Angelo Giuliano: "National Security Law is the best thing that happened to Hong Kong!"

March 11, 2021 (Jingjing Li - YouTube) - [Jingjing Yi chats] with Angelo who is a Swiss Italian that had been living in both Hong Kong and Chinese mainland for a long time. 

He witnessed the whole social unrest, and he has been very vocal exposing violent protestors' behaviors during the social unrest in Hong Kong. Some people even exposed his little son's photo and identity to threaten him to be silent. But he never stopped. He shared with [Jingjing] what he witnessed, what he thinks about the social changes in Hong Kong, and the National Security Law.

China Uproots Hong Kong's US-Backed Opposition

December 5, 2020 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - China finalised its campaign against protests in its Hong Kong territory when it expelled opposition politicians from Hong Kong's government for endangering national security. 

Following this move, opposition politicians still in office resigned in protest, leaving the territory's government firmly pro-Beijing. 

This came after a sweeping security law was passed which focused heavily on cutting foreign backing to opposition groups rioting in Hong Kong's streets and outlawing aspirations of "independence" as a form of sedition. 

With the cutting off of foreign support and the effective removal of opposition political parties supporting and driving the protests from Hong Kong's political landscape, the prospects for another round of disruptive and violent protests is highly unlikely. 

And almost as if to vindicate Beijing's policy decisions regarding Hong Kong, the US and UK insisted on one last round of interference regarding these most recent developments. 

UK's Sky News in an article titled, "UK summons Chinese ambassador after expulsion of Hong Kong MPs," would claim 

The government has summoned China's ambassador to register "deep concern" after Beijing ordered the expulsion of four opposition MPs from Hong Kong's parliament.

Kwok Ka-ki, Alvin Yeung, Dennis Kwok and Kenneth Leung were banished from the territory's assembly for allegedly endangering national security.

They were expelled under a new Chinese law banning supporters of Hong Kong independence from holding office.

The article also claimed: 

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab on Thursday declared China's action a fresh breach of the Sino-British Declaration, the deal that saw Hong Kong pass back to China from Britain in 1997.

The agreement commits China to ensuring Hong Kong enjoys a "high degree of autonomy" and preserves the right to freedom of speech. 

The London Guardian would also report in its article, "Hong Kong and China could face fresh US sanctions over ousting of lawmakers," that: 

Hong Kong and Chinese officials could face further sanctions from the United States over a new law that disqualified four pro-democracy legislators as “unpatriotic” and prompted a mass resignation by the pro-democracy caucus. 

The UK had violently seized the territory in 1841 and occupied it until its handover back to China in 1997. Before the handover, the British government demanded Beijing recognize a series of conditions including "democratic" procedures that ironically never existed under British rule.  

More recently, the UK's attempts to maintain influence over the territory has been aided by US interference in the form of financial, political and material support provided to opposition parties and street movements culminating in open support of protests in recent years and even featuring high-profile trips by opposition leaders to Washington D.C. to directly receive US aid.  

Hong Kong was never the UK's to legitimately determine the affairs of from the beginning and only through its own military and imperial aggression did it hold any power over the territory. It parting "demands," while agreed to by Beijing who at the time was left little choice, have no relevance in an international order the US and UK both have regularly predicated on "might makes right."

Currently, China has the "might" to determine what is right in Hong Kong, and Beijing has correctly decided that what is right is uprooting the remnants of Western influence and interference from its territory. 

While the UK government and its much larger transatlantic partners in the US are far from giving up their collective ambitions to subordinate China and greater Asia to the West, it appears that Beijing has laid the groundwork to fully shut Hong Kong off as a vector for such efforts. 

The irony is that had the US and UK not pushed as aggressively as they did in Hong Kong over the past several years it is likely their proxies would have been able to maintain some form of influence in the territory for many more years to come. But by rushing in a bid to pressure Beijing, they provided the perfect justification for Beijing swiftly and completely uproot these proxies once and for all. 

What's more is that while the US and UK's interference in Hong Kong has led what's being called the "Hong Kong model" by other Western-backed opposition movements across Asia targeting governments friendly to China, Beijing's success could now provide a "Beijing model" for regional governments to likewise fully and permanently uproot Western interference from within their borders as well. 

What the US in particularly had regularly referred to as "America's Pacific Century" may yet turn out to be the eventual dusk of Washington's hegemonic ambitions in the region.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.  

US Government Gives Award to Hong Kong Agitators it Funded

September 18, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - After previously denying any role in supporting protests in Hong Kong - Freedom House - a subsidiary of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) who had been funding Hong Kong protest groups for years - will be showering Hong Kong's opposition with awards. 

If there was any doubt about how deeply involved the US government is in funding and backing political subversion not only in Hong Kong, but around the globe - in addition to its multiple illegal wars, invasions, occupations, and other "hard power" interventions - the US government-funded NED through its subsidiary Freedom House has just awarded Hong Kong's mobs its 2020 "Freedom Award." 

Image: A previous Freedom House event in 2015 would feature "umbrella revolution" leaders Joshua Wong, Benny Tai, and Martin Lee being "honored" in Washington DC. Despite this open display of support, plus financial support provided by the US government to various organizations linked to each leader, the US would later attempt to deny any role in Hong Kong protests which eventually led to violence and arson.   

It is full circle for the US-regime change pipeline - albeit unsuccessfully- where the US government helps create, fund, and sustain unrest in a targeted country, props it up across the Western media, then showers all involved with "awards" afterward not only to bolster their morale, but to encourage other US-funded agitators elsewhere to continue their work. 

"Freedom Award" Exposes Global-Spanning Political Interference

Freedom House's website in a post titled, "Freedom House Presents 2020 Freedom Award to Hong Kong and Sudan Protesters," would claim (emphasis added): 

The special online Freedom Awards event will feature special remarks from former Belarusian presidential candidate Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya.

Hong Kong’s prodemocracy movement and two groups from Sudan—the Sudanese Professionals Association, represented by Samahir Ali Othman Almubarak, and the Organization of the December Revolution Martyrs’ Families, represented by Dr. Amira Babiker Ahmed Osman—will receive the 2020 Freedom Award at Freedom House’s annual awards event on September 16, beginning at 6:45 p.m. EDT. 

The mention of Belarus opposition figures only further boosts already clear evidence that the US is involved in political meddling in that nation as well - a nation sitting right on Russia's borders. 

Image: Previous Freedom House guest Joshua Wong (left) and speaker at Freedom House's 2020 "Freedom Award" event Nathan Law (right) in Washington DC lobbying and receiving US government support for their mobs in Hong Kong, China. 

Freedom House also notes that Hong Kong opposition figure Nathan Law - who had previously visited Washington DC to solicite and receive US government backing - would be speaking at the event: 

Prominent activist and former legislator Nathan Law will speak about the movement for democracy in Hong Kong. Special remarks will also be delivered by Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, recent Belarusian presidential candidate; Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the US House of Representatives; and Marco Rubio, US senator from Florida. Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights under Law, will offer reflections on the US protests for racial justice.

Were there any doubt that the US was behind Hong Kong's unrest and in contact with the protest's core leadership, the US government-funded Freedom House organizing an event in which actual protest leaders are participating should help shed it.  

In order to help those struggling with why US meddling in places like Hong Kong, Belarus, and elsewhere is wrong, first consider the UN Charter itself - Chapter 1, Article 2 which states: 

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

An opposition group funded and run by a foreign country is a direct attack on the political independence of any nation such groups are operating in or against. Hong Kong's mobs in particular were demanding "independence," meaning that US-funded opposition groups were attacking the territorial integrity of China as well. 

And if that isn't convincing enough, just consider if nations like Russia or China were involved in similar behavior - dispersing money and support to opposition groups in the US aimed at ousting the current government, rewriting America's constitution and laws, or just simply, violently destroying America's infrastructure - then holding "award" ceremonies in which these agitators would literally fly out of the country to attend in either Russia or China. 

While this year's Freedom House award ceremony will be online owed to COVID-19, these events are normally held in Washington DC. 

In 2015, three Hong Kong protest leaders - Joshua Wong, Benny Tai, and Martin Lee - would literally travel to Washington DC to "offer the United States a chance to show the world where it stands." 

The Freedom House post titled, "Beijing’s Ruler versus Hong Kong’s Heroes," would inject the US right at the center of what was and still is entirely China's internal political affairs. The event was purposefully scheduled to coincide with the visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping as a deliberate slight, and even threat.  

The US had backed Hong Kong's opposition before, during, and now after their latest, violent attempts to impose their and their foreign backer's agenda on the Chinese territory of Hong Kong. It is an overt display of contempt for both international law and norms regarding national sovereignty and the principles of non-interference and non-intervention as laid out in the UN Charter itself.  

While we shouldn't hold our breath and wait for the UN itself to act against the United States, these facts must be pointed out not only in Hong Kong but everywhere the US is involved in attacking the political independence of a targeted nation - to end the illusion of legitimate political opposition so that these nations can quickly and effectively detain, try, and imprison those involved and avoid the bloodshed and destabilization that has partially consumed Hong Kong, or completely consumed nations like Libya, Syria, and Yemen. 

For China, its new security laws regarding Hong Kong were made possible by America's arrogant and open support of the violence that consumed the territory for months. 

Image: US-funded Hong Kong agitator Joshua Wong (left) poses with US-backed Thai agitator Parit "Penguin" Chirawak (right) who flew all the way to Hong Kong to meet with Wong. It was recently revealed that Parit had also visited the US Embassy in Bangkok on at least two occasions and is now considered a "core" leader of anti-government mobs in Thailand. 

Other nations - like Thailand whose own US-funded opposition openly admires, has visited, and still coordinates with the remnants of Hong Kong's opposition - must quickly expose and neutralize similar US interference so they can also enjoy the peace and stability now slowly returning to China's territory of Hong Kong. Perhaps other targeted nations can do so with the help of nations like China who have successfully confronted and overcome US meddling. 

US-Funded Agitators in Hong Kong Back Thai Protests

US uses region-wide network of sedition to create the illusion of widespread support for color revolution in Thailand. 

August 18, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The Western media continues portraying anti-government protests in Thailand as "student-led" despite the US-backed billionaire-led opposition openly vowing to take to the streets just months ago.

The West is also covering up that core leaders and organizations leading the protests are directly funded by the US government via the notorious regime-change front, the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Now, the US is mobilizing other fronts in the region it is funding - including in Hong Kong - to create the illusion of wider support for Thailand's anti-government protests.

Joshua Wong - who literally travelled to Washington D.C. to lobby for and receive direct aid from the US government for violent mobs he led in Hong Kong - has taken to social media to bolster the image of Thai mobs in a bid to help replicate the Hong Kong opposition's "success" in Thailand.

Unmentioned by Wong is the true common denominator linking the two protest movements - not a love of "democracy" but a steady stream of money and supp


He claimed in a 3-part post on Twitter that:

1. Two days ahead of another rally on Aug 16, it is horrifying to know Thai police just forcibly arrested student leader Parit Chiwarak and bundled him into a car, to crush our Thai fellows' call for changes. 

2. When our next generations fight with sweat and tear for a better future where people can live with dignity, justice and liberty, there's nothing more ridiculous for the dark power of tyranny to turn the clock back with suppression and draconian laws.

3. Force and fear won't kill our spirit of resistance, and can never take away our future and imprison our soul. As situation in Thailand turns critical, I hope all freedom-loving people can stand with Thailand and save Parit.  

Wong omits that his "freedom-loving people" in Hong Kong destroyed the city, burned infrastructure, threatened and intimidated political opponents, attempted to assassinate rival politicians, and even lit an elderly man on fire for simply speaking up against protests.

He also omits that in Wong's pursuit of "liberty, dignity and justice" he has taken directives, money, and political support from the United States - guilty of the worst crimes against humanity of the 21st century - crimes that are currently still ongoing.

Also not mentioned is that the movement Parit "Penguin" Chiwarak leads is also US government-funded.

READ MORE: Why is the US Funding Protesters to Attack Thailand's Military and Monarchy?

Parit himself travelled to Hong Kong to meet Joshua Wong. And while Parit and other "students" are portrayed as the leaders of ongoing protests in Thailand - it was corrupt billionaires Thaksin Shinawatra and Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit who vowed as recently as December 2019 to take to the streets.



Like their US backers, these billionaires are guilty of some of the worst abuses in Thailand's history. Thaksin Shinawatra killed thousands while in power from 2001-2006 including nearly 3,000 during a 90 day "war on drugs" in 2003, 85 protesters in a single day in 2004, and 18 other opponents who "disappeared" or were outright assassinated during his time in power. Many more have died amid his attempts to return himself to power.

Thaksin Shianwatra has used various proxies in his bid to return to power including fellow billionaire Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and his Future Forward/Move Forward Party. Upon losing 2019 elections, Thanathorn vowed to take to the streets.

Realizing how little legitimacy a protest led by a power-hungry billionaire would look - the mobs that he organized were passed off by a supportive Western media as "students" and openly copied the tactics and style of US-backed unrest in Hong Kong.

Thanathorn too visited Hong Kong and met with Joshua Wong.

Reuters in its article, "China denounces Thai politicians for show of support to Hong Kong activists," would note:

The Chinese embassy in Bangkok has condemned Thai politicians for showing support for Hong Kong activists involved in anti-government protests, saying it could harm the relationship between the two countries.

It also mentioned Thanathorn specifically, reporting:

The embassy criticism, in a statement on its official Facebook page late on Thursday, came days after Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong posted a picture on social media with prominent Thai opposition politician Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit.

The article notes the Thai government's suspicions that Joshua Wong and the front he represents were coordinating with similar fronts in Thailand.

The physical and political ties between US-backed sedition in Hong Kong and Thailand also manifests itself digitally in the form of the so-called "Milk Tea Alliance," an online propaganda tool that amplifies US-backed regime change propaganda across US-based social media networks like Facebook and Twitter as well as promoting the overall anti-Chinese agenda of the US State Department.

Democracy by definition is a process of self-determination - yet everything about protests in Thailand and Hong Kong are being determined and influenced from beyond Asia's borders with students serving merely as a front for both corrupt billionaires within Thailand and Hong Kong and their foreign sponsors attempting to seize power and co-opt local sovereignty - especially in regards to rolling back China. 

UK's Stunning Hypocrisy over Hong Kong

A British arms embargo on Hong Kong over "human rights concerns" while the UK continues to arm and train Saudis amid Yemen genocide? 

August 1, 2020 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - Further evidence the UK hides behind "human rights" rather than stands for them was demonstrated when London placed sanctions on Hong Kong after the passing of a security law aimed at combating overt foreign interference in special administrative region of China.

British state media in an article titled, "UK suspends extradition treaty with Hong Kong," would claim:

The UK government will suspend its extradition treaty with Hong Kong "immediately and indefinitely".

The article also stated:

[British Foreign Secretary] Mr Raab also confirmed the government would extend its arms embargo - which has been in place with China since 1989 - to Hong Kong, stopping the UK exporting equipment, such as firearms, smoke grenades and shackles, to the region.

The article cited other members of the British government condemning China for alleged human rights abuses, violations of international law and a lack of democratic values. This comes after the UK caved to US pressure and banned Chinese telecom company Huawei from involvement in the UK's 5G rollout.

Omitted from the BBC article was mention of the UK's own and very real abuses.

British Human Rights Concerns are Projections of Own, Real Abuses  

At a time when the UK condemns China for its "actions in the South China Sea" the UK still finds itself involved in wars of aggression and military occupations around the globe, side-by-side their US allies.

Worse still is that while the UK pledged to extend an arms embargo on Hong Kong over human rights concerns, the British government continues to arm nations like Saudi Arabia who is still currently waging war on neighbouring Yemen in a conflict the United Nations itself has called "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world."

The New York Times in its article, "Britain Says It Will Resume Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia," would admit:

Saudi Arabia is a big market for British arms manufacturers. Between April 2015 and March 2018, Britain’s government licensed the sale of at least 4.7 billion pounds (around $5.89 billion) of military equipment to the Saudis, and a further £860 million to its coalition partners.

Sales of arms were temporarily "suspended" over growing awareness of their use in Saudi atrocities in its ongoing war of aggression in neighbouring Yemen. After sufficient lip service was paid to "investigating" the issue, sales were resumed with claims abuses were "isolated."  The US has likewise sidestepped concerns over arms sales to Saudi Arabia with a $478 million missile sale moving forward. 

This staggering hypocrisy was noted even within the British government itself, the NYT would note:

Emily Thornberry, who speaks for the opposition Labour Party on international trade, described the resumption of arms licenses to Saudi Arabia as “morally indefensible.” The timing, she added, suggests “at the very least a case of mixed messages, undermining the government’s claim to be human rights defenders.”

Indeed, the British government's claim to be human rights defenders is undermined if not entirely exposed as a façade behind which it advances various agendas. It cites "human rights" when smearing its opponents on the global stage such as China (often with fabricated claims), then eagerly, openly and unapologetically tramples human rights when convenient.

The common denominator between Britain's otherwise contradictory stance regarding China and Saudi Arabia is its desire to advance its geopolitical agenda in undermining competitors and bolstering its own wealth and influence globally. Human rights is a mere prop to be used or abused.

Never were human rights an actual principle driving UK foreign policy, but merely a superficial enabler or inconvenient speed bump toward moving it forward.


Besides the UK's stunning hypocrisy, the latest moves made against China regarding Hong Kong remind the world that the very sort of imperialist ideology that saw the British take the territory by force in 1842 is still very much alive and thriving in policy circles in London and across the Atlantic in Washington. While outright military occupation is impractical, the UK and its American partners still seek to influence and interfere in Hong Kong's political and economic affairs.

The continued antagonising of China within its own borders, the use of warships to provoke China off its own shores and sanctions aimed at crippling the nation economically are all very deliberate acts undermining not only China's peace, prosperity and stability, but that of the entire world who increasingly see China as a valuable economic and political partner.

The ultimate hypocrisy here is that as the UK claims it stands as a force for "good" in the world, it is in fact an enabler of waning Western interests desperately trying to plunge the world into chaos to spoil the success of its competitors and search for an opportunity to reassert themselves, reclaim their wealth and revive their demonstrably malign influence globally.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.   

Hong Kong Security Law is Common Sense, Not Controversial

July 17, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - China's special administration region of Hong Kong saw the passing of a security law outlawing acts universally recognized as criminal and threats to any nation's security and sovereignty.

Despite what would appear to be common sense legislation, the Western media has cried "controversy." While the West claims it fears curbs on freedoms inside China - it is becoming increasingly clear that the West's real fears revolve around the "freedom" of its proxies and their attempts to maintain Hong Kong as a defacto Western foothold.

British state media, the BBC in their article, "Hong Kong security law: What is it and is it worrying?," would note:

Hong Kong was always meant to have a security law, but could never pass one because it was so unpopular. So this is about China stepping in to ensure the city has a legal framework to deal with what it sees as serious challenges to its authority.

The BBC would also list acts criminalized under the law which include:

• secession - breaking away from the country
• subversion - undermining the power or authority of the central government
• terrorism - using violence or intimidation against people
• collusion with foreign or external forces

Nothing on the list is in any way controversial, with virtually all other nations on Earth maintaining similar laws on their respective books.

Additionally, Hong Kong - a region that belonged to China before being taken by force by the British Empire in 1841 and a region that now once again belongs to China after its handover to Beijing in 1997 - is clearly China's to govern and to do so in any manner China decides. Laws it passes regarding Hong Kong are not Washington or London's business just as laws passed regarding US or UK territory are none of Beijing's.

The BBC and many others across the Western media have attempted to claim the new security law is "controversial" simply because despite the UK's handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, the UK and the US have both attempted to maintain the region as a foothold inside China - and to do so specifically by engaging in literally everything on the list outlawed by the bill - including secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion.

The BBC article explains:

Hong Kong was handed back to China from British control in 1997, but under a unique agreement - a mini-constitution called the Basic Law and a so-called "one country, two systems" principle.

The BBC never explains why China should be bound by an agreement made with the UK - a hostile foreign occupier now fully departed from China's restored sovereign territory.

Those complaining the loudest in Hong Kong - according to the BBC article itself - include culprits guilty of all the above - including Joshua Wong and his US-backed "Demosisto" political party and other recipients of US and UK funding and support.

Wong and mobs he helped organize and lead systematically destroyed Hong Kong's infrastructure, used violence against political opponents, and openly appealed to the US and UK to intervene.


Repeatedly exposed have been the vast amounts of resources from the US government funneled into Hong Kong propping up this so-called "pro-democracy" movement.

The generally pro-Western South China Morning Post even admitted to extensive US meddling in Hong Kong in an article titled, "US has been exposed for funding last year’s Hong Kong protests."

The article noted:

Imagine how the American government would react if multiple Chinese state agencies such as Xinhua were exposed secretly helping protest groups across the United States to evade surveillance and crackdowns by law enforcement agencies.

Washington would probably threaten China with war. Roughly, though, the little-known but powerful US Agency for Global Media has been doing just that in Hong Kong. It oversees funding for various news and information operations around the world, including Voice of America and Radio Free Asia.

About US$2 million was earmarked for the protest movement in Hong Kong, but has now been frozen as part of a general overhaul and restructuring by a new agency boss.

As clear as the South China Morning Post article makes US meddling in Hong Kong, it is just scratching the surface of the scale and duration of US meddling in China's internal affairs - particularly in regards to Hong Kong.

Virtually every aspect of Hong Kong's opposition is a product of US meddling with the majority of protest leaders having literally been hosted in Washington D.C. and the direct recipients of US funding and support to build up their respective movements and carry out US objectives under the smokescreen of promoting "democracy." This has been the case for years, long before the most recent protests.

All of this constitutes a clear breech of China's sovereignty - a violation of international law and norms - but also a violation in terms of Washington's own laws. For example, were China - as the South China Morning Post article imagined - aiding subversion in the US in a similar manner - it would be deemed absolutely illegal under US law and those involved would face equal or harsher punishments than under Hong Kong's new security law.

That China's move to shield its borders from overt, admitted foreign meddling should be considered "controversial" by the West illustrates just how deep the West's double standards run and how Western foreign policy is driven by the principle of "might makes right" with all other principles serving merely as smokescreens.

And while the US and UK condemn China for reasserting itself over its own territory and people, the US and UK both continue illegal wars and occupations thousands of miles from their own shores all across the globe. The Western media is tellingly silent about this hypocrisy.

While the US and UK may believe crying "controversy" over the new Hong Kong security law helps paint themselves as defenders of "human rights," "freedom," and "democracy," it in fact only further paints Western foreign policy as dangerously hypocritical.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. 

Hong Kong is Symptomatic of Wider Issues

July 15, 2020 (James O'Neill - NEO) - On the 7th of July 2020 Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jin Ping held one of their regular telephone conversations. The fact of the call, let alone its content, received scant coverage in the western mainstream media. This was unfortunate because what the two men had to say conveyed major geopolitical decisions. The impact of those decisions will have major consequences.

Rather than paying heed to what the two men were discussing, and its broader implications, the West was instead focused on the ongoing conflict in Hong Kong. Three countries in particular were using their agents to stir up trouble in the former British colony; the United States, Great Britain and Australia.

There is a deep irony in the loud protestations of the leaders of those three countries in their professed concern for Hong Kong democracy. It was only a little over 20 years ago that Hong Kong was returned to China, which it had been an integral part of for more than 1000 years until forcefully colonised by the British in the mid 19th century.

For the next 150 years there was no democracy in Hong Kong. It was ruled by a British government appointed Governor. The people of Hong Kong did not even have the right to vote. The protestations about Hong Kong’s alleged loss of democracy after its return to China (with a 50-year transition!) are a classic example of that long-established British trait of hypocrisy. One would be hard put to locate illustrations of western governments, including the United States and Australia, clamouring for Hong Kong democracy prior to 1999.

This historical record needs to be kept firmly in mind when one reads in the western media of their politicians lamenting the loss of Hong Kong “democracy” as the Beijing government asserts its authority. One would search long and hard for any other example in the world where a colonial power relinquished its control on such adverse and restrictive conditions.

The western powers, especially the aforementioned trio, have no intention of recognising China’s legitimate rights in Hong Kong. Their actions go beyond political speeches, and lamenting the alleged loss of democracy in the former colony. The evidence is overwhelming that the protesters in Hong Kong demonstrating, often with considerable violence against persons and property, are armed, financed, and politically supported by the aforementioned trio of countries.

There are approximately 3 million Hong Kong citizens (of a total population of 7,000,000) who, at least in theory, have the capacity to emigrate to the United Kingdom or some other country such as Australia. Part of the anti-Beijing propaganda from the aforementioned trio is to suggest that those 3 million or so individuals could emigrate to their countries.

The western media, which solemnly reports these vague proposals without qualification or question, never consider the logistics of such an exercise, assuming for the moment, improbably, that it was either feasible or indeed the wishes of the aforementioned 3 million Hong Kong citizens.

While it is probable that at least some, no-one can say how many, of the supposed 3 million would either wish to leave, or would be welcomed in the three countries, and would actually leave. No one familiar with the current and past attitudes of any of the three countries to mass Chinese migration can be in any doubt that the vague promises currently being offered are strictly for propaganda purposes.

The aforementioned telephone conversation between Putin and Xi was exactly right in their reported pledge to cooperate against “external sabotage and intervention”. The two leaders recognise the brutal truth that the western politicians do not care one iota for the people of Hong Kong, but see them as useful tools in the ongoing propaganda war against both China and its increasingly close ally, Russia.

This was reinforced by Xi when he referred specifically to the “external sabotage and intervention of the western powers” in his conversation with Putin. The specific Russian view was set out by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova in her press conference on 2nd June. Ms Zakharova noted Russia’s support for what the Chinese government was endeavouring to achieve in Hong Kong. Russia considers “all issues pertaining to Hong Kong to be China’s domestic affairs” she said.

Both Russia and China are pursuing a larger geopolitical agenda. Trade between the two countries exceeded $110 billion in 2019. Their geopolitical cooperation may also be seen in their effective underwriting of Iran’s continued freedom from direct United States attack, and incorporation of Iran into a prominent role in the rapidly expanding Belt and Road Initiative.

It is more than a coincidence that neither of the United States, United Kingdom or Australia have expressed any interest in, or support for, the BRI. To the contrary, Australia and the United States are busy trying to create alternative economic structures to compete with the BRI. There is also evidence of direct attempts by the United States to foster internal disorganisation within China, notably with their support for the returned jihadists in China’s western regions.

As the recent moves by Japan indicate, such manoeuvres are doomed to fail, because their motive is manifestly anti-China. Desperate propaganda attempts such as portraying China’s involvement with the island nations of the eastern and southern Pacific as contrary to those nations interests notwithstanding, it is obvious that China offers a better future than the neo-colonial past of those nations. Or indeed the neo–colonial future that is the inevitable outcome of United States and Australian “protection”.

Trump appears to share the delusion of the compelling attractiveness of the western model. He recently invited Russia to attend the next meeting of the G7 nations which had expelled Russia over the manifestly false narrative regarding Crimea. The G7, which does not include the world’s largest economy, China, is not as attractive as United States thinking assumes.

On 4 July 2020 Russia’s deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov described the United States invitation to Russia to attend the G7 as a “flawed idea”. The American concept of expanding the G7 was itself flawed, Ryabkov said, “because it is unclear to us how the authors of that initiative consider the Chinese factor. Without China it is impossible to discuss certain issues in the modern world.”

Russia clearly sees itself in a similar position. Trump’s invitation was not aimed at getting Russian involvement in canvassing critical geopolitical issues. Even if Trump himself had worthy intentions, they are not shared by other members of his administration, let alone the Democrat party and the overwhelming majority of United States mainstream media, the military and CIA establishments, or the United States Congress.

What the experience of China in the current furore over Hong Kong demonstrates above all, is that the western powers will stop at nothing to undermine it and every national organisation that enjoys the benefits of cooperation and development with China. That manifestly does not include the western nations (with some exceptions) who are not reacting well to the steady demise of their geopolitical dominance of the past 200 to 300 years.

Hong Kong may be properly regarded as a weapon in a much larger geopolitical battle.

James O’Neill, an Australian-based Barrister at Law, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Coronavirus Exposes Hong Kong's Fake "Pro-Democracy" Mobs

March 13, 2020 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - While the large street mobs plaguing Hong Kong's streets have more or less subsided, the foreign-funded movement and its supporters continue seeking every opportunity to perpetuate their agenda.

This agenda, despite the Western media claiming it is centred on advancing human rights and democracy while opposing Beijing's "authoritarianism," is in all actuality merely racist and anti-Chinese, a scion of both British and American attempts to impose their rule on Hong Kong and use the territory as a vector to project power across into mainland China.

Far from the conclusions reached by pro-Beijing media, the most recent example of the so-called "pro-democracy" movement's overt racism and its attempts to hide behind legitimate excuses was covered by the pro-Western South China Morning Post (SCMP).

The article titled, "More than 100 HK restaurants refuse to serve customers from China," at first attempts to depict supporters of the recent "pro-democracy" mobs barring mainlanders as taking measures merely to fend off the spread of the Covid-19 coronavirus outbreak.

But soon even the pro-Western newspaper is forced to admit not only legitimate human rights concerns regarding what is clearly a racist and discriminatory policy, but that the restaurants involved are indeed supporters of the recent anti-Chinese mobs indicating that their real motivation is political and concerns regarding the coronavirus are a poor attempt to disguise it.

The article claims:

More than 100 restaurants in Hong Kong have refused to serve diners from mainland China during the coronavirus outbreak, according to a human rights group that is warning firms against crossing the line into racial discrimination.

The article however eventually admits that one of the restaurants investigated was previously and openly a supporter of anti-Chinese mobs masked as "pro-democracy" protests. The article stated:

The findings came three weeks after the EOC advised Kwong Wing Catering, a popular local restaurant chain — which supported the anti-government protesters who took to the city's streets from last June — to remove notices displayed at its outlets. Those posters said the eatery would only serve Hongkongers and that its staff did not speak Mandarin.

While organisations like the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) and others are stepping up to speak out against this pattern of increasingly bold racism and discrimination, silent are the same foreign organisations that supported the anti-Chinese mobs at the height of their violence on the grounds of defending "human rights."

The mobs then and now continue a blatant agenda of racism and discrimination, not against the government in Beijing and its policies but clearly against the over 1.3 billion people of China itself.


This reveals the movement, backed by Washington, London and Brussels, as merely hiding behind notions like democracy and human rights while in actuality trampling both while pursuing agendas built on the worst imaginable values (or lack there of).

In a time of crisis like this most recent coronavirus outbreak, those truly dedicated to humanity and its movement forward into a better future are revealed. So too are those who merely pose as progressives yet seek every opportunity to exploit the misfortune of others to advance their own self-serving and ultimately anti-social agendas.

The coronavirus has served as a litmus test, exposing the true nature of individuals, organisations and nations alike.

The "pro-democracy" mobs and their supporters have been put to the test as well, and to no one's surprise, they have failed.

For the rest of the world looking on, if they haven't already entirely tuned out Hong Kong's disingenuous faux democracy movement, they now have another example of the West and its "pro-democracy" proxies revealing their true nature.

The coronavirus has caused much damage to individuals' health, to the economy and strained relations between nations, but it has also helped shine a light on many who have for too long posed as forces of good while all along perpetuating the very worst.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

AFP Dedicates Half an Article Justifying Hong Kong Assassination Attempt

November 6, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Hong Kong legislator Junius Ho narrowly escaped assassination when an opposition member attempted to drive a knife into his chest after luring him in for a selfie, RT would report.

RT's article would mention briefly in one paragraph that Junius Ho has been outspoken about ongoing unrest in Hong Kong.

Compare this to AFP's article, "Pro-Beijing politician stabbed in Hong Kong," which dedicates more than half its article to detailing Junius Ho's alleged misdeeds in what can only be interpreted as an attempt to justify the otherwise indefensible act of terrorism.

AFP even divides its article in half with the heading, "- Controversial figure -."

The article then claims:

Alongside Hong Kong's leader Carrie Lam and police chief Stephen Lo, Ho has become one of the most loathed establishment figures among democracy protesters. 

He has long been one of the most stridently pro-Beijing politicians in the city.

AFP continues - attempting to paint Junius Ho in the least flattering manner possible - indirectly suggesting that perhaps he even deserved it. AFP also attempts to cite growing violence on both sides as if to suggest attempted assassinations are merely the next logical step in ongoing unrest.

Omitted from AFP's article is that fact that leaders organizing protests are confirmed to be funded, backed, and directed by the US government with many leaders literally travelling to Washington D.C. to openly lobby for and receive aid from the US.

Among them are Joshua Wong, Martin Lee, Benny Tai, and Nathan Law. One - Johnson Yeung Ching-yin - is literally a US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) fellow whose profile can be found on NED's official website.

Nations Have a Right to Defend Themselves Against Foreign Attack - Whatever the Form  

Foreign-sponsored sedition - including through the use of terrorism - justifies the targeted nation and its people in defending themselves through whatever means are necessary.

If AFP wanted to make excuses for violence - it could have done so on behalf of China including Hong Kong residents opposed to the ongoing unrest and seeking to restore order and stability to their streets, businesses, homes, and public infrastructure.

No one has the right to use violence to advance their political agenda. But people do have the right to defend themselves against those who try.

US-backed mobs have targeted businesses, infrastructure including trains they've tried to repeatedly derail - endangering hundreds of innocent lives - as well as having targeted residents and politicians themselves with violence for opposing the unrest.

Just as Western propagandists - including AFP - have done elsewhere around the globe - they are deliberately defending, spinning, or omitting violence initiated by the opposition - and portraying the response of security forces and local residents attempting to fight back as "aggression."

AFP to dedicate half its article on the attempted assassination of Junius Ho attempting to explain why he is "one of the most loathed establishment figures among democracy protesters" is nothing short of appalling propaganda and even an oblique sign of approval for the attack.

Exposing and undermining this propaganda at every turn not only prevents this from being effective in regards to Hong Kong - but disarms a dishonest Western corporate media from using this same trick in the many other nations either already under similar attacks - or next in line.

Follow Tony Cartalucci on VK here.  

US Agitators in Asia "United" Over Hong Kong Chaos

October 24, 2019 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - Despite the chaos created across Hong Kong, the vast majority of the region's inhabitants do not support the growing violence nor do they benefit from it in any way.

As is typical in other regions of the world the US is meddling, a lack of local support is often remedied by attempting to create links and synergies between various US meddling in different nations.

During the 2011 Arab Spring the US literally imported terrorists and weapons it used in the overthrow of the Libyan government to Syria in an attempt to oust the government there.

In Ukraine, the US and its Ukrainian allies recruited right-wing extremists from around the globe to fill the ranks of "volunteer" Neo-Nazi militias.

Now in Hong Kong, similar synergies and ties are surfacing.

US-Backed Thai Opposition Conspiring with Hong Kong Agitators 

A recent Reuters article titled, "China denounces Thai politicians for show of support to Hong Kong activists," would report:

The Chinese embassy in Bangkok has condemned Thai politicians for showing support for Hong Kong activists involved in anti-government protests, saying it could harm the relationship between the two countries.

These "Thai politicians" belong to the US-backed opposition led by union-busting nepotist billionaire Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and his patron, fugitive billionaire and ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra along with their collective political machine.

Reuters would report:

The [Chinese] embassy criticism, in a statement on its official Facebook page late on Thursday, came days after Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong posted a picture on social media with prominent Thai opposition politician Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit.

Thanathorn and Wong met at the London-based Economist sponsored "Open Future Festival" held in Hong Kong, Reuters reported. The Open Future Festival and particularly the event held in Hong Kong focuses primarily on contesting China's sovereignty over Hong Kong.

Reuters also noted that:

Thanathorn said he was not involved with the Hong Kong protests. He also said he respected Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, known as the Basic Law, and supported freedom of expression. 

“I have always supported people’s rights to peaceful self-expression. I wish to see the situation in Hong Kong resolve,” Thanathorn said in a Facebook post.

Thanathorn's support for the Hong Kong opposition and their demands that the British-instituted "Basic Law" be upheld should come as no surprise.

Thanathorn himself along with is political party "Future Forward" have few well defined policies but those that are involve cancelling joint Thai-Chinese infrastructure projects including high-speed rail projects already under construction, as well as the cancellation of Thai-Chinese military arms deals and cooperation.

Thanathorn's pro-Western stance is further reflected by the fact that his party hosts several "founding members" drawn from US government-funded fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations including "Prachatai" which poses as an "independent media platform" despite being funded and directed out of Washington and being headed by a literal "fellow" of the Washington-based US National Endowment for Democracy, Chiranuch Premchaiporn.

Thanathorn's pro-Western stance has been rewarded repeatedly through extensive and positive coverage across the Western media as well as political support offered directly by Western embassies in Bangkok. Thanathorn is often accompanied by Western diplomats when summoned by police for his various criminal charges.

Wong's ties to the US-backed opposition in Thailand didn't begin with meeting Thanathorn. As early as 2016 Wong attempted to travel to Bangkok to attend activities led by Netiwit Chotipatpaisal who is for all intents and purposes simply a "Thai version" of Wong.


Netiwit has admittedly visited Western embassies and works in tandem with US-funded fronts like "Thai Lawyers for Human Rights" and Thanathorn's Future Forward Party in their collective efforts to destabilise Thailand politically, undermine the military and constitutional monarchy and roll back Thai-Chinese relations.

Netiwit has repeatedly protested in front of the Chinese Embassy in Bangkok on the anniversary of the Tiananmen unrest.

An article by above mentioned US government-funded media front Prachatai titled, "Student group gathers in front of Chinese Embassy in memory of Tiananmen massacre," claims: 

The student group, calling themselves “Humanity Without Borders”, was led by Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal and Sirin Mungcharoen, both students at Chulalongkorn University. The group placed white flowers in front of a printout of a tank, and observed a moment’s silence in memory of the dead.

While Netiwit is fond of protesting in front of the Chinese Embassy over events that transpired before he was even born, he regularly visits the embassies of the US and UK for dinner parties even as both nations currently and illegally occupy, bomb, drone and otherwise destroy multiple nations around the globe at the expense of tens of thousands of human lives.

Thanathorn, Wong and Netiwit represent the same corrosive form of synergistic foreign-sponsored opposition that has eaten its way through North Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe. While they claim they are bound by their dedication to democracy and human rights, the true thread running through all of their movements and agendas is US political support and their troubling hypocrisy for accepting this support.

Thai Government Opposes Thai Opposition's Meddling in Hong Kong 

Reuters notes that the current Thai government condemned the Thai opposition's meddling in China's affairs and considers the Hong Kong unrest an internal affair for Beijing alone to resolve.

In an attempt to undermine the credibility of the Thai government's statement on Hong Kong, Reuters refers to the 2014 military coup in which the Thai military ousted what Reuters describes as an "elected government." This is meant to paint the Thai government as a "dictatorship" and depict its recognition of and respect for China's sovereignty as instead solidarity between it and the "authoritative regime" in Beijing.

Yet in reality the government removed from power in 2014 by the Thai military was openly run by Thaksin Shinawatra who resided abroad as a fugitive and ruled via his nepotist-appointed sister Yingluck Shinawatra. Before the Thai military intervened, the Shinawatras had robbed nearly a million rice farmers and were killing protesters in the streets, all facts repeatedly and intentionally omitted by media organisations like Reuters.

The Reuters article also tries to sidestep US involvement in Hong Kong's unrest, depicting it instead as merely claims made by Beijing. Yet extensive documented facts and even admissions from US officials confirms the US has spent millions of dollars building up Hong Kong's opposition and fuelling unrest there.

All About Isolating China 

It takes little effort to find the common denominator between the Thai and Hong Kong opposition and why they feel such affinity for one another. They are united by their US sponsorships and their collective agenda of undermining China's rise upon the regional and global stage, an agenda originating in Washington itself.

Thanathorn of Thailand's "Future Forward Party" has specific policies focused on rolling back deepening Thai-Chinese relations while Thai "student activists" like Netiwit openly and regularly protest against China in between dinner dates at the US and UK embassy.

Wong's efforts to destabilise Hong Kong is a much more obvious and direct effort to target Beijing, its sovereignty over its own territory and its image globally.

Together this army of regional agitators openly cooperates in advancing what is essentially an extraterritorial agenda originating thousands of miles away in Washington. While these opposition figures claim they are dedicated to "democracy," they seem to forget that democracy is a process of self-determination, not a process of having one's agenda determined for you in a foreign capital.

While these opposition figures claim to be dedicated to "human rights," bemoaning claimed offenses carried out by the Chinese government, they click wine glasses at embassy events together with representatives of the worst human rights offenders of the 21st century. The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and current US-British support for Saudi Arabia in its war on Yemen come immediately to mind.

China may be the target today but Thailand's government must ensure that the contagion of US-fuelled unrest doesn't backwash into Thailand itself. Figures like Thanathorn have repeatedly alluded to aspirations of creating chaos similar to that consuming Hong Kong within Thailand. His political allies led by Thaksin Shinawatra have already twice attempted to burn down Bangkok (2009 and 2010) and have killed over 100 people in politically-motivated violence and acts of terrorism from 2006 onward.

Whether we believe or not Thanathorn, Wong and Netiwit truly stand for the principles they claim to represent, one thing is absolutely certain; their counterparts in North Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe who have led Western-backed "pro-democracy struggles" have left a trail of destruction, failed states, war, economic collapse and persistent instability negatively impacting the lives of millions. There is no "success story" for Thanathorn, Wong or Netiwit to cite when advocating others to join their cause across Asia.

China regaining control over Hong Kong will be key to ensuring wider regional stability. Chinese allies like Thailand reining in domestic agitators trying to fuel or support Hong Kong's unrest will be key to not only restoring stability inside China, but key to preventing the same unrest plaguing Hong Kong from spreading outward to nations like Thailand.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Singapore: Hong Kong Protesters' Demands are Unrealistic

October 21, 2019 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) -  It is interesting to note where the Southeast Asian city-state of Singapore sits amid the shifting poles of global power between East and West.

Once a British colony, the tiny island nation has since served as a barometer indicating the ebb and flow of Western influence over Asia, and now, the ups and downs of China's emergence as a regional and global power.

As China's rises regionally and globally, Singapore has shrewdly positioned itself to both benefit from its rise, while continuing to cultivate useful ties with the West. This creates a balance of interests that work to prevent any one nation from gaining too much influence over (or within) Singapore.

Singapore's view regarding ongoing protests in China's Hong Kong region is a good example that reflects these dynamics, with Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong undermining the narratives the Western media has been spinning for the unrest.

Singapore's PM is Right 

Bloomberg in its article, "Hong Kong Protest Demands Are Unrealistic, Singapore PM Says," reported:

Protesters in Hong Kong are making unrealistic demands in an effort to take down the government, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said. 

“Those are not demands which are meant to be a program to solve Hong Kong’s problems,” Lee said at the Forbes Global CEO Conference in Singapore on Wednesday. “Those are demands which are intended to humiliate and bring down the government. And then what?”

Firstly, Prime Minister Lee is entirely right.

The protests, confirmed to be the work of foreign interests seeking to undermine and destabilise China, seek only to tear down the current government with no practical plan for what will replace it.

Prime Minister Lee's "and then what?" perfectly summarises the blind, raw emotions driving many of the protesters and the malign agenda of the protest's leadership who has stirred up unrest in the streets to begin with.

The supposed "and then what" many protest leaders have suggested is the notion of Hong Kong "independence." It is a notion that is entirely disconnected from reality, with the region's economy and demographics deeply and irreversibly tied to the rest of China. Beijing is also in no way ever to accept such a notion, and certainly not lacking the ability to prevent it from ever happening.

"Independence" and the following repercussions it would have on Hong Kong would leave the region, its people and economy suffering alongside the many other disasters unfolding in the wake of Washington's "democracy promotion" such as in Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, Syria and Yemen.

As protesters grow more violent and akin to terrorists, it certainly seems their only goal is to "humiliate and bring down the government." Nothing remotely realistic or constructive can be observed among the protesters' actions or demands. 

Singapore Prioritising Ties to Beijing

Secondly, Prime Minster Lee's casting the protests in a more realistic and far less flattering light, contradicts the heroic and entirely fantastical light the Western media has portrayed them in. This can be interpreted as Singapore prioritising its ties with Beijing over Washington, London and Brussels, a prioritisation Singapore's leadership usually makes based on carefully thought-out, informed consideration.


Hong Kong's protests have attracted negative attention from many other nations across Southeast Asia including Thailand where the current government has condemned the Thai opposition's association with Hong Kong protest leaders, particularly Joshua Wong.

Were the United States truly in a position of sustainable and lasting primacy in Asia, it is unlikely we would be seeing bolder stances being taken by Asian states against its various schemes, including this most recent episode of Washington-sponsored destabilisation in Hong Kong.

Singapore, as a barometer of the region's balance of power, taking a clear stance on Hong Kong's protests, a stance opposing Washington's eager support of them, is another metric to consider when determining Asia's current and future political and economic landscape.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.   

VIDEO: Expert Explanation of US Meddling in Hong Kong

October 19, 2019 (LD) - Independent journalist Dan Cohen provides an expert explanation of US meddling in Hong Kong in the video below - exposing the steady stream of propaganda emerging from the US and other Western powers directly involved in engineering and perpetuating growing violence aimed at undermining China's sovereignty and stability.

Violent fanatics are assaulting people in the streets of Hong Kong while corporate media cheers them on as “pro-democracy” and oligarchs cash in. I explain how the US meddling machine is ramping up the Cold War with China: pic.twitter.com/hi3kKNlIAt

— Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) October 17, 2019

A more indepth article can be found here, via The Grayzone. 

Information Warfare: Twitter Targets Hong Kong

October 14, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - When Twitter Safety announced that it was taking actions against "information operations" directed at Hong Kong - informed observers could have immediately assumed that Twitter was not actually serious about stopping anything of the sort - but rather ensuring the information operation they are a part of was protected and those attempting to take action against it were purged from their platform.

And of course, those informed observers would be correct.

The official statement published on Twitter's official blog titled, "Information operations directed at Hong Kong," would claim:

We are disclosing a significant state-backed information operation focused on the situation in Hong Kong, specifically the protest movement and their calls for political change.

The statement would also claim:

This disclosure consists of 936 accounts originating from within the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Overall, these accounts were deliberately and specifically attempting to sow political discord in Hong Kong, including undermining the legitimacy and political positions of the protest movement on the ground. Based on our intensive investigations, we have reliable evidence to support that this is a coordinated state-backed operation. Specifically, we identified large clusters of accounts behaving in a coordinated manner to amplify messages related to the Hong Kong protests.

Ironically, "a coordinated state-backed operation" is exactly what the Hong Kong protests themselves are.

Extensively documented evidence - much of which was being exposed and shared by accounts purged by Twitter including this author's own Twitter accounts - has proven beyond doubt that the Hong Kong protesters are funded and directed by the United States government with virtually every protest leader having literally travelled to Washington D.C. to conspire with US politicians and organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) - an entity openly admitted to be used for destabilizing and overthrowing political orders in foreign nations.

Despite this overt foreign-backed effort to destabilize Hong Kong and wider China - Twitter has instead decided to target accounts within China itself to disrupt any effort to expose and confront this US-backed unrest unfolding in Hong Kong.

Twitter, Western Media Aiding and Abetting Terrorism 

More recently, US-backed agitators have turned from violence including attacking police and arson - to attacking Hong Kong's civilian infrastructure including its mass transit system. Protesters have been seen intentionally trying to derail trains - and in fact - one train did derail injuring several passengers.

The Washington Post in its article, "Under Hong Kong’s streets, the subway becomes a battleground for protesters and police," would report (emphasis added):

Rail operator MTR Corp. also has become a protest target, stemming from a perception among demonstrators that it has conspired with authorities to stymie protest action. Stations have been vandalized so frequently in recent weeks that there is a shortage of parts needed for repairs, the rail union has said. 

In a city where about 90 percent of journeys are via public transportation, the clashes have left some of Hong Kong’s 7.5 million residents feeling they no longer have any safe spaces, susceptible to arrest or police scrutiny whenever they venture out. Some people are boycotting the MTR, while others suffer flashbacks when they ride the trains.

An "AFP Fact Check" attempting to exhonerate protesters of being caught sabotaging rail that led to a derailment which injured 5 commuters simply notes that protesters caught on camera sabotaging tracks were at a different location trying to derail a different train than the train in question.

Image: No, the photographed protesters didn't, they were simply trying to derail trains full of innocent passengers at a different location... A prime example of Western media aiding, abetting, spinning, and defending what is literally terrorism. 

Nowhere does AFP attempt to deny the protesters were still very much so sabotaging train tracks and endangering hundreds of lives in the process.


Despite presenting evidence to the public clearly showing protesters sabotaging civilian mass transit infrastructure and thus endangering hundreds of innocent lives - because it wasn't at the specific location the derailment occured - AFP boldly declares at the top of their "Fact Check" that it was "FALSE."

The paralyzing "fear" the Washington Post describes but falls intentionally short of properly labelling, and the deliberate sabotage of train tracks AFP attempts to spin and defend is called "terrorism."

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines terrorism as: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion. Terror is defined as: violence or the threat of violence used as a weapon of intimidation or coercion.  

Thus - the Hong Kong protests whose "legitimacy" Twitter is dedicated to preserving - are engaged in terrorism. Twitter is thus an eager accomplice.

Information Warfare Disguised as Social Media 

None of this should be surprising. The 2011 so-called "Arab Spring" was a region-wide campaign organized years ahead of time by the US government in coordination with other social media giants including Facebook and Google which admittedly trained and equipped agitators to destabilize - and if possible - overthrow their respective governments. 

This continues today with many nations now reacting by restricting or banning foreign social media platforms and producing their own domestic versions. Russia and China are two nations in particular that have done this with great success and have attracted constant criticism for it across the Western media under the false pretext of "eroding free speech."

It is little wonder why Twitter is banned in China.

It is not a matter of China seeking to impede free speech because free speech itself is a concept completely alien to Twitter. Massive purges are regularly carried out by Twitter - as well as other social media networks like Google's Youtube and Facebook - to remove political content that targets the special interests these large social media networks represent.

Twitter is banned in China specifically because it is a weaponized platform - designed specifically to manipulate public perception and serve as a vector for very real "information operations" carried out by the US, aimed at China itself - including China's special administrative region of Hong Kong.

If mere suspicions of "Russian influence" can induce massive network-wide purges on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter to stave off alleged foreign interference in another nation's internal political affairs - certainly Hong Kong protest leaders like Joshua Wong, Martin Lee, Johnson Yeung Ching-yin, and Jimmy Lai literally travelling to Washington, receiving funding and political backing from the US government constitutes an overt example of such foreign interference and should be moved to the top of Twitter's purge list.

The fact that Twitter not only has taken no action to expose and stop US interference in Hong Kong, but is actively aiding and abetting it illustrates unmistakable as well as unforgivable hypocrisy shedding any doubt over what Twitter actually is. It is not a social media platform - but a political tool merely masquerading as social media.

This revelation - proven indisputably numerous times and most recently in regards to Hong Kong - should prompt nations around the globe to follow Russia and China's lead in producing domestic alternatives and regulating Twitter, Facebook, and Google out of their information space.

For Twitter and its most recent purge to uphold the "legitimacy" of Hong Kong's protesters - the end result is simply proving that US social media platforms are just as eager in reality to purge users and censor content as they claim China is.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.