To describe Falun Gong as "a new religious group deeply hostile to Beijing" as done in the recent @abcnews report is such an inappropriate way to phrase things.

I was in China in the summer of 1999 after FLG hosted a peaceful protest in Beijing. Nightly news was nothing but endless rants about it being a dangerous cult. Literally insane over the top stuff that cultivated hatred of this religious group among the general population.

So many people were arrested, tortured, even killed simply for their religious beliefs. This insane crackdown continues to this day.

Yet @abcnews wants to characterize FLG as "deeply hostile to Beijing," as if Beijing was simply being all cool and laidback and suddenly Falun Gong was hostile to them.
This type of victim blaming is disgraceful.

Also, for Jocelyn Chey to say, "It would be difficult for anyone who is involved in establishing or encouraging good working relations with another country if you come from an organisation which has got such a clear hostile position to begin with." wtf

First, why is religion being taken into consideration? What religious beliefs does Jocelyn Chey have?
Second, Chey should know better than to characterize the position of any of the people mentioned as hostile- it's simply honest.
BUT Beijing treats honesty as hostility.

Chey already whined about this on the embarrassing conspiracy theory laden meNadUe blog in March boo hoo hoo https://twitter.com/j_laurenceson/status/1234966964654575616?s=20

And of course Brophy finding excuses for Beijing to refuse engagement. Nothing is ever Beijing's fault in his view: "It wouldn't surprise me if the presence of Vision Times representatives on that board would be enough for China to simply boycott a body like that."

Finally, for someone who had an ACIAC position funded by agent of influence Huang Xiangmo to say this is very rich "If your employer... has a political agenda which conflicts with the agenda of the advisory body to which you're appointed, that's definitely a conflict of interest"