On September 30, Philadelphia raised the flag of communist China at City Hall, which sparked significant criticism from human rights activists and legislators. This event was organized to celebrate the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) National Day, marking the declaration of their rule after a long civil war.
• Event Context: The flag-raising was co-organized by a group associated with the CCP to commemorate its National Day on October 1. This marks the beginning of a regime responsible for extensive human rights abuses.
• Protests: The Tibetan Association of Philadelphia protested the flag event, calling for its immediate removal. They argue that the flag represents a totalitarian regime responsible for the oppression and genocide of millions, including Tibetans and Uyghurs.
• Statements of Concern: Activists like Tsering Jurme and Rushan Abbas voiced their opposition, emphasizing the CCP's history of violence, cultural destruction, and ongoing persecution.
• Political Responses: Local and federal officials, including Pennsylvania state Sen. Doug Mastriano and Rep. John Moolenaar, criticized the decision to raise the flag, deeming it disrespectful to the values of freedom and human rights.
• Historical Precedence: Philadelphia is not new to raising the Chinese flag; similar events occurred in 2019 and have also been reported in other U. S. cities like New York and Boston. In the past, such actions have often been met with backlash from anti-CCP groups.
• Sister City Partnerships: Philadelphia has a sister city relationship with Tianjin, China. Lawmakers expressed concerns that such partnerships may promote the CCP's agenda under the guise of cultural exchange.
• Involvement of Local Organizations: The involvement of local Chinese organizations, which are linked to the CCP's United Front work, has raised alarms about their influence and objectives in the city.
The decision to raise the flag of the CCP at City Hall faced widespread criticism from various sectors, highlighting deep concerns about human rights and the implications of endorsing a regime known for its oppressive actions. Local authorities, including the mayor’s office, have not publicly responded to these criticisms.
No comments:
Post a Comment