Monthly Archives: October 2014

Tsang Yok-sing: Voice of reason

Hans Mahncke

Tsang Yok-sing

I have always felt that if Hong Kong has to have a pro-Beijing type in charge (and unfortunately as long as the CCP is in charge, it does), the best man for the job would be Tsang Yok-sing. Although I personally disagree with most of his political inclinations, Tsang has always struck me as an overall decent guy who won’t blurt out gibberish, just to please Beijing – unlike the pathological liar they put in charge of Hong Kong.

Of course, it comes as no surprise that Tsang has come forward to dismiss the ‘foreign forces are behind the protests’ B.S. propagated by CY Leung.

Here’s how RTHK reports it:

LegCo president and pro-establishment DAB lawmaker, Tsang Yok-sing, has said he does not believe foreigners are the driving force behind the Occupy Central civil disobedience movement.
His comments, on Cable TV, appear to contradict the view often expressed by mainland media that people from outside China are funding the Occupy movement in order to start a so-called colour revolution.

Earlier this month, the Chief Executive CY Leung said forces from other countries had been encouraging the mass protests, though he refused to identify them.

 

CY’s “foreign forces” pychosis

After CY Leung recently made accusations that the Occupy movement is somehow connected with an evil foreign plot to undermine China, a number of people have quite rightly asked to see evidence.

True to his tried and tested M.O., CY is now saying that he would “consider” disclosing the evidence “at an appropriate time”. In other words, he intends to do nothing at all.

Of course, there is no evidence because there is no plot. For CY, the best way of maintaining the delusion is if people just forget about this issue (just as they seem to have forgotten about his illegal structures, about Dreambear, about his West Kowloon conflict of interest fiasco and so many other things).

As Mark Twain once said, “Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles [replace: delusional liars] who really mean it.”

 

CY’s lies

Knowing CY Leung of old, everything he has done since being anointed to the position of chief executive has been very much predictable and in character.

By now, his problems with the truth are of course widely known, perhaps first exposed to a wider audience by Henry Tang during the 2012 debates when CY lied about his leanings towards tear gassing protesters. This exposure has since been supplemented many times over by CY himself – as a start, one just needs to look at his lies about illegal works at his house. The “Dreambear” case also comes to mind.

So aside from his general psychosis, he is also a pathological liar – or perhaps one flows from the other.

Thanks to David Webb of webb-site.com we now have another example of CY lying, this time about whether he would run in 2017. Check out the video.

Notice that, last year, when he said that he would run again, he turns to the camera, as if to speak to the public rather than the interviewer. Such was his confidence about running in 2017. As the interviewer points out, things are of course different now. But rather than acknowledge this, CY just brazenly and without blinking declares that the interviewer got his facts wrong and that he never said he would run in 2017. What a lying lowlife thug.

CY’s psychosis

Hans Mahncke

Bruno Ganz as CY Leung

Those who have long believed that CY Leung suffers from some serious form of psychosis now have spectacular proof in form of CY’s bizarre interview on Newsline.

For those who cannot stomach watching this pathological liar disseminate his self-serving drivel, in sum, CY is now saying that “foreign forces” are at work in the pro-democracy movement. Reminds me of the time when he was university council chairman when he also felt that all bad things – such as a staff union organising a protest – were being orchestrated by external forces, money was being funneled in through evil outsiders etc.

The sooner this vile creature passes into oblivion the better for everyone.

PS If it has not already been done, someone ought to produce a CY Leung version of Hitler ranting away in his bunker in “Der Untergang”.

And then there were CY’s fiduciary duties

While I have previously written about CY Leung’s tax problem, it is worth revisiting the issue of his fiduciary duties to the shareholders of DTZ. When the initial revelations about CY’s secret deal were disclosed by the Sydney Morning Herald on Wednesday, barrister Alan Leong called the news a “cast-iron case” of a breach of his fiduciary duty to DTZ shareholders.

Five days later, it is now being reported that the CY’s secret deal was concluded on the very day that a rival bid was made to acquire for DTZ. Not just any rival bid, but one that was £100 million higher than that made by UGL. For context, UGL’s bid was £77.5 million. In other words, the rivals were offering 130% more than UGL.

Just as interesting is the news that UGL is now selling DTZ for a LOT MORE than they got it for. The Brisbane Times quotes a figure of $ 1 billion.

And what does CY’s spokesman say? He dissembles:

“The decision to sell DTZ was a decision made by DTZ board of directors. DTZ played a significant role in initiating and negotiating the terms of the ‘resignation’ agreement that Mr Leung entered with UGL.”

In other words, he is trying to say that DTZ knew of the secret deal. Note, however, the words used: “played a significant role in initiating and negotiating”. Played, significant role, initiating, negotiating: all of these are typical examples of the language of dissembling. For instance, the word ‘significant’ can simply mean that they were involved in some way or another. Whether it was actually ‘significant’ is largely subjective. Similarly, the scope of initiating and negotiating are not delineated in any way. No doubt, as the truth is gradually revealed, CY (or his spokesman) will twist those words to fit whatever the newly revealed facts are.

Lastly, although not picked up in the reports that I have read, I think it is fairly significant that the head of China’s liaison office in Hong Kong, did not see “any big problem” with CY’s secret deal. Not exactly “unwavering support”.