After posting my October 27 blog, in which I announced that I would stop writing about my story and reiterated my goal and desire to be Mr. Warren Buffett's apprentice, I thought I could finally take my mind off the development of my story and concentrate on catching up with Mr. Buffett. But I could not. Actually, I was totally shocked by the reactions to my truthful, innocuous blog. What's more, I also became increasingly worried about my upcoming court appearances associated with my protest on Pattullo Bridge last year.
I have to write again. I feel like I'm under the crossfire of politics and law.
Mehar Arar, who was detained by US immigration officials at JFK Airport likely based on false and misleading information furnished by RCMP and who was later tortured in Syria following the "extraordinary rendition" by American authorities, says that he lives a double life in that the memories of torture still comes back regularly to haunt him. [Edited 20061212]
I guess I live a double life too -- an extraordinarily unusual one online and an extraordinarily bland one offline. But unlike Mr. Arar's, both aspects of my life are real.
Online life
I devote most of my energy to my "public" life interacting with "people in the loop" via media and Internet, in order to seek justice for Cecilia Zhang (and, let's not forget Dr. Guobing Jiang) and myself. In the course of my endeavor, I had to be drawn into politics and write about it. Apparently, my writing has drawn quite a following among politicians and pundits, both here in Canada and abroad.
The latest example would be about the report I had given up writing: The Politics of Polarization, Propaganda and Peaceful Coexistence.
May - June, 2006
One of the main ideas of my proposed report came from my own experience and observations after I realized in May that RCMP/CSIS was the culprit of Cecilia Zhang abduction and murder. Mostly out of the desire to protect Canada's image, I took a moderate response so as to make it easier for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to provide his political leadership in my file. And I justified my action in my blog The Meaning of Justice on June 19: "Moderation is a valued temperament in this polarized world". Unfortunately, Mr. Harper failed to do that and another tragedy occurred in Toronto in July.
August 2, 2006
Just hours after I posted the second half of my open letter to Stephen Harper on August 2 – prompted by the death of Dr. Guobing Jiang - Warren Kinsella said in a blog posted on National Post website that "one-sided ceasefire" means suicide. I believe he was talking about Dr. Jiang's death, except that as a spin doctor, he twisted my act of political moderation into "one-sided ceasefire" with the killer.
September 18, 2006
I set up a template for my proposed report in the evening of September 18. I did not put out any content except for the title: The Politics of Polarization, Propaganda and Peaceful Coexistence.
September 19, 2006
In his speech to United Nations, President Bush expressed his desire to work with moderates of other countries.
September 27, 2006
In hosting the presidents of Pakistan and Afghanistan, President Bush said: "The forces of moderation are being challenged by extremists and radicals." Mr. Bush also suggested that supporting moderation and defeating extremism go hand in hand.
September 29, 2006
In hosting Kazakh president, Mr. Bush again pleaded to "support the forces of moderation throughout the world".
Memo to President Bush: To work with the moderates, you have to moderate your own behavior first. It's always easier to talk the talk than to walk the walk.
Late September to early October, 2006
In a series of columns on Washington Post, David S. Broder tried to provide some input – from Bush's point of view – for my report. I appreciate his efforts. Thanks but no thanks.
October 3, 2006
Secretary Condoleezza Rice in Saudi Arabia: "First of all, we have made very clear that we believe that all parties now in the region need to be dedicated to helping particularly these young government in places like Lebanon and Iraq and to help the Palestinians. But the way that one does that is to support the moderate forces that are fighting those who are extremists and are fighting those who would use terror as a political weapon."
In fact, Rice saw her entire Middle East tour of that week as an opportunity to "rally moderate forces and moderate voices".
October 9, 2006
Foreign Minister Peter MacKay said about North Korea's nuclear test: "Everyone is going to have to moderate their response in the short term, so as not to cause an improper reaction."
Note 1: In part 2 of my open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper on August 2, I said that "the problem with my blog [Summer Hibernation] was in the over-reaction by the Bush administration [with a media nuke]."
Note 2: Iraq War was an unnecessary over-reaction to 9/11 by the Bush administration.
Note on Note 2 (20061210): No puns intended. The sooner the Americans realize that over-reaction to terrorism - a voilent form of extremism - plays into the hands of terrorists, the more efficient of a war on terror they can fight.
Note 3: This rare change of heart by MacKay revealed that, after all, he knew what's right. Whether to have the courage to do what's right is the true test of leadership.
October 12, 2006
British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett on Guantanamo Bay : "The existence of the camp is as much a radicalising and discrediting influence as it is a safeguard to security."
I fully agree.
October 27, 2006
I announced that I wouldn't be writing the report.
October 28, 2006
Lee Teng-hui stole a page from Bush's playbook above. Again, it's ironic to see a radical Taiwan secessionist to steal my idea of moderation.
I am flattered with this kind of attention to my writing ever since I started my journey more than two years ago. At the same time, I am also frustrated that my cause has been totally ignored and my offline life continues to be miserable.
Offline life
Maybe you haven't thought about my miserable offline life too much. I seldom wrote about it because I did not want to bore you.
It's a tough life not only because of the many problems I have to deal with - financial problems, health problems, legal problems, to name just a few – but also because of the bareness of it. I do not know how to answer a question as simple as "What do you do for a living", let along uttering a word about my online life to people around me lest they think I am crazy.
But the worst part of my life was to have RCMP/CSIS on my tail. Just take a look at some of incidents that I mentioned in my previous reports and blogs. Now that I know RCMP/CSIS was the culprit of Cecilia Zhang abduction and murder, logically, those incidents were the works of RCMP/CSIS, too. And they all make sense to me now. For example,
·
I wrote in my first report about an Internet incident in March 2001 where somebody seemed to be able to exert some control over the Internet to deliver individualized information to the public computer I was using. Often times, I wondered how it could be possible. Now I understand it was the job of RCMP/CSIS, acting in concert with Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC).·
Somebody was able to detect the existence of a cell phone I purchased anonymously for the singular purpose of communicating with Mr. Warren Buffett in May 2002. I thought it would take some really resourceful people to pull off such an activity. Now I understand that it was the work of RCMP/CSIS.·
When I was preparing to file my own civil case in fall 2002, the calls I made – most of them were of a legal nature - using the public telephone in the New Westminster courthouse library seemed to have been monitored. I used to think that such activities were too brazen to be attributed to any individuals. Now I understand they were the works of RCMP/CSIS.·
Of course, I now know the infamous videotaping of me in or around my residence from 2002 to 2004 was conducted by RCMP/CSIS - which was before they killed Cecilia Zhang - and likely continued after I came back from Ottawa in summer 2005, which may explain a couple of my failed attempts to make friends.I believe that my current Bail Officer, who took over my bail file at the end of March, is a spy. I also believe that RCMP/CSIS has always been working on people around me to, among other things, try to instigate conflict and spread rumors about me. All these just make my tough life almost unbearable.
Legal case
What worries me most is that, with only a few week to go until my next court appearance, UBC Law Students' Legal Advice Program (LSLAP), who had been holding on to my case for several months, suddenly informed me early this month that they would no longer represent me.
The reason, according to LSLAP, was that "the issue of mental health had been raised". Of course, LSLAP knew from the beginning that the Crown had raised the issue at my bail hearing. I even once asked LSLAP to help me to have my bail conditions reviewed by a judge.
What's even stranger was that LSLAP insisted that I contact a specific lawyer to represent me. And LSLAP suggested that, "because the issue of mental health had been raised", this particular lawyer would be able to help me get financial aid from Legal Aid Society.
Again, LSLAP knew that I had applied for Legal Aid before and had been turned down. And Legal Aid Society knew that the Crown had raised the issue of mental health. What possible difference could it make now if I apply again, except that this particular lawyer is involved in the process?
Besides, my Legal Aid application was turned down under very suspicious circumstance last November. I was approved initially by my worker, only to have it turned down by a manager hastily on a weekend.
I called this lawyer whom LSLAP referred me to, with those questions. His answers were evasive. I believe he taped our conversation. He seemed to want to let me know that he knew the common perception that I had been called upon to be the 5 th generation of Chinese leadership.
(By the way, when I wrote in March that there was a possibility that the Chinese government was interested in my service, I was being reticent. But "people in the loop" already knew what I meant. The common perception I sensed was that I was called upon to be the next generation of Chinese leadership. My own realization came about gradually last fall. It was Stephen Harper, with his famous 5 campaign priorities, who gave me the clearest hint in the middle of last election. It was also around that time that Li Yang wrote several articles on the inner workings of Chinese leadership.)
All these smack of the shadowy work of RCMP/CSIS, similar to what they did to me when I tried to hold a news conference right after I was released on bail last November. RCMP/CSIS sabotaged my efforts then by (1) delaying my email and cell phone communications with reporters; (2) affected SFU when I called SFU and tried to book a room in their downtown campus. (Sometimes I wonder if RCMP/CSIS has a liaison officer at SFU just to be able to better monitor and control me.)
To have a lawyer represent me properly is very important. It was precisely because I did not have my own lawyer during my bail hearing that the Crown was able to impose on me such strict and unfair bail conditions, which caused me considerable hardship in the past year, and to discredit my protest by simply saying to the judge that my Internet postings were "not really suggestive of a mind that is operating sort of on a logical [ground]." (The bail hearing took place after New Westminster police kept me in a solitary confinement with lights on for a whole night.)
For the Crown, I believe that they know my underlying cause of the protest is valid, but they either don't care, or they are out to discredit me. I suspect the Crown is following the political development of my story. For example, they decided in mid-March to proceed with only the lesser of the two charges against me. And they sent me the new Information sheet on May 3, coincidentally the same date when Min Chen trial was fixed because it was on that date when Cecilia Zhang's parents signed their victim impact statements.
As for RCMP/CSIS, nothing will make them happier than to drag me through the mud in the upcoming trial.
I am fully aware the inconvenience my protest on Pattullo Bridge caused to the motorists on that day. For that, I have apologized publicly in court, on a newspaper and in my blogs. However, I do need a lawyer to represent me in court so that I could properly defend myself.
That's why I have to continue writing.
