Differing views on human rights activist Harry Wu
I would like to express my support for the Hong Kong government's refusal to give a visa to the anti-China campaigner Harry Wu.
Mr Wu, who spent nearly 20 years in prison on the mainland, is overly critical of China's human rights record.
No nation in the world has a perfect human rights record and that includes Mr Wu's adopted country, the US. As a US citizen, perhaps he ought to look in his own backyard for human rights abuses.
In Mr Wu we have a creation of the global media machine. Without the media attention he has received, he would probably be out of a job. With it, he has set up a research foundation into political prisoners in China and finds a ready audience on the US lecture circuit.
His job is to create as much controversy as possible so as to get maximum media attention. On the face of it, the man who complains so loudly about the human rights situation in China now owes his living to it.
The kind of media coverage given to Harry Wu only encourages him to act more shamelessly as an anti-China human rights activist. The more controversy he creates, the more attention he gets from the media.
He is dedicated to revenge against China and he does not seem to care what issue he plays up, whether it is people in prison, or alleged trading in human organs, or anything else. China is not the only nation in the world with problems, Mr Wu.
Why should Hong Kong allow him in to cause trouble? Would you welcome a troublemaker into your home if you knew he intended to embarrass you and your family?
I fully support the government banning him from entering Hong Kong and if people outside Asia complain, well, let them. Why do they not mind their own business and let us in Asia mind ours?
Secretary for Security Regina Ip's response to the banning of Harry Wu was not only irresponsible for a person in her position, but demonstrates a strident arrogance (South China Morning Post, June 25).
Mrs Ip does not think Mr Wu needs to come to Hong Kong to talk to 'his friends'. She said he could communicate via e-mail or by phone.
Banning Mr Wu is another blow to the freedom of expression and assembly in Hong Kong and greatly damages its image. It sends the message that the administration honours the authoritarian style of government practised by Beijing. This should be awake-up call for the people of Hong Kong.