Will today's students remember?

Keeping memories of June 4 alive is a challenge, write Albert Wong and Eva Wu
Last month, in a small room at the back of the Hong Kong Professional Teachers Union headquarters in Mong Kok, eight students gathered to discuss their feelings towards the 1989 democracy movement.

Sitting around a small rectangular table in a cramped room, the eight students hesitatingly introduced themselves and revealed which universities they attended before expressing their feelings on a historical event they have rarely had the opportunity to discuss.

They drank tea and ate biscuits. All eight of them were only 20 years old.

Twenty years earlier, students from universities all over Beijing had descended upon Tiananmen Square to commemorate the death of Hu Yaobang and call for widespread reforms in a protest movement that ended with the crackdown on June 4.

Wang Dan , a history student at Peking University, who later topped a most wanted list for his involvement in the protest, had just turned 20.

Wuerkaixi , a student at Beijing Normal University, second on the wanted list, was 21.
Last month's tea gathering was organised by the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China, which hopes to stoke interest in the 1989 pro-democracy movement among students too young to remember it. The Y89 movement hopes to gather students born in 1989 to take part in commemorative events and take to the stage during the
June 4 candle-light vigil to symbolise how the next generation will not forget.

But so far, only 60 students have joined, well short of the 200 originally hoped for.

Many blame the lack of awareness on the absence of structured teaching and the unwillingness of textbook publishers to dedicate space to such a sensitive topic.

Another factor dissuading greater participation is the stigma attached to being politically active. Young people who participate in the June 4 candle-light vigil are sometimes derided by their peers for "playing with candle wax".

Despite the obstacles, activists are optimistic that by using technology, including the Web, along with the persistence of those who remember the events, the democracy movement will not be forgotten.

Li Yiu-kai, who is helping to organise the Y89 movement, admitted that recruiting participants has been difficult, and that at first, potential participants were worried about job prospects and whether they would be barred from the mainland.

Christina Chan Hau-man, who made headlines as a pro-Tibet protester who was hauled away while the Olympic torch relay passed through Hong Kong, is cited as an example of one who has been stigmatised because of her views.

Following her protest, she was denied entry to Macau under its internal security law even though she planned only to board a connecting flight that same day.

Furthermore, curiosity about her views turned to animosity, with both her e-mail and Facebook accounts being flooded with unwanted messages. "The guy who first organised the Facebook campaign with me - he just doesn't want anything to do with me any more," said Ms Chan. "I did think about leaving Hong Kong and never coming back."

Judith Ngan Sin-ling, a 20-year-old Baptist University student, said that while she grew up in a family who cared deeply about the 1989 movement, it was only this year that she committed herself to participating in commemorative events. "I never felt it was something I couldn't talk about because we talk about it all the time [at home]. But now I feel it is getting harder to talk about it, which is why I feel I need to do something," she said.

Ms Ngan has signed up to take to the stage at Victoria Park on June 4, but managed to persuade only one of her friends to take an interest. "It's not that they laugh at me, but they just don't care," she said. Hong Kong Federation of Students Secretary General Crystal Chow Ching blamed a lack of education rather than discrimination for preventing young people from participating.

"The real problem is not the students themselves, but [the fact that the] education system does not encourage much discussion of this topic. The lack of information in the textbooks is the real problem," Ms Chow said.

Last month, the students' union at City University published its monthly newspaper commemorating the anniversary. On its front page, it stated: "On June 4, 1989, the Chinese Communist Party's general secretary Hu Yaobang suddenly passed away."

The two factual mistakes in the statement immediately raised concerns about the extent of student ignorance over the topic. Hu died on April 15, 1989, and was no longer the party's general secretary.

Coverage of the crackdown in history textbooks for secondary students varies from just one sentence to two pages, with most of them labelling the crackdown as the "June 4 incident".
One publication dismisses the several months of protests, political deliberations, and military crackdown in one short sentence: "The government suppressed the student movement." In other textbooks, the "June 4 incident" is mentioned without further details and interested students must seek further information in the footnotes.

None of the textbooks say the People's Liberation Army "opened fire"; only words like "armed interference" or "the army cleared Tiananmen Square" are used. There are no pictures of tanks, only of protesting students. None of the textbooks touch on casualties or the death toll. The Education Bureau said its curriculum development institute outlined a guide for each subject but also allowed editorial freedom for textbook publishers. Textbooks were important but were not the only references, the bureau stressed.

With limited information in textbooks, veteran Chinese history teacher Chan Hon-sum organises his own materials. Every year since the crackdown, Mr Chan has spent a lesson showing footage from news reports at the time, displaying newspaper clippings and sometimes sharing with them his personal views on the crackdown.

"I am never too radical in class and the footage I show is just news reports," he said, adding that he came under no pressure from the school as a result.

"The way I teach is similar to news reporting but I do not hide my personal views from them. I do tell them that I was aggrieved whenever I recall it," said Mr Chan, who has taught history for almost 30 years. "I think teachers can share with students their thoughts on the incident. It does not matter if students have opposite views {hellip} what matters is that the facts cannot be washed away, particularly those having significant impact on the future."

Ho Hon-kuen, deputy president of the pressure group Education Convergence and deputy principal of Elegantia College in Sheung Shui, shows news reports and film documentaries about the protests and crackdown every year.

Mr Ho said the crackdown should be understood in the context of contemporary Chinese history. "It is not enough to talk about June 4. The [1919] May Fourth movement should also be taught. The crackdown has its origins and consequences," he said.

With Chinese history textbooks generally avoiding the politically sensitive details of the crackdown, Richard Tsoi Yiu-cheong, vice-chairman of the alliance, worried that the younger generation would be misled: "They may think it was not something big or it was just a general social issue, which had no significant impact at all. Once they are out of school and realise the difference between what they learn and the fuller picture, they may misunderstand, and think that some people have magnified the whole thing," he said.

However, Mr Tsoi remained optimistic. "What we are doing is to guide them into making the first step. I hope they will make the second and the third step to discover the facts by themselves."

Indeed, Mr Li said that despite the disappointing reaction from 20-year-olds so far, those who had signed up had given him confidence that the memory of June 4 would not die.

Reflecting on the tea party last month, he said that despite initial nervousness, the students showed a deeper than expected knowledge. "You could tell that they understood this was not just an isolated event, but one that has implications for democratic development in China and Hong Kong" he said.

Mr Li, who has also created the Y89 website which includes YouTube clips of events in 1989, said the internet had been one of the most significant factors in preserving June 4 in people's consciousness. "Real images are always much better than our written texts," he said, adding that the alliance was planning to adopt more new media technologies in its efforts to educate the public.

Even immigration obstacles for exiled dissidents will soon be overcome, with plans to hold video conferences, so the likes of Wang Dan can talk to students, Mr Li said.

And despite their relative lack of activism compared to their counterparts in 1989, who joined hunger strikes and took donations to the protesters, Andrew To Kwan-hang, then-secretary general of the HKFS, said he was not overly concerned about today's students. "The current crop of students may not even have been born then, or were just one or two years old; you can't expect them to feel as strongly as we did, who saw and felt it first-hand," he said.

He also noted that the students in 1989 did nothing extraordinary. "You have to remember that we did nothing except follow the public sentiment. We were not acting so differently from the rest of the population," he said.

Nevertheless, he stressed that the role of a student leader, especially among those in the HKFS, was to "take the initiative". Ms Chow stressed that the HKFS understood its role as a leader of student movements, and would not waver in its commitment to vindicating the June 4 victims. "Our role is not only based on history and tradition, but it has come about through rational debate about June 4, and what it means to be Chinese and strive for a democratic China."

(source: SCMP, 31 May 2009)

繼承英烈志接好民主棒 六四20周年今日大遊行

平反六四，等了20年，屠城慘痛場面不會忘記。支聯會今日舉行紀念「六四」二十周年大遊行，要求北京政府平反六四，撫慰死傷者和家人，提醒領導人不要再犯如此大錯，並繼承建設民主中國英烈志。不論經歷者，或新生一代，抑或激憤曾蔭權的代表論人士，今日維園三時見。

華叔籲再發揮人民力量
支聯會每年六四前一個星期日都舉辦遊行，爭取平反六四，二十年來風雨不改。今年大會主題是「毋忘六四．繼承英烈志，薪火相傳．接好民主棒」，一頁頁的訴求包括要求北京釋放民運人士、追究屠城責任、結束一黨專政、建設民主中國。大遊行於今日下午3時在銅鑼灣維園一號球場出發，遊行至中環政府總部。支聯會副主席蔡耀昌說，今年主題之一是薪火相傳，遊行前會在維園舉行「新生代看六四」座談會，由泛民各黨派出30歲以下的代表出席，了解一班在89年仍然年輕的新世代對六四看法。特首曾蔭權早前在立法會以一句「國家的驕人成就」，企圖掩蓋六四屠城真相，又自稱代表全港市民，在社會引起重大迴響。支聯會副主席李卓人稱，曾蔭權的言論激起很多人對六四熱烈討論，尤其是在年輕人之間，更引起廣泛討論，期望今日的遊行會有更多年輕人上街，薪火相傳之餘，也向北京與曾蔭權證明，香港人沒有忘掉六四帶來的慘痛回憶。李卓人又指出，89年香港曾有過兩次百萬人上街聲援北京學運的光輝歷史，今日上街除了一種回憶，也是一種致敬。支聯會主席司徒華表示，六四發生已經20年，但內地政制沒有明顯改善，沙士期間隱瞞疫情，四川地震多項豆腐渣工程，足證內地依然是封閉社會。他說中國須先有民主，香港才可能有民主，呼籲港人踴躍參加今日遊行，再一次發揮人民力量。「03年7.1嘅50萬人上街，可以趕走葉劉，05年老董落台。」他指，內地很多城市留意到香港的新聞，若今日遊行人數眾多，對爭取平反六四有很大幫助。「左派」陣營、香港青年發展網絡召集人呂智偉，早前指李卓人當年派錢給天安門廣場的學生，華叔反駁荒謬，指當時阿人的資金是買帳篷給學生，餘下的百多萬元，更被北京市公安局沒收。他說，這一代的中共領導人仍然是由鄧小平所欽點，估計到2022年再經過數輪領導人替換後，才可能由沒有沾過六四血的新一代領導提出平反。

北京屠城情景歷歷在目
資深傳媒人公民黨毛孟靜於89年是法新社記者，她說當年要假扮日、韓留學生才能混入學生群中，採訪真相。她呼籲市民除了要今日上街，也要出席六四燭光集會及7.1遊行。時事評論員劉銳紹當年是文匯報駐京記者，當年軍隊屠殺市民與學生的情景歷歷在目，呼籲市民今日一定要上街。

紀念「六四」二十周年大遊行
主題：毋忘六四．繼承英烈志，薪火相傳．接好民主棒
日期：今日（31/05/09）
時間： 3:00pm集合
路線：銅鑼灣維園至中環政府總部
服飾：以黑或白的素色衣着為主
天氣：24℃--30℃，部份時間有陽光
備註：支聯會歡迎遊行人自備橫額及標語
資料來源：支聯會、天文台

(轉載自《蘋果日報》2009年5月31日的報道)

高志活：丹麥領事向港府高入境事宜

　　國殤之柱丹麥雕塑家高志活，今天抵港出席一系列六四二十周年紀念活動。高志活去年被港府拒絕入境，昨天他出發前表示，收到丹麥駐港總理事麥禮國發出的通知，內容提及麥禮國早前曾與保安局討論其個案，但未有說明他是否獲准入境。

　　麥禮國昨天接受本報查詢時承認，前日的確與保安局副秘書長魏永捷會面，討論高志活入境事件，但他引述魏永捷在會上稱，不能評論個別個案。

　　麥禮國個人則認為高志活入境沒大問題、很大機會可來港。政府發言人回覆本報重申，不會評論個別事件，指審批入境會考慮相關因素。

　　高志活表明，若今次再度被拒入境，會循各方途徑投訴港府，也會借助國際傳媒施壓。

　　高志活昨天出發前表示，由於港府一直沒表明他是否獲批入境，於是他早前去信丹麥總理拉斯穆森要求循外交途徑協助，其後丹麥外交部透過駐港總理事館與保安局接洽。

　　高志活是次聯同兩名兒子及其好友兼電視台攝影師來港，「陣容」與去年五月奧運聖火傳遞前夕被拒入境相同 （該電視台攝影師當時獲准入境）。高志活表示，入境期間將身穿黑衣，但不會高舉任何抗議橫額。他留港期間會出席平反六四遊行及燭光晚會，亦會修葺港大國殤之柱。他將於六月七日離港。

　　「我今次會帶來兩個全新迷你版國殤之柱雕塑，希望送給香港立法會及大學生。」高志活表示，訪港期間希望親手將國殤之柱送給立法會主席曾鈺成，會透過支聯會安排。

　　支聯會副主席蔡耀昌表示，暫未知立法會是否接受新國殤之柱。至於另一尊送給哪間大學，會交由學聯決定。他指，支聯會是次花費五萬元以下，資助高志活及其一名兒子、合共兩人訪港的食宿費

(轉載自《信報》2009年5月30日的報道)

趙紫陽《改革歷程》中文版開售

尚有5日便是六四事件發生20周年的日子，紀念六四的各種活動陸續舉行。以已故中共總書記趙紫陽生前錄音輯錄成的回憶錄《改革歷程》的中文版昨日開售。支聯會昨午於中環華人行對街頭設攤位，售賣120本、售價128元的新書，並在半小時內售罄。趙紫陽回憶錄的英文版已在本月初率先推出，昨日開售的為初版8,000冊的中文版。有購買的市民表示，六四事件發生時年紀尚輕，在教科書中也不能得到足夠資訊，希望透過這本書，了解更多關於六四的資料。有來自內地、現時在本港大學任教的老師表示，當年亦有參與民運，希望利用此書向學生講述六四的歷史。

「國殤之柱」作者今抵港
支聯會在未來一星期會陸續舉行不同的六四活動，支聯會副主席李卓人及蔡耀昌等會在今天下午到機場迎接「國殤之柱」作者、丹麥藝術家高志活。支聯會在周日下午3時，舉行「毋忘六四．繼承英烈志，薪火相傳．接好民主棒」大遊行。

支聯會主席司徒華昨日表示，希望市民可以踴躍出席星期日的遊行，以及星期四晚的燭光晚會，但若豬流感爆發，政府不希望有公眾集會，燭光晚會將延至10月1日晚舉行。

而天主教前香港主教陳日君樞機昨晚主持了紀念六四20周年彌撒，約有400人參加。陳日君說，平反六四的願望落空，擔心很難查清當時事實，年輕一輩對歷史大事會失去興趣。他強調要求平反六四無報復之心，只是不想事件再發生，只是要推翻虛偽的政權和文化。

(轉載自《新報》2009年5月30日的報道)

屠城彈頭絕版民主女神像 支聯會開倉公開六四物證

歷史的見證，可以是很森寒的殺人武器，可以是很暖人的團結信物，甚至可以是很不羈的即興潮物。支聯會最近「開倉」，跟記者一起緬懷20年來積累下來的六四物事。如果怕碰到這些沉重的史實會觸景傷情，不妨跟年輕網民一道兒，穿起六四潮tee，正視歷史。

大約在六四10周年的時候，一位內地人偷偷懷著一顆子彈頭來到香港，彈頭用一塊黑紗捲著，是中國政府六四暴行的罪證。那位內地人把彈頭連同一封書信交給支聯會，說彈頭是一位學生在六四屠城後，於北京街頭拾起來，哭著交給他的。那位內地人一直保存著這件殺人物證，至1999年交給支聯會。

除了這顆彈頭，支聯會設於長沙灣的貨倉，還堆積著好些年月也不會蠶食的人民集體回憶。這兒有絕了版的民主女神像、斷了貨的六四復活蛋、好久沒見的佐丹奴民運tee，還有讓人欷歔的民主歌聲獻中華糾察隊臂章。

堆滿支聯會貨倉
保存著這些歷史遺物，不僅是為了未能忘記。支聯會副主席蔡耀昌說，他們本來有計劃在北京成立一間中國民運資料中心，讓後世了解中國民間曾經發起過這麼一幕驚心動魄的運動。奈何這個近乎癡人說夢的理想遲遲不能實現，支聯會貨倉越來越擠逼，500呎丁方塞滿人們不想回憶的文物。這些陳年土產都是香港人與全中國同胞之間的熱血信物。以貌似扭蛋的六四復活蛋為例，支聯會推出過好幾年，向香港人派發，是個膠蛋殼藏著一枚寫上「毋忘六四 跨越九七」口號的別針。六四復活蛋寄意民主意識在內地重生，提示港人在重要節日毋忘內地受苦受難的同胞。

擬搞展覽證歷史
「我仲有個構思，就係好好利用呢文物，向下一代灌輸有關六四的歷史知識。特別係新來港的年輕人，佢哋在內地無法接觸六四真相，如果能夠透過六四文物展覽，引發佢哋對六四的興趣，將會可以補充目前教科書的不足。」蔡耀昌看著支聯會侷促的貨倉有感而發，想起香港人討論六四的言論空間日漸狹窄：「慶幸香港仍然有好多人支持平反六四，每年都起碼有幾萬人出席維園集會，證明公道自在人心。」

(轉載自《蘋果日報》2009年5月29日的報道)

八九學運領袖獲邀出席研討會 王超華禁入境

六四20周年臨近，特區政府「高度戒備」。據了解，當局近日表明將拒絕多名民運人士入境，包括八九學運領袖王超華。她原獲邀來港出席一項與六四有關的學術研討會，但協助她來港的朱耀明牧師收到消息，當局不容許王超華入境。

王超華原擬出席的研討會，由香港城市大學、美國哥倫比亞大學及法國國家科學研究院合辦，下周一在外國記者會舉行。籌辦研討會的法國學者白夏接受本報查詢時證實，曾發信邀請王超華來港，出席這個主題為「六四對中國發展的影響」的研討會。他表示，若王超華被港府拒絕入境，他會很奇怪，「香港不是實施一國兩制？不是有言論自由的嗎？」

當年被通緝21人之一
據了解，王超華持美國護照，來港本不用申請簽證，但主辦單位為免浪費機票開支，早前託人向保安局查詢王超華能否來港。協助王超華來港的朱耀明昨日回應時承認，上周末接獲有關方面的消息，當局不會批准王超華入境。

王超華89年時為中國社會科學院研究生，六四後成為21名被通緝的學運領袖之一，後流亡美國，在加州大學洛杉磯分校攻讀博士。前年朱耀明曾安排她來港與多年不見的兒子會面，但港府在她從台北出發前已派人攔截，經多番交涉，王超華承諾不公開活動，才獲准來港，並只能逗留一星期。
除了王超華，支聯會早前公開表示計劃邀請前學運領袖王丹來港，出席六四20周年的活動。支聯會副主席蔡耀昌昨透露，政府雖沒正式說明會拒絕王丹入境，但據他了解，王丹成功來港的機會接近零。此外，本月初旅居美國的民運人士楊建利從台灣來港，企圖闖關，後遭拒絕入境及遣返。

港府正破壞一國兩制
蔡耀昌批評，民運人士來港並非從事非法活動或破壞社會秩序，他們部份人更持有效護照，特區政府根本沒合理理由拒絕他們入境，完全出於政治考慮，「其實好可悲，根據《基本法》出入境事務特區政府有權處理，但o依家或因為中央壓力或因為怕中央難堪，唔畀民運人士入境，係破壞一國兩制。」政府發言人昨日表示不會評論個別個案，只說入境處會依據情況個別考慮，作出決定。

(轉載自《蘋果日報》2009年5月26日的報道)

指北京學生先襲擊軍人要引起內戰兩皇仁生錯解六四惹嘩然

皇仁書院兩名學生昨日在一個六四座談會上，指當年北京學生受外國利用，要推翻中共，又深信當年屠城是因學生先襲擊軍車、軍人，要引起內戰。兩人言論引來全場嘩然，經歷六四洗禮的學生領袖和傳媒人即場「教導」二人，彌補學校不教的失誤。該座談會由中學生聯盟舉辦，30多名學生出席。他們先觀看六四屠城片段，再由講者講述當年見聞。至討論時段，皇仁書院應屆會考生李文棋說，六四頗恐怖，屠殺造成生靈塗炭，但反問「如果冇六四會點？中國會更加好？」他又認為當時學生被資本主義國家利用，「美國想透過民主運動，推翻共產黨。」

「趙紫陽有答案畀你」
另一皇仁生溫駿瑋持類似觀點，「當時有人話，要趕走共產黨，迎接國民黨返嚟。」他不相信軍隊先開槍殺人，「上網睇到學生攞刀去劈裝甲車，啲人仲可以燒死埋（軍人），做埋燃燒彈去襲擊。」他堅信民主不適合中國，「仲有好多文盲。」出席座談會的支聯會副主席蔡耀昌叫二人拿出證據支持論點，「有啲市民擲吓石，你知唔知係乜時間呀？係解放軍開槍殺緊人呀！」應屆會考生黃綺婷說：「坦克車一碌過就死，我揸把刀啫，可以做得乜？」社民連立法會議員黃毓民不屑溫駿瑋所說，「你講嘅都係流，今時今日冇人再咁講，好佩服你！」當年目擊六四屠城的記協新聞自由小組成員麥燕庭教導二人，切勿道聽途說，「你唔明嘅問題，趙紫陽已有答案畀你。」兩名皇仁生會後表示，他們有修讀中史，李文棋說：「因為考試冇考，老師冇乜點教（六四）。」溫駿瑋稱，他是從網上得到有關資訊，強調真相沒人知，「話柴玲係第一個走佬，好多都咁講；話解放軍殺好多人，睇嗰啲片段無殺人，佢哋對住人民紀念碑頂開槍。」

(轉載自《蘋果日報》2009年5月24日的報道)

新高中課本輕描淡寫六四

中學使用的中國歷史教科書向來對六四事件輕描淡寫，沒有寫明血腥屠城。三年制新高中將於今年9月推行，但出版社只是「翻炒」現有高中中史書的六四事件內容，形容解放軍只是進行清場；有出版社則以附註形式，引述官方報告的死傷人數。

以「清場」形容屠城
本報翻查四所出版社的新高中中史書，它們都將六四事件歸入改革開放中出現的社會問題，將六四事件肇因歸咎於貧富懸殊、人民不滿通貨膨脹和幹部貪污腐敗；其中三家出版社有提及民眾要求民主改革，齡記則沒有提到。對於六四屠城經過，四本教科書都簡單地稱解放軍進駐天安門廣場清場，齡記更形容軍隊「驅散聚集的學生和民眾」，未有提及傷亡情況；香港教育圖書竟指中共在事件中獲取教益，注重民主與法制的建設。現代教育有較多篇幅講述六四事件，並刊登民眾絕食和軍隊入城圖片，在附註中也寫出各界估計事件中有數百至數千人死傷，並引述中共公安部1990年的報告，指事件造成931人死、2.2萬人傷。該公司業務發展部總監紀華傑稱，只是根據教育局的課程綱要編寫。中國歷史教育學會理事何漢權認為，出版社有責任提及六四事件的死亡數據，「有時唔使自我審查得咁緊要，真確一啲，教育局都奈你唔何。」

部份新高中中史教科書提及六四事件內容
《高中中國歷史》5下現代教育研究社
形容屠城情況：中共下令解放軍開入天安門廣場，進行全面清場，平息事件
死傷人數：引述公安部90年報告，有931死亡，2.2萬人受傷
《高中中國歷史新視點》必修6文達出版
形容屠城情況：政府武力干預，歷時五十六天的群眾運動才告平息
死傷人數：沒有提及
《新視野中國歷史》必修第四冊香港教育圖書
形容屠城情況：中央出動解放軍，在天安門廣場進行清場，平息了這場風波
死傷人數：沒有提及
《新探索中國史》5下齡記出版
形容屠城情況：中央下令軍隊進駐天安門廣場，展開清場行動，驅散聚集的學生和民眾
死傷人數：沒有提及
資料來源：上述出版社派給中學的教師用書

多數學校避而不談
港大學生會前會長陳一諤淡化六四屠城的言論，令不少人驚訝香港年輕人對六四事件認識貧乏。支聯會副主席蔡耀昌承認，雖然支聯會過去不斷做年輕人教育工作，可是缺乏學校支持，加上全部教科書沒有詳細交代事件，令不少香港中學生根本不清楚六四事件的來龍去脈，扼殺他們認識這件中國近代史重要事件。

令新一代不了解事件
曾就香港歷史教科書如何交代六四事件進行研究的蔡耀昌說，支聯會過去一直有向全港學校發信，要求為學生舉行六四事件講座，或提供有關六四事件材料，但有回應的學校只佔少數；有中學生對他說，由於課堂從無詳細解釋六四事件前因後果，令他們對六四了解不足。蔡耀昌認為，學校、教科書迴避六四問題，正是令香港新一代不了解六四的主要原因，他認為特區政府有責任令年輕一代完全了解六四事件的背景、經過與結果，將六四事件列入中國歷史課程中，令香港年輕人對這件影響中國發展的重大歷史事件有深入而全面的了解，以免出現年青人不知、不了解六四情況出現。

(轉載自《蘋果日報》2009年5月1日的報道)