hong Kong's return to the motherland, while a considerable number of them just wanted to take the chance for venting dissatisfaction, especially for letting loose their resentment about economic difficulties and income drop. And a number of demonstrators were purely misled. The newspaper, which has always stood for "opposing China and making a mess of Hong Kong", once again spearheaded to instigate a demonstration. Its own reports laid bare the truth of misleading the common people.
Please read the following about a child's participation in the demonstration together with his father: A seven-year-old child who took part in the demonstration against the legislation of Article 23 said proudly, "I have seen a new page in the history. This demonstration represents the freedom of speech. I will tell my classmates that I have participated in the protest and experienced the moment in history." The pupil in the first-grade of a primary school appeared to be quite premature. He always stressed that it was through news on TV and papers that he had a rough idea about Article 23 of the Basic Law. If the bill of Article 23 was passed, the freedom of speech would be adversely affected and people couldn't speak in a carefree way, or they would be jailed. The child was by no means dragged on to make up the number. Instead, the reason for protest was to witness the moment in history. The child said that if he could make the HKSAR government not to pass the bill, he actually helped a lot of people. He added that early in 1999 he followed his father in the protest against the Hong Kong Estate Agents Authority.
No more dwelling on now. Such reports are a sheer misleading. Could a child of seven be able to make such remarks if not induced? Premature as he might be, he couldn't be so premature to an extent as such. Perhaps, it is a fact the child knew the Article 23 by TV and papers. However, the fact proves the negative effect exerted by some Hong Kong media in misleading the masses.
The so-called "group of democrats" in Hong Kong has for years been engaged in the vocation of distorting facts, fomenting social conflicts, inciting dissatisfaction and misleading the masses and the international opinion as well. Before 1997 they tried every means possible to stand in the way of Hong Kong's returning to the motherland; since the rejoining they have been racking their brains in opposing the Basic Law and interfering with the HKSAR government's administration in conformity with the law.
Misleading little children and blind men in demonstration shows that the "clique of democrats" is at their wit's end now. Also the days are numbered when they can still make use of the Article 23 to cheat the common people in Hong Kong. Once the legislation of the Article 23 is completed, people in Hong Kong will see no loss of the rights and freedom provided as before. The sky in Hong Kong remains blue as ever, and the sea is boundless as before.
What needs to be reminded of is that the "clique of democrats" lives on opposing the motherland and disordering Hong Kong, yet the misled demonstrators are doing a thing of wasting their own time without being paid or subsidized. Currently the most imperative task for Hong Kong to do is to revitalize its economy, while in future it is to develop its economy in a continuous way. For people in difficult plight now, they have the rights to protest. But for improving their economic status and raising the quality of life, it eventually depends on their own hard work.
(People's Daily July 7, 2003)
|
