Occurring amidst the backdrop of the restoration of relations between the two countries and continuous anti-communist activities, some violent, undertaken through the past two decades, it has been considered the largest such protest in the history of Little Saigon.

Over the following two months, hundreds of people gathered daily to protest in front of the shop and called on Trường to remove these symbols, which the community, consisting mostly of anti-communist refugees from South Vietnam and their descendants, found very offensive.

The demonstrations were considered unique at the time due to their large scale and unlikely participants, with the presence of various demographic groups and more "moderate" voices creating a sense of increased unity among the Vietnamese American community.

On the other hand, there were controversies over the disturbances brought on by the protests as well as the cost and manner of police deployment, concerns that Trường's right to freedom of speech was violated, and questions about assimilation and inter-community relations.

[3] These tensions burst into violence in the 1980s as peace activists and journalists were assassinated and others were assaulted or harassed throughout the decade for expressing supposed pro-communist sympathies or encouraging dialogue with Vietnam, which the FBI has suspected to be the work of a paramilitary group that aimed to overthrow the communist government in Hanoi.

[4] The violence subsided later in the decade after the dissolution of this group, but in the 1990s, as Vietnamese American communities became more established in the United States, protests became common to fight off any suspected communist influence, with Orange County becoming the center of political expression.

During a protest in Orange County, Trường handed out leaflets for a forum that he organized to start a discussion between the pro- and anti-Hanoi sides and support increased trade with Vietnam, but no one attended.

[13] As scheduled, Trường started executing his plan on January 17, 1999 (timed around Martin Luther King Jr. Day and, more controversially, Tết[14]), with only the picture of Ho Chi Minh being displayed.

[16] The protests were mostly peaceful, with demonstrators shouting anti-communist slogans, holding signs and the flag of South Vietnam, stamping on and burning effigies of Ho Chi Minh, and sharing their stories of repression.

"[21] The Vietnamese community in the United States were outraged by the display, describing the use of communist symbols as bringing back the trauma of repression, war, and fleeing Vietnam, and most supported the protests.

[22] These actions were also marked by a high rate of youth participation, which was spurred on by student groups retaliating to a Los Angeles Times column from Daniel C. Tsang claiming that most of the younger generation had become apolitical and were not as anti-communist as their elders.

[c][23] With information on the events spreading quickly through the community via the Internet and a well-established system of Vietnamese-language radio stations, solidarity protests were organized in other cities with high concentrations of Vietnamese Americans, such as San Jose, New Orleans, and Houston.

In addition to the base issue of Trường's display, protesters also aimed to make a statement on the human rights situation in Vietnam and enhance Vietnamese American political power.

[34] One example was a specific allegation that a $50 arrival fee was leveraged on passengers to fund him at Hanoi's Noi Bai International Airport, which was denied by Trường as well as staff at the Vietnamese consulate in San Francisco.

[35] Concurrent demonstrations were held in front of Councilman Lam's restaurant as his lack of support for the original protests led to accusations that he himself was a communist sympathizer, and a recall campaign was initiated against him.

[37] In 2000, he sued the city and police chief of Westminster for four million dollars, claiming they did not adequately protect him from the protesters and thus violated his free speech rights; the lawsuit was rejected the next year.

He regained some notoriety for the 2004 "press conference" that he attempted to organize against Garden Grove's "communist-free zone" declaration, which ended in heckling and Trường being escorted to his car along with his wife by police.

In addition to existing issues around the display of the symbols, language and generational differences were also cited as a cause for the controversy, as it was an English-language program aimed for younger Vietnamese Americans that was shown on a channel that normally broadcast Vietnamese-language content.

Although its creators held a public forum to explain that they had not meant to cause offense, new sit-ins encouraged by community radio and dissatisfaction from attendees led to the network deciding to cancel the rest of the show.

[44] As perceptions of the incident by the community have grown more multifaceted, some Asian American artists and scholars have used the controversy as inspiration for intentionally shocking and angering pieces of art as a form of exposure therapy to assist in healing and managing trauma among Vietnamese refugees.