If you want to get an idea of how people try to con themselves into believing that evil is not evil, read a letter to the editor to The Wall Street Journal about the Chinese Communist Party’s assault on Jimmy Lai. The author, Huang Jingrui (shown above), is a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry in Hong Kong.
Lai is the former publisher of the now-banned Hong Kong newspaper Apple Daily. After a months-long “transparent” show trial, he was “transparently” sentenced to twenty more years in prison for fighting for freedom and democracy and opposing tyranny.
This is the letter (February 19, 2026):
Your newspaper wasted no time in publishing an editorial titled “Jimmy Lai Gets a Death Sentence” (Review & Outlook, Feb. 10) right after his sentencing to 20 years in prison. [How much time should the Journal have wasted?]
Your editorial decries the sentencing “a profound injustice.” I beg to differ here: The trial was conducted with full transparency, closely witnessed by citizens, the media and foreign consular officials.
Your editorial alleges the sentencing “confirms that Hong Kong…is now firmly under the iron boot of Beijing,” which only exposes your grave misunderstanding of the “one country, two systems” principle implemented in Hong Kong. Please bear in mind that Hong Kong is part of China, and the “one country” has always been the foundation of “two systems.” Any attempt to undermine “one country” is a crime that violates national security and must be held accountable.
Your editorial laments the “end of an era” for Hong Kong. Here I’m delighted to inform you that it is the old era of violence and chaos orchestrated by anti-China elements that has ended in Hong Kong….
Huang Jingrui
Spokesman, Office of the Commissioner of the Chinese Foreign Ministry in the Hong Kong SAR
That’s not the whole letter. The omitted parts don’t contribute to its logical strength.
Even in what I have quoted, there’s more than one non sequitur. But let’s look at one of them. Here is a Huang syllogism:
Premise one (unstated): Injustice is always done in secret.
Premise two: The trial of Jimmy Lai was publicly reported, as transparent as you could possibly get.
Conclusion: Therefore, the trial, conviction, and sentencing of Jimmy Lai were not unjust.
Not too convincing, is it? Not even if premise two were correct, which it isn’t. Neither the CCP pressure to destroy Lai regardless of any considerations of justice nor the actual motives of the courtroom judges were delineated in the super-transparent proceedings.
Also see:
The Wall Street Journal: “Jimmy Lai Gets a Death Sentence”
