Wong pitches cash, shows deal to ATV

Wong pitches cash, shows deal to ATV

Kevin Cheng

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Ricky Wong Wai-kay’s Hong Kong Television Network yesterday threw a lifeline to the collapsing Asia Television, by offering 1,000 hours of its programming in exchange for a monthly sum and a 50-50 split in advertising revenue.

In an announcement to the Hong Kong stock exchange at 5.46pm, HKTV said the offer, which includes a monthly payment of HK$5 million to ATV, was put on the table without any negotiations.

Its statement said “the company has today sent to the board of directors of Asia Television Limited a written proposal regarding the possible broadcasting of certain drama programs, variety and infotainment programs of the company and/or any of its subsidiaries via ATV, which is subject to the entering into between the parties a formal written agreement.”

The proposal which lapses on Monday at 5pm includes broadcasting HKTV programs through ATV’s existing analog Home channel and digital Channel 11 simultaneously for four hours per day until December 31.

HKTV said this could end sooner, depending on whether ATV could no longer operate its free television program service. The offer would see HKTV arrange advertising and collect revenue on the two channels and be paid a license fee for its programs, based on 50 percent of the advertising revenue collected.

“As at the date of this announcement, neither the company nor its representatives has entered into any discussion or negotiation in relation to the proposal with ATV, its shareholders, or the joint and several managers of ATV … and therefore, the company does not know whether the proposal is of interest to ATV or its stakeholders,” the HKTV statement read.

An ATV spokesman said the company has received the proposal and that it will need to be discussed with the board and management. Cash-strapped ATV’s free-to-air license expires next April.

NJ Syngagogue Harassed with Firecrackers, ‘Allah Akbar’…


A 21-year-old Clifton man is accused of throwing lit firecrackers outside a synagogue and yelling “Allahu Akbar” before fleeing, according to a Northjersey.com report.

Rizek Musheisen has been charged with bias intimidation, possession of fireworks and criminal mischief, said Passaic Police Department spokesman Andy White.

According to the report, police responded to the Ahavas Israel Synagogue on Van Houten Ave. around 8 p.m. after a report of suspicious activity.

Witnesses at the scene told investigators that a 2012 black Nissan with tinted windows had pulled up in front of the synagogue, and a man later identified as Musheisen exited the vehicle, lit the firecrackers and yelled the phrase before returning to his car.

Police later tracked the car to a Quick Chek parking lot. According to the report, the police found a bag of firecrackers in the car’s trunk upon search of the vehicle. Musheisen was in the car with three men from Passaic, Jersey City and Linden, said the report.

The three men were not charged in connection with the crime. According to the report, investigators believe Musheisen acted alone.

Authorities don’t believe anyone was injured.

In a statement, Ahavas Israel and Rabbi Rav Eisenman condemned the incident and all incidents of intolerance, which he said were inconsistent with the synagogue’s teachings and philosophy.

“I was saddened to learn that certain individuals -whose actions are not representative of the views of the overwhelming majority of our neighbors- have chosen to act in ways which are inconsistent with the American way of liberty and justice for all,” Eisenman said.

Advanced Feminist Logic™


Some will say that it is an oxymoron to speak of feminist logic, but after many months of careful study, I have mastered the basics:

1. Do you have a vagina?
2. Vote Democrat!

This is the simplest understanding of feminism, i.e., whatever arguments are necessary to persuade unhappy women that voting Democrat is the best revenge. However, mastering Advanced Feminist Logic™ requires the disciple to accept without question the premise that women are universally oppressed by patriarchy. All women are victims of this system of oppression, the feminist believes, and all men benefit from it.

“Feminist consciousness is consciousness of victimization . . . to come to see oneself as a victim.”
Sandra Lee Bartky, Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (1990)

Whether they are speaking of “male supremacy” or “sexism,” whether the immediate object of their indignation is “rape culture,” “harassment” or the “objectification” of women in media, always the fundamental premise of the feminist argument is this systemic, historical and universal oppression of women. What we might call the Patriarchal Thesis is really an extraordinary assertion, requiring us to believe that there are no natural differences between men and women. Rather, everything we consider to be “natural” in terms of human traits and behavior — the masculinity of males and the femininity of females — is socially constructed by the gender binary of the heterosexual matrix.

Those who have achieved Feminist Consciousness understand that differences between men and women are an illusion created by the patriarchy in order to oppress women. And if you don’t accept this extraordinary claim, you are either (a) a woman in need of further enlightenment to achieve Feminist Consciousness, or (b) a male, and therefore a beneficiary of oppression and probably also a rape apologist.

“All women are prisoners and hostages to men’s world. . . .
Each man is a threat. We can’t escape men.”

Disagreement with Feminist Logic™ becomes impossible once you accept the Patriarchal Thesis that is the fundamental premise of the feminist worldview. And if you do accept this premise, you will find it quite difficult to deny that “PIV is always rape, OK?”

Heterosexuality itself is both the cause and effect of male supremacy —“most women have to be coerced into heterosexuality,” to quote Professor Marilyn Frye — because, in the feminist worldview, there is no natural reason for women to be attracted to men, and thus it is patriarchal indoctrination that deceives women into the delusion of “love.” According to feminist theory, women’s “love” for men is actually a symptom of fear, a syndrome akin to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a reaction to “sexual terror” enforced by male violence, as Professor Dee Graham explained.

If the preceding paragraph strikes you as insane, then obviously you have not achieved Feminist Consciousness. The premise of the Patriarchal Thesis leads invariably to the conclusion that males are at best unnecessary or irrelevant, insofar as they are not actively engaged in rape, violence and oppression. Fear and Loathing of the Penis — an existential dread of male sexuality — is the underlying spirit of feminism. It is scarcely surprising to see feminists at our colleges and universities promoting hysteria about “rape culture,” as no feminist can possibly imagine why a woman would ever consent to sexual intercourse with a man.

So as I was describing this in my usual jocular fashion on Twitter, I found myself accosted by Ken Simon, a theatrical actor, playwright and director. Rather than ping-ponging back and forth 140 characters at a time, I wrote him a message via Twit Longer:

Let me explain something, as politely as possible.
You came trolling into my timeline, accusing me of “misconstruing” feminism, as if I don’t know what I’m talking about. Never mind the fact that I’m sitting here with about five dozen feminist books within arm’s reach. The tweet to which you responded was, in fact, a subtweet in response to a feminist who had insulted me after I tried to compliment her.
So, here comes the White Knight, Sir Kenneth of Simon, to add further insults and I’m like, “Who is this asshole, anyway?” Go over and check your TL, and you’re a liberal advocate for gun control whose chief concern today is that Hillary Clinton might not be liberal enough for you. You’re inside an ideological bubble, an echo chamber divided from the exterior world by a high towering wall of Epistemic Closure, and I don’t know that anything I say could convince you to reconsider your opinions. There is no reason for me to argue with you, except for the fact that you decided to show off for your friends: “Look how superior I am to This Guy Here.”
Fine. Bask in the warm glow of your self-congratulatory gesture. Just don’t expect me to join in the applause. Also, don’t expect any reward for being a White Knight of Male Feminism.
Ask around, Ken. Feminists don’t actually like Male Feminists.
Eventually, you’ll discover that feminists consider you just another misogynist swine, and your effort to ingratiate yourself to them by parroting their rhetoric will only inspire feminists to hold you in even deeper contempt than they hold men generally. You may not believe me today, but if you are intelligent, honest and observant, one day you’ll realize I’m right.
Feminism is a totalitarian doctrine of hatred. It cannot be reformed, nor can it be appeased. Feminism is an ideology that demands war against human nature, and the question is whether we can stop this deadly menace before it destroys our civilization.
— Robert Stacy McCain

That’s not a joke. People need to wake the hell up.