Jackie Chan, Gao Zhisheng, and the true meaning of bravery

Most people wouldn't put "cowardice" and Jackie Chan in the same sentence. Chan's physical bravery - he does his own movie stunts, to the point where no one will even insure him - is fairly well-known. However, there is more to bravery than risking injury on a movie set. When it came to the most important stage he has ever held, Jackie Chan's bravery left him, in a way Gao Zhisheng's bravery did not.

On Hainan Island, Chan was asked about the Communist censors who banned his latest film. As Communist Premier Wen Jiabao sat in the audience, Chan veered into an anti-freedom rant (Telegraph, UK):

"I'm not sure if it is good to have freedom or not," he said. "I'm really confused now. If you are too free, you are like the way Hong Kong is now. It's very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic."

He added: "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we are not being controlled, we'll just do what we want."

Theories abound on Chan's pro-CCP line: buttering up to the CCP to get his next film OKed (The Useless Tree), an elitist's unvarnished view of poor Chinese (John Pomfret), etc. Whatever the cause, it was pretty clear that Chan knew what side of the bread was buttered. He placed his financial interests above truth, freedom, and his fellow Chinese. It was painful to see.

Meanwhile, miles away, in an undisclosed prison, Gao Zhisheng continued (and continues) to suffer at the hands of the Communist police.

Like Chan, Gao was at the top of his profession in the eyes of the CCP - in Gao's case, the legal profession. Like Chan, Gao was faced with a choice: continue following the party line or accept the truth about the regime and fight for justice. Unlike Chan, Gao took the latter course.

Gao started to wonder why the regime was so cruel to Falun Gong practitioners and Christians who refused to put the Party between themselves and their God. Worse (for the regime), he started to wonder publicly why this happened. In time, he became one of the leading defenders (legally, politically, and vocally) for the victims of Communist persecution.

As one would expect, it didn't take long for him to join them.

Gao's family managed to escape earlier this year (National Review); when the CCP discovered this, Gao disappeared. To this day, no one knows where he is, how badly he has been hurt, or even if he is still alive.

We do know this, however: Gao Zhiseng is a true hero. He risked his practice, his reputation, his career, his livelihood, and even his life to help the persecuted and speak truth to power.

Jackie Chan, by contrast, played to the crowd, basked in the applause, and risked nothing. As John Pomfret notes in particular, Chan was merely parroting the line the CCP-dependent "elite" have been using for some time:

My reaction, however, is this: Chan is just saying what a lot of other rich Chinese feel. In the 20 years since Tiananmen, Chinese society has changed enormously. One of the most astounding ways has been in the return of a class society and in the disdain with which China's rich view China's poor. When Chan was saying Chinese need to be "controlled," to be sure, he was speaking about the poor. He didn't have to say it, But that's what the audience at Boao heard and that's why they cheered him on. Anyone who has conversations of depth with members of China's elite has heard this argument before. "The quality of the average Chinese is too low," the line goes. (Zhongguoren de suzhi tai di le.) "So of course we can't have full freedom."

Of course, the elite have become increasingly free. But they also increasingly rely on the instruments of state to maintain those freedoms and to maintain their advantages over China's hoi polloi.

Gao Zhisheng once belonged to the same elite, but he saw through the veneer. That's what makes him so dangerous to the regime, and so heroic to the rest of us. Gao Zhisheng refused to be bought by the Chinese Communist Party.

Becuase of this, future generations will remember Gao Zhisheng long after Jackie Chan retires, his film company goes under, and his films gather dust on Blockbuster shelves. Jackie Chan acts bravely on the silver screen; Gao Zhisheng embodies genuine bravery in real life. Once again, this week revealed that Gao Zhisheng is the true hero; Chan just plays one on TV.

Hong Kong and the Beijing bounceback

Here in the United States, talk of a "bounce" was centered on the Republican and Democratic conventions. In Hong Kong, however, it was a "Beijing bounce" that overawed the political culture. In theory, a surge of "patriotism" from the Communist Olympiad would lead to smashing pro-Beijing victories in Hong Kong's Legislative Council (half the seats are elected by the people, the other half by "functional constituencies," i.e., group designed to ensure a pro-Communist majority).

However, like nearly everything else about the Games, the intended effect was nowhere to be found (BBC). Pro-democracy candidates won 60% of the vote (again - BBC) a majority of the elected seats (again), and even took a couple of the functionals (again). The result was so shocking that the city had its own Dewey-defeats-Truman moment, courtesy of the Hong Kong Standard. So, here, even in a city under Communist control with limited liberty, the Communists' Olympic game plan went awry.

Things have been no better outside Communist China. Japan is still concerned over the Communist military (Japan Times); Communist espionage in Canada continues to be front-page news (Ottawa Citizen) and Europe (London Telegraph); businesses around the world are having second thoughts about using Communist China as an export platform (Washington Post); the Long Arm of Lawlessness continues to rankle in New York (Epoch Times); and even the Communists' claim to Taiwan was turned against them by Congressman Elton Gallegly, who cleverly used it to demand the regime make good on $260 billion in Nationalist Chinese debt (Washington Times).

Even elsewhere inside Communist China, things are less than what the cadres had expected: protests in Hunan (Epoch Times), a Paralympiad that merely highlights how terrible the regime treats the disabled (Radio Free Asia via Epoch Times and the Washington Post), Sichuan earthquake victims demanding to know what happened to aid promised them (Sound of Hope via Epoch Times), soaring inflation (Epoch Times), and a teenage girl beaten by police (Epoch Times).

About all the Communists can do is declare war on the German press (Epoch Times) and try to divert attention to its space program (BBC), although the Korean colony had a good weekend (One Free Korea).

Still, the big news is in the former British colony. The Communists have now had over a decade to try and wear down and overwhelm the Hong Kong democrats - once united as the Democratic Party and now split among several parties. Yet the regime has always failed. This was their best chance. They had the urbane Donald Tsang as Chief Executive instead of the deeply unpopular Tung Chee-hwa; they had years of building goodwill with democratic nations that should know better; and, of course, they had the Olympics.

In the end, though, it got them nothing in Hong Kong. The voters refused to be seduced by Tsang, or the Games, or anything else. In the one place where democracy was allowed to live - for the express purpose of dying so the Communists could showcase the body to the rest of China - it has continued to survive because the people of Hong Kong refuse to let it expire.

The people of Hong Kong have shown uncommon bravery, compassion, and concern for their fellow man at the ballot box. They live a quiet heroism the cadres fear, and the free world must not ignore (including certain bloggers who usually focus on rural unrest).

Open Letter to Maurice Strong

Dear Mr. Strong,

I have read you column in Macleans yesterday evening, and I must confess that I found it remarkable - in its deep denial of the truth, servility to the Communist regime that hosts and protects you, and utter lack of recognition of how the free world thinks and acts. With any luck, you may read this and come to see your egregious errors. Even in the more likely possibilities that you remain unmoved by this (or unaware of it), others who have read your column may see this as well so that they may not fall prey to your long-winded illusions.

The first of which is your notion that the restrictions placed upon the Chinese people are "minimal." People of faith through the land you call home suffer far more than "minimal" restrictions on their right to practice their religion (Boycott 2008 and Epoch Times). Nor would attorney Gao Zhisheng, who has been imprisoned and tortured simply because he asked for such "minimal" restrictions to cease (Epoch Times). I would also refer you to the relatives of the Tiananmen massacre victims (See also Pajamas Media).

This is a truth that is recognized throughout the world, and neither your attempts to minimize it nor your subsequent descent into moral relativism can explain it away. Even among the center-left in the free world, where your criticisms of democratic nations are most well-received, the step you take towards dismissing the abuses of the Chinese Communist Party is simply not taken (Boycott 2008 and Epoch Times). Even the most virulent opponents of American foreign policy, such as The Progressive, make clear that, in their words: "This is not to say that Bush’s human rights abuses are equal to China’s." Thus the notion you imply and hope to sell to the free world is in fact rejected across the political spectrum here (to see the political right's response, if you wish, I refer to the Washington Examiner).

Having failed to understand our politics, you move on to miss economics. To claim that Communist China is "utilizing the methods of capitalism" without a functioning rule of law or genuine property rights is to completely misunderstand the term. "Capitalism" - or, to be more precise, a free market economy - does not exist without genuine property rights, and as any rural village citizen could tell you (if they felt safe enough to do so), genuine property rights do not exist in Communist China. Neither does the rule of law, although if you perhaps attempted to earn a profit in Beijing rather than hold down a United Nations sinecure you would probably be more aware of that.

Your discussion of "climate change" is also flawed. The idea that "those who have contributed most to the problem of climate change must take the lead" sounds wonderful, but does nothing to address the fact that exempting Communist China from any post-Kyoto agreement (or limiting its impact on it) will do nothing to impact carbon emission now that Communist China is the largest carbon emitter on Earth. To further use the issue to rant against "the wasteful and indulgent appetites of the rich and their pre-emption of a disproportion of the world's resources" is particularly brazen given that your friends in the CCP elite exercise these indulgences and pre-emptions with far more gall and self-absorption than anyone in the free world (outside of its criminal element) would even dare.

Moving on to your historical errors, I am curious as to how the people of East Turkestan and Tibet would react to your assertion that "China's territorial disputes with its neighbours have been confined to differences over their boundaries rather than attempts to occupy or annex them." Not that any Tibetans or East Turkestanis are allowed to speak freely on this matter, thus you can resort to the typical Communist propaganda on Tibet that is justified by nothing but Nazi lies. Then again, that isn't the only time the Communists have looked to the Nazis for inspiration (Small Dead Animals).

Not that your account of recent history is much better. Your assertion of Communist China's acceptance of the "differences that exist" between Hong Kong and the mainland can only come from someone unwilling to pay attention to the events of the last decade there.

I could not help but note several other issues you do not mention: the Communist aid and comfort to the brutal Sudanese regime (Epoch Times and Washington Post), and Beijing's Korean colony (One Free Korea). I was particularly intrigued by your decision to ignore the latter, as you have been the United Nations' special envoy on the subject for many years. Your silence is deafening.

The rest of your column is standard propaganda from expatriates, but I am compelled to point out this particular nonsense for what it is:

Uninformed and ideologically biased critics of China should ask themselves why it is that the majority of Chinese today are better off and better satisfied than ever, why more overseas Chinese are returning to China, and why more foreigners are enjoying conditions of life here that make them want to stay, even if it involves changing their employment to do so.

I can do more than ask myself these questions, I can actually answer them. The Chinese people may claim to be "better off and better satisfied than ever," but one wouldn't have to go far beyond Beijing to see that this is little more than Communist propaganda (in fact, just spending some time with the legions of appellants/petitioners risking arrests and torture should do the trick, but if you prefer, try Hanyuan, Taishi, or Shanwei).

As for "more overseas Chinese are returning to China," there are likely several reasons, but one of them has to be the extension of the Communist Long Arm of Lawlessness into the free world to intimidate exiles into silence. A brave few refuse to succumb to the mobs (Epoch Times), but such bravery is not common in the human condition. I'm sure many Chinese who would prefer freedom abroad to repression at home are deciding that repression abroad is no better.

Your assertion about foreigners is best answered by Ethan Gutmann's Losing the New China, in which he describes the painful manner in which expatriates are compromised ethically and financially by the regime.

I will acknowledge that your particular reasons for remaining in Beijing, which may have more to do with avoiding a certain inquiry into Iraq's Oil-for-Food program than anything else, have probably blinded you to this reality.

In short, your column managed to get international politics, economics, and history wrong in several areas. As such, I can certainly understand why you could not fathom the anger in the free world over Communist China's behavior (Asian-Pacific Post, Between Heaven and Earth, Boycott 2008, Epoch Times, From On High, National Review Online, Washington Post). Not even those willing to enjoy the Olympic Games can suspend disbelief as you have on the Communist regime (Washington Post).

As I mentioned in the opening paragraph, I do hope that you see this and that it may open your mind. If so, you might want to consider the radio broadcasts from Reporters Without Borders (Boycott 2008 and the Epoch Times). Otherwise, I can at least hope that those who read your error-prone column will also read this and avoid the errors you have made.

Yours truly,
D.J. McGuire
China e-Lobby

And so it begins . . .

Today's post will be the last before the Opening Ceremonies in Beijing. I will neither watch nor post on the Communist propaganda bonanza, but news on the periphery - like the treatment of protesters, media, and/or athletes who refuse to follow the script - will get the due attention.

The International Olympic Committee is doing all it can to make lemonade out of lemons. Jacques Rogge even went so far as to say nice things about the air in Beijing, all evidence to the contrary (BBC and the Washington Post). The cadres themselves are making certain there are no "disruptions" (Epoch Times) - to the point of tricking petitioners into thinking their complaints would actually be heard so it would be easier to arrest them (One Free Korea), keeping out foreigners who would have brought up issues like Darfur (Washington Times), having their puppets in Hong Kong keep exiled dissident Yang Jianli out of the city (Washington Post), and, of course, keeping all current jailed dissidents under lock, key, and boot (Boycott 2008). Their brutal assault on two reporters in occupied East Turkestan is still generating outrage (Boycott 2008), but odds are by this time tomorrow the only where you'll still read about that will be this quarter.

Foreign leaders are making their way to Beijing as I write this (National Review Online), as are of course, the various sponsor representatives and other starry-eyed would-be investors. I would advise them to mind the food (BBC) and (for the guys) any surprisingly easy offers of companionship (World Net Daily). Meanwhile, the regime will have its circus to make the Chinese people think the world loves the CCP (Epoch Times), and given that the Chinese people have been browbeaten with this meme for years already (Washington Post), odds are the CCP will achieve what it so dearly wanted out of these Games.

After the party's over, the rest of the world will go back to swallowing the same "engagement" Kool-aid, best seen on the utter lack of accountability demanded of Beijing for the antics of its Korean colony (Epoch Times). I'm not so sure the Chinese people will feel the same once the bill comes due.

The egdes are fraying

With less than three weeks to go until the Propaganda Exhibit begins, the cadres are hard at work making sure the tapestry of the nation is on perfect display, but there is still some significant fraying at the edges - largely due to the Communists' efforts themselves, much like repeated vacuuming can damage a carpet (OK, maybe that's just my carpet, but I digress.

The Harmonious Society Department has been hard at work repressing media (Boycott 2008, Epoch Times, and the Washington Times), but as one would expect, the media is making their unhappiness plain, defeating the purpose of the initial restrictions. Meanwhile, a slew of arrests have turned the pre-Olympic buildup into ongoing accounts of the police state (Between Heaven and Earth, Epoch Times, Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard). All of this was before the embarrassing order barring Mongolians and Africans from Beijing bars during the Games (Asia News and World Net Daily) - perhaps Robert Mugabe is exempted (London Telegraph). Then there are the land seizures (BBC) and the bans on foreign entertainers (Int'l Herald Tribune).

Even the "normal" parts of the Olympics (athletics, commerce, and the notion of worldly reconciliation) are hitting snags. The cadres are being exposed as medal-hungry brutes (BBC), commerce-killing paranoids (Washington Times), and Taiwan-hating radicals who have even managed to alienate their friends in Kuomintang (Taipei Times).

Still, as much trouble as the Olympics have been, it's nothing compared to non-Olympic issues.

The cadres are resorting to outright bribes to quite parents of earthquake victims (Epoch Times). The people of Macau and Hong Kong continue to resist one-country, one-and-a-half-systems (Epoch Times). The World Trade Organization (of all people) insists that globalization be a two-way street (BBC and Washington Post).

Even foreign policy issues - long the crutch upon which cadres and appeasers have leaned - are turning on the regime. An espionage scandal straight out of a bad spy novel hits Britain (Times of London); the Long Arm of Lawlessness continues to alienate New Yorkers (Epoch Times); and even the Korean colony is getting serious blowback (One Free Korea).

Whether or not these will all combine to disrupt or detract from the Olympics is unclear (not that I'd bet on it), but it is fairly certain that these will continue to give the cadres headaches long after the "triumphant" Games turn into an avalanche of corruption.

The ugliness of naked force . . .

. . . was on full display both in Communist China and it's Korean colony today.

The countdown to the Beijing Games continues with more nail biting (Boycott 2008) - and deportations of anyone the Communists think might cause a problem (Washington Post). Communist interference with dissidents and opponents extends from Hong Kong (Epoch Times) to New York (Epoch Times) and even into orbit (well, sort of - Boycott 2008 and Epoch Times). Meanwhile the Stalinist regime shot and killed a tourist from South Korea (BBC, CNN, and One Free Korea), even as the democratic South softened its policies toward it (BBC and CNN).

What brings this all together is the context. Communist China is preparing for a propaganda bonanza courtesy of the Games, but it can't seem to stop its repressive and criminal behavior. Its Korean colony, albeit for different reasons, has a similar opportunity with the world community - and it chose to shoot dead one of the very people who represents that opportunity.

Thus the basic nature of these regimes are on display for the rest of the world to see. Who will open their eyes? Who will keep them closed?

When nationalism goes awry (and what it will mean)

The Chinese Communist Party has come to rely on radical nationalism as its regime's raison d'etre for nearly two decades. It is their only response to outrages like poor export control (Epoch Times), questions about its ties to corrupt and cruel dictators (like, say Fidel Castro - Washington Times), and especially the appalling brutality against its own people (Epoch Times) and the occupied nations (BBC and the Washington Times). The Communists' only answer is to insist that they are defending Chinese pride and honor against pernicious outsiders, and that all who disagree are enemies of the Chinese nation. So one can imagine what the reaction has been to the newest political disaster in Hong Kong, where the local democrats actually managed to outflank the cadres on the nationalism issue.

It all began when the Communist-appointed leader of the city, Donald Tsang, decided to make seventeen political appointments to his staff, on the notion that "political appointees would provide more accountable government than bevies of civil servants" (BBC). Local democrats seized on that fairly quickly:

The obvious problem with the theory, pointed out by Hong Kong's feisty democratic camp, is that without proper elections, there is no mechanism for getting rid of ministers and none has yet taken responsibility for anything. Instead, say the critics, the appointees are government loyalists who get in the way of professional managers at the expense of taxpayers.

At this point, it's still a normal (well, normal for HK) argument between the democrats and the Communists over political power, freedom, and accountability. Then things took a very ominous turn for the cadres (emphasis added):

The pan-democratic opposition mounted a concerted campaign, questioning the opaque nature of the appointment process, the US$17,000 (£8,600) to US$28,600 monthly salaries being paid to allies of the chief executive, and the new staffers' claimed loyalty to Hong Kong.

The most prominent new appointee, Greg So, is deputy chairman of the pro-Beijing political party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB). Alongside his Hong Kong identity and Chinese nationality, he also holds a Canadian passport.

The question was raised: How patriotic can Mr So be if he has kept his foreign nationality? It then came to light that most of the new appointees held dual nationality.

For the Communists, this was an absolute nightmare. One of their lead propagandists in Hong Kong was exposed as what we would call a "dual citizen" - giving the democrats to the chance to accuse him and his fellow cadre-blessed pols as having divided loyalties. Even worse, the democrats actually won the argument:

The government mishandled the affair from the start - refusing to reveal the salaries on offer only to be forced into a humiliating apology and full disclosure.

On the nationality issue, it first stated that the Basic Law, Hong Kong's constitution, did not require deputy ministers to relinquish second passports. Then it refused to reveal who did or did not have extra passports.

Finally, public pressure forced most of the new appointees to say they would give up their foreign citizenship, to "prove" their patriotism.

So not only did the cadres have to hear accusations of being unpatriotic, they had to respond to them and alleviate them. In other words, after the democrats claimed the Communist-backed appointees weren't fully patriotic, the appointee ceded the point and changed policy.

One can easily see how this could be disastrous for Beijing. It wasn't outside forces who were damaging the Middle Kingdom; nor was it angry dissidents who were dividing the Chinese people. The Hong Kong cadres themselves were caught without sufficient patriotism, and even worse, the dissident-democrats were the ones who exposed them and grabbed the flag for themselves.

As word of this spreads, the regime will find itself on the defensive on the one issue that is essential to its survival. In the long run, that could bring closer the day when the Chinese people rise up and take their country back.

In the short run, however, we can expect from Beijing more repression at home (Boycott 2008), more historical justification what is both ahistorical and unjustifiable (Times of London), more suspicion towards "outsiders" (Boycott 2008), and more overseas intimidation (Epoch Times). Of course, the anti-American policies that have defined Communist China's foreign policy for years will also continue.

The free world must be prepared to ride out this storm and band together to contain, isolate, and undermine the Communist regime. That means a recognition that international "improvements" with Beijing are superficial at best (BBC), and that disputes am0ng ourselves must be minimized (Washington Post and Washington Times). America and her democratic allies will never be secure until China is free.

News of the Weekend (May 17-19)

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State forced to admit Communist Chinese arms in terrorists' hands: The opening statement of John Negroponte to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (Uyghur Human Rights Project) is chock-full of the usual "engagement" nonsense, but after questioning from Senators not named by the Taipei Times, Negroponte had to acknowledge "concern about Chinese weapons or Chinese-designed weapons showing up in some of these battle areas, be it Iraq or Afghanistan" (emphasis added). He also said he raised the issue with the cadres last week. Is the Administration prepared to do more if this continues?

Another day, another ally thrown under the bus: If the Administration policy toward "another Chinese province" (a.k.a. North Korea) is any indication, the cadres are free and clear on arming terrorists. Just as South Korea is finally beginning to focus on the Stalinist regime's horrendous treatment of the people of northern Korea, the United States has resumed food aid (BBC, Washington Post, and the Washington Times), due in part to the Singapore Surrender. Of course, Japan is quite used to this sort of thing (Washington Post).

Zimbabwe got its Communist arms after all, thanks in part to the South African navy (which secretly refueled the Communist Chinese vessel - Sunday-Herald, Scotland), Angola, and the Congo Republic (a.k.a. Congo-Brazzaville).

How the rest of the world views the Communist Olympiad: Canadian human rights groups, joined by two-time Olympic figure skating silver medalist Elvis Stojko, call for the Communists to stop abusing their own people - and for the rest of us to avoid the Games if they don't (Epoch Times). Meanwhile, Patrick Sherwen (Citywire via UHRP) discusses the effect of the bad publicity on foreign investment in Communist China (sadly, its' not much).

News from the occupied nations (Tibet and East Turkestan): The Tibetan government-in-exile responds to the latest Communist propaganda (TibetNet via Uyghur American Association); Mansoor Ijaz laments the plight of East Turkestan, although his assertion that Tibet has done "comparatively well under Communism" is not shared here (UHRP).

One-country, one-and-a-half systems rolls on: Hong Kong now has a "blacklist" of individuals who will not be allowed into the city at the Communist regime's behest (Radio Free Asia via Epoch Times).

Enlightened Comment of the Day: Gordon Chang takes the prize for his explanation of the Communists' openness on the massive earthquake ("the country's leaders had little to lose" - New York Sun via UHRP) and how it will likely disappear as it becomes clear that "(p)eople died and others were injured because they were in, on, or near substandard structures that were bound to fall down." Making Chang's point for him were CNN and Britain's Guardian (h/t Boycott 2008). If any of this extended to the numerous nuclear plants in the vicinity of the quake (Times of London), this could be a tremendous backlash against the Communists.

Runner-up on ECOD: The fellow who wrote this detailed analysis of Communist China's "holistic censorship regime" (for obvious reasons, (s)he chose not to reveal his/her name - UHRP).

News of the Day (April 29)

North Korea Freedom Week in full swing: The North Korea Freedom Coalition has the list of events (h/t One Free Korea).

More news on "another Chinese province": OFK hears that food-rationing has reached the Stalinist military officers. The head of the CIA says Syria's would-have-been nuclear reactor (built with Stalinist aid), was very close to making "enough plutonium for one or two bombs" (AP via OFK). James Carafano (New York Post via Front Page) rips the Singapore Surrender.

Remembering Lin Zhao: Forty years ago today, a woman who had the courage to stand up to the Communists during the madness of the Cultural Revolution was executed. Jennifer Chou (Weekly Standard Blog) reminds us how her life and death are still relevant (and feared by the CCP).

One country, one-and-a-half systems rolls on: A student in Hong Kong who supports the Tibetan pe0ple receives threats and suffers vandalism. The police respond by demanding to know if she's talked to the anti-Communist Apple (Epoch Times reporting).

Meanwhile, in Beijing, the endless propaganda coming from the CCP appears to be having an effect - although you never can tell in a dictatorship (Washington Post).

Meanwhile, in Tibet, seventeen "rioters" were sent to prison (BBC and CNN), as a supporter of the Tibetans is kicked out of Nepal (BBC).

News of the Overnight (April 1-2)

Pentagon official admits to espionage role: Gregg Bergersen pleaded guilty to "conspiracy to disclose national defence information 'to persons not entitled to receive it'" (BBC). Bergersen handed over information on Taiwanese defenses, but the island democracy has said the spy ring "had not compromised key technology."

Bleeding Tibet continues to shadow upcoming Olympics: A pro-Tibetan Indian athlete refuses to carry the Olympic torch (BBC). Rebiya Kadeer compares the Olympic ideal with the Communist reality (Washington Post), as does Trudy Rubin (Dallas Morning News via Uyghur American Association).

More Olympic news: The International Olympic Committee asks the cadres to lift their internet crackdown (BBC and Below the Beltway). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls on President Bush to "consider boycotting the opening ceremony of the Olympics Games in Beijing" (CNN), as do pro-Tibet protesters in the nation's capital (Washington Post).

Enlightened Comment of the Day: Matthew Claxton (Chilliwack Times via UAA) wins the honor by emphasizing the main point of the Tibetan crackdown - "The primary victims of the Chinese government are the people who live inside its borders, whether Tibetan, Uighur or Han Chinese."

More Tibet news: Desperate to turn aside the public relations wave against them, the Communists now claim Tibetans are becoming suicide bombers - with no evidence, of course (BBC and CNN). At least one Tibetan monk dies under siege by Communist police (Epoch Times). Los Angelenos protest the crackdown (Epoch Times). India's government goes very wobbly on Tibet (BBC) - although the opposition doesn't (Washington Post) - while Nepal continues slavishly following the Communist line (CNN). Michael Richardson (New Zealand Herald via UAA). Tibetans in Canada call for the Communist TV station to be taken off the air there (Epoch Times).

One country, one-and-a-half systems rolls on: Li Zhen (Epoch Times) examines how the Hong Kong press is starting to fall into line with the Communists.

More on Communist media suppression: Not even foreign press were immune, as was evidenced in the detailed screening the cadres implemented for its little Tibet tour last week (Epoch Times).

Protests spread to occupied East Turkestan: Following the death of Mutallip Hajim - in a Communist prison cell - and orders from the cadres to the family "to bury him immediately and inform no one of his death" (Radio Free Asia via UAA), Uighurs took to the streets with autonomy demands similar to Tibetans, plus a call for the Communist regime to "release all political prisoners."

Corruption news: The trial of ex-Shanghai boss Chen Liangyu was held in secret last week, turning the Jiang Zemin crony into the latest (and one of the least likely) human rights causes (Epoch Times).

U.S. provides Stalinists with list of the regime's nuclear personnel who were in Syria: While it might help convince the rest of the world that the Stalinists were helping Syria's Bashar Assad become a nuclear power, but One Free Korea is right to wonder why this information is too dangerous for Congress.

More news on "another Chinese province": The Stalinists continue to blast South Korea's new president (BBC). One Free Korea explains why the would-be American Ambassador to South Korea - Kathleen Stephens - is not the should-be Ambassador. OFK also rips Glenn Kessler and highlights the stories of defectors from northern Korea running for office in the South.

News of the Day (March 28)

Witness says Communist cop disguised as Tibetan started riot: An anonymous witness told the Tibetan Government in exile that one of the "Tibetan rioters" was in fact a Communist policeman (Epoch Times):

A Chinese woman from Thailand (who prefers that her name not be used) was studying in Lhasa when the protests broke out in March. As one of her friends is a policeman, she visited him at the local police station quite often and got to know other policemen there.

After the protests on March 14, she and other foreigners were sent to the police station where she saw a man with a knife in his hand walking in with some arrested Tibetans. The man later took off the Tibetan-style clothes and put on a police uniform.

This woman was sent out of Lhasa with other foreigners the next day. When she arrived in India via Nepal, she recognized the policeman she had seen in Tibetan garb from BBC TV news and photos that the Chinese embassy had provided to the media.

Ngawang Nyendra said the witness was shocked when she saw the policeman in the BBC broadcast. She realized then that the man had disguised himself as a Tibetan in order to incite people to riot.

This isn't the first piece of evidence revealing Communist instigation of violence in Tibet; it is, however, the first time (I think) that we have an eyewitness to the cadres' actual role in all of this. Another Epoch Times piece examines the way Communist media handled the "riot," and finds compelling evidence of Communist orchestration - including the fact that thousands of Communist police were already at the scene the day before the "riots" began.

Canada rips "military crackdown" in Tibet: Canada's Minister for Democratic Reform (who also serves as House Leader - their version of a legislative Majority Leader) openly supported "the people of Tibet" and became one of the few elected officials on the planet outside Taiwan to call the Communist action a "military crackdown" (Globe and Mail). Meanwhile, Canadian blogger Ezra Levant took aim at the Communist regime's "ventriloquist puppets" in Canada.

More on Tibet: Communist China invited diplomats into the occupied nation to examine its handiwork (BBC). Joseph Klein (Front Page Magazine) focuses on lack of action at the UN. San Diegans stand with the Tibetan people (Epoch Times). Andrew Martin Fischer details the history of Communist China's occupation (Far Eastern Economic Review). Tsering Woeser (via Epoch Times) provides a running account of the last two weeks in Tibet. Tibetan teenagers protest the mass arrest by the cadre-friendly Nepal government (BBC).

Calls for Boycotting the Olympics continue to come in: Jason Lee Steorts (NRO) calls for the free world to stay home, while the editors at the Canadian National Post leave the option open (h/t Boycott 2008). Naturally, the cadres are not happy (Washington Post). Meanwhile, Congressman Frank Wolf (one of our favorites), moves to defund any political junket that would include the Communist Olympiad (Below the Beltway). Czech President Vaclav Klaus will skip the opening ceremony (ABC). Meanwhile, the IOC begs the cadres not to force the Olympics to tape delay (Financial Times, UK).

U.S. officials count 1,400 Communist missiles pointed at Taiwan: The unnamed officials based their calculation on new "intelligence assessments" (Washington Times). The number is even higher than outgoing Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian's estimate of 1,328.

Australian Foreign Minister insists his government is tough on Communist China, all evidence to the contrary, including the minister's own words on the Olympics (AAP via Epoch Times).

Hong Kong bans Falun Gong practitioners from entering the city: The latest example of one country, one-and-a-half systems, was noted by the HK Standard (h/t Between Heaven and Earth).

News on "another Chinese province" (Stalinist North Korea): It was a busy day for Stalinist-in-chief Kim Jong-il, with a missile test (BBC and CNN) and anti-American screed (CNN).

Congratulations to Anson Chan

The former head of Hong Kong's civil service, who had been the last link to the British colonial government until she resigned from the Communist-backed regime in disgust, scored a landslide win in her bid for the city's Legislative Council (The Australian).

It was yet another reminder that the people of Hong Kong still long for freedom and democracy.