The little attention the Hong Kong media, including the South China Morning Post, has given to the plight of Shi Tao, the journalist jailed on the mainland, is nothing short of frightening. Shi has been condemned to 10 years in prison for doing something the United Nations General Assembly would consider most commendable. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: 'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.' Both mainland authorities and Yahoo! have violated this article. As long as Shi is in prison, the media should keep the pressure on so he can obtain a new and fair trial. Yahoo!, for its part, owes all its clients an apology. And it should assure them that it will not betray its clients in future. Yahoo!'s statement that it has to obey China's local laws is absurd. Is it right to obey the unjust laws of any autocratic government? Should Yahoo! not instead be concerned about obeying the laws of decency, of respect for clients, and complying with the universal declaration of human rights? The mega contracts between giant media companies and autocratic regimes pose a great danger for freedom. People are worried. It is becoming very clear that self-censorship is alive and well not only in the mainland but in Hong Kong. GIANNI CRIVELLER, Aberdeen Cancel Tamar project I could not agree more with what Maria Tam Wai-chu says in her article 'Tamar - central to Hong Kong's renewal' (September 29), and your leader the same day ('Not more boxes, but thinking outside the box'). In view of the scale of the project to build a government headquarters, the big money that will go into it and the consequences for the whole community, I think Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's administration should think twice before making a decision to proceed. After all, this is not a pond for someone's pleasure in Government House, but a major development that will affect the community and Hong Kong's future generations. P. H. CHIU, Quarry Bay 'Long Hair' doing fine Peter Lok ('Long Hair spoiled trip', September 28) wonders what the 60,000 people who voted for Leung Kwok-hung in the Legislative Council election might now be thinking. As one of the 60,000, I am thinking: 'Good, that is exactly why I voted for him'. The only people who came close to spoiling the 'ice-breaking' trip to Guangdong were the poodles who burst into applause at the words of the provincial Communist Party chief Zhang Dejiang . The democrats, on the contrary, made the whole exercise worthwhile by tentatively exploring the limits of dialogue with mainland authorities on issues that are of concern to many Hong Kong people. Was this not the whole point of the trip to the mainland? Senior Guangdong cadres are well aware both of Long Hair's methods and the boldness of many of the democratically elected legislators in voicing their constituents' concerns. I would venture that even they might have been disappointed had the 'ice-breaking' trip not had any ice to break. K. N. MAK, Ma On Shan Solve, don't just criticise I read with interest the letter by George C. K. Jor headlined 'Downside to the magic?' (September 27), along with every other letter which criticised Hong Kong Disneyland. I would like to make a few comments on the latest letter. First, I have been to Hong Kong Disneyland with my family and, although it was overcrowded, my younger brother, who is nine years old, thoroughly enjoyed the visit: he indeed had a 'magical' time. This has made me think that Disneyland probably does not deserve most of the criticism. Second, and more importantly, no matter who criticises the theme park and no matter how many attacks are levelled at it, Disneyland is here to stay. As many critics have pointed out, the Hong Kong government spent billions of dollars to help build Disneyland, which reinforces the fact that it will not demolish the theme park because of some people's opinions. Lastly, and most important, if criticism of Hong Kong Disneyland continues, it will create a bad image for the theme park. This will discourage people from going to the attraction. So, ironically, critics can affect some of the things they have been criticising, for example, profitability - by contributing to a loss in profits. This is not to say criticising should be discouraged, but instead every negative statement made should be backed up with a suggestion to help solve the problem described. NATHAN CHAN, Sha Tin End fireworks pollution I commend the letter by Keith Kwok Ka-keung, permanent secretary for the environment, ('Tackling air pollution', September 28). This is the kind of substantive and frank response we expect from government servants. Mr Kwok's assertion that Hong Kong's pollution is not just a local issue and requires joint efforts with Guangzhou to address is quite valid. But what if we go down to an even more localised level, say, Discovery Bay? Surely, here the government can act decisively on its own to substantially lower the daily pollution caused by Disneyland's fireworks, bearing in mind that effective pollution-reducing technology is already in use elsewhere by Disney? I, and no doubt all Discovery Bay residents, look forward to Mr Kwok's usual substantive and frank response. GAURANG THAKKAR, Central Keep islands' wildlife I have recently been able to review the plan for conservation and ecotourism development drawn up by Martin Williams for Lantau ( www.hkoutdoors.com ). It is a superb alternative to the government plan, which I believe amounts to unsustainable, ecologically destructive development. As a conservation biologist, I have been visiting Lantau and nearby islands annually since 1979. I typically bring groups of other biologists, graduate and undergraduate students, and amateur naturalists. We have discovered new species of reptiles and insects, and documented new habitats for many rare species. We work with colleagues at local universities, and the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, among others. We know Lantau and the surrounding islands, like Peng Chau, Hei Ling Chau, Chau Kung To, Shek Kwu Chau, and the Sokos, are treasure troves of biodiversity. But over the years we have lost a lot. The consumptive destruction of most of Chek Lap Kok, the urbanisation of the Tung Chung region, the Disneyfication of Penny's Bay, and continued housing development along Lantau's south coast have all destroyed significant natural areas and habitat. The demise of agriculture, too, has resulted in paddies reverting to shrub. This has decreased the habitat for many species specialised for marsh and paddy life. Buffalos and cattle are our allies in helping maintain these open ecosystems, but active agriculture is needed too. All these factors are considered in the alternative plan. I urge concerned citizens to study this plan and, I hope, assist us in making it a reality. JAMES LAZELL, Lantau Don't abandon teens Being a compassionate society requires effort. Treating the question of teenage anal intercourse as solely a legal question, divorced from morals, science, logic and health, is bogus. Emotional and relationship damage - sometimes beginning as early as 18 months of age - is often cited as the initiation of homosexuality. Many gays do not recall the damage which ultimately led to their homosexuality. But where is the collection of worldwide studies that clearly establishes homosexuality as being caused by something other than relationships or emotional problems? The blatant claim that anal intercourse is a desirable choice for teenagers is clear. But where is the proof of benefit to our teenagers? An ongoing, published American study collects and summarises the death notices of gays from 18 gay publications. Over 10,000 death notices have been logged. Only 9 per cent of the homosexuals lived to 65. The figure was 2 per cent for those who died of Aids. Meanwhile, death notices for the general public revealed that 80 per cent of married men lived to age 65 or older. Homosexuality is highly dangerous for life expectancy. We are not a compassionate society if we accept brazen claims that result in teenagers being added to tomorrow's statistics for premature death. The present death statistics for homosexuals are bad enough. Shame on us if our silence condones misinformation foisted upon our vital, impressionable youth. GORDON TRUSCOTT, Yuen Long
