Lin Yee-cheng, a columnist for Hong Kong Economic Journal, penned a commentary on the violent attack on former Ming Pao editor-in-chief Lau Chun-to last week. It had a hair-raising headline "Six knife wounds and a pool of blood: the new terrorism is here".

What does Lin mean by "new terrorism" exactly? The definition he gave is "government or pro-government forces brutalize powerless people by means of terror". He was apparently accusing the central government and the patriotic camp in Hong Kong of unleashing "new terrorism" in Hong Kong. As if that was not clear enough, Lin added: "There has emerged a number of 'gangs' with the word 'love' in their names since Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying took office and their behavior somehow reminds people of the political goon squads on the mainland. However, after recent attacks on two heads of media entities in a row it is no longer 'somehow'. Maybe the present-day version of the 'traitor-disposing squad' that terrorized Hong Kong during the 1967 rebellion has already been born."

The police have drawn no conclusion whatsoever on the case, as Lau's attacker has not been caught. But Lin sounded like he was quite sure Lau was attacked because of "significant news reports published in Ming Pao in the past two years when Lau was editor-in-chief". This included reports exposing unauthorized building works at Leung's private residence and a collaboration with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists in uncovering overseas assets of "taizi dang" (children of former or current central government leaders).

Lin obviously knew how preposterous he was by wantonly linking Leung to Lau's case. This is why he countered himself by saying "Ming Pao's detailed reports have not done irreparable damage to Leung, which means Leung should not be so mad as to have Lau whacked even if he hated Ming Pao's guts." However, that is not self-correction by any means, as he went on to justify linking Leung to the case: "The money-laundering business of 'taizi dang' is huge and usually involves 100 billion yuan ($16.3 billion) at a time. Anyone who spoils it has to be killed spectacularly, because that is a good reason to put a price on some one's head if there ever is one (the possibility that these two motives might be linked somehow cannot be ruled out because, for one thing, Leung could be a minion of 'taizi dang')."

Let's be real here. Lin's messed-up logic is worthless, not to mention that Hong Kong society enjoys freedom of speech and the press is never afraid of the authorities. If anyone who upsets "taizi dang" is then harmed as a result then shouldn't our streets be flowing with blood by now? And who is absolutely safe? The fact is the Hong Kong press lambasts someone in power almost every day, but has any journalist been killed so far? Besides, if "the government and pro-government forces" try to "brutalize powerless people by means of terror" but manage to use only two knives on someone, who is merely a former editor-in-chief, how pathetic can they be? And, if Lau got stabbed six times because he had been editor-in-chief of Ming Pao for two years, why has Lin not been targeted, considering that he used be an advisor to the Central Policy Unit of the government and turned into a rabid attacker of the government, who routinely speaks ill of the authorities for any or no reason? Shouldn't he be stabbed a thousand times already?

An upright intellectual with an unshakable conscience should make sure every word they utter is infallible so as not to affect society negatively. It is, therefore, a great shame that Lin assumes "letting facts speak for themselves means not letting people speak at all." That is why he is so good at making up stories all the time and letting his political bias do the talking instead of facts. He is the one who aptly targets others with slanderous accusations and quenches his thirst for attention with outrageous claims intended to cause panic.

If the "new terrorism" has indeed descended on Hong Kong, the only real sign is the social chaos caused by the wild claims churned out by Lin and like-minded politicians, who absolutely hate social stability.

The author is a veteran current affairs commentator.

(HK Edition 03/05/2014 page1)