Hong-Kong Protests

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
You share all these updates but unfortunately noone can see it since it's linked to a closed group on FB.. Maybe just upload the video somewhere else or use different link?

Sorry, I wasn't aware they were closed groups. You would have to excuse me. As I have said on here many times, and I'm embarrassed to say this. But I'm absolutely clueless on tech. So I don't/won't know how to go about posting stuff any other way, sorry!
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
Even subway guards get a beating because they tried to stop wanton vandalism!

The sad thing is, is not going to stop, because these people can't be reason with. They are just running on. Animal instinct. Like the red guards of old!

For example, my nephew's wife put on her facebook, that they (rioters) must fight on and must not loose because they are fighting for a better tomorrow, for her and her young baby! Lol

The irony, at this rate they will be nothing left to fight for!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
I am perhaps a bit more optimistic about the situation than some.
I really believe that this wave of popular protest has peaked and that the big mass rallies of a million plus, which we saw a few months ago are unlikely to be repeated anytime soon.
Now the crowds are just "hundreds" when before it was thousands or even tens of thousands.
I see the increase in violence and the increasingly sensationalist claims/rhetoric from the protestors as signs of desperation.
I remember (just) being a teenager, I remember fully well, going places and taking part in things, simply because they sounded like fun and because there would be girls there.
Often I could not have cared less about whatever cause the event was supposed to be supporting.

I am also old enough to remember living through the cold war.
I recall clearly the various scenarios in which strategists would play out the start of possible WW3 or even the more limited scenarios in which the SU would try to expand into smaller areas of Western Europe.
These were always based on the Salami slicing principle, taking a small action and seeing how the opposition reacted before taking the next small slice.
Now I am not saying that Cold War Europe and Hong Kong are directly comparable (they are not), but it does give a useful insight into strategy.

I would say that the chance of the PLA itself being deployed against civilians is so remote as to be possible to be fully discounted.
It is of course the PAP that have been moved to the Shenzhen border and these that would cross into HKSAR if the local police needed further assistance.
Even here, the salami slicing principle suggests that a full deployment against the rioters is highly unlikely.
My guess is that the PAP would deploy to protect critical/national level infrastructure (ie Lantou Airport, the mainline railways, Power stations etc) and central government buildings etc, freeing up local police officers to deal with the sharp end.

Beyond this though are real and legitimate gripes in the city. Soaring house prices, rents and the cost of living at the forefront. I noticed myself this year that my money went nowhere near as far as it had in previous visits. If the LC start to seriously address some of these problems, then a lot of the residual heat that the protest movement has proved so good at harvesting will be extinguished.

While I agree with most of what you say I would contend the salami slicing is coming from the anti-government rioters and the conspirators behind them, their actions are calibrated to abuse the system, terrorize others as in the majority of HK people, sabotage infrastructure, and sow misinformation while preventing anything constructive from being done.
 
Rare gem of an English language op-ed that is more factual and objective than the vast majority of reporting on the topic:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


OCTOBER 2, 2019
An alternative view of HK protests
By GEORGE KOO

In reporting the Hong Kong protest movement, the Western media have represented hoodlums as heroes and hooliganism as a movement for democracy. The rioters beat up on innocent bystanders, attacked police with gasoline bombs and sharpened metal rods, destroyed government buildings and metro stations, and interrupted the operations of the international airport.

The Hong Kong economy has ground to a halt, yet the media praised the rioters as freedom fighters. In fact, the ringleaders of the riots demanded that the disturbances not be called riots but protests.

When the Hong Kong police pushed back on the protesters, the cameras always found them, much less so when the violence was perpetrated by the rioters. In fact, accusations of “police brutality” were frequently bandied about as the provocation for the ensuing violence.

In the months from early June to early August, the Hong Kong police had to face protesters numbering in the millions, or at least that was what the media reported. Yet the police with great restraint made just 420 arrests.

By contrast, New York’s finest arrested 700 during the one-day Occupy Wall Street protest on October 1, 2011, and the size of that crowd was in the thousands, not millions. If the mayhem that has happened in Hong Kong took place in New York, rivers of blood would have covered the pavement and city jails and hospitals would have overflowed with victims.

So, what was the original cause for mass unrest in Hong Kong?

It was precipitated by the Hong Kong government proposing an amendment to the existing Fugitive Offenders Ordinance.

The necessity of the amendment became obvious when a young man took his pregnant girlfriend from Hong Kong to Taiwan, murdered her, and buried her dismembered remains there, and then came back knowing that he couldn’t be extradited to Taiwan to face justice.

Safe haven for fugitives
I asked a friend, a longtime resident of Hong Kong and a senior adviser to the governments in the territory before and after its handover from British to Chinese sovereignty, for an explanation of the proposed amendment. He said, “There are currently hundreds of known fugitives using Hong Kong as a safe haven because Hong Kong only has agreements with certain countries but [they] have so far not included Macau, Taiwan and mainland China.

“The proposed amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance are designed to promote criminal justice and to redress a situation whereby certain criminals can use our city as a safe haven.”

Agitators seized the opportunity to convert a government intention to close a loophole into a cause célèbre by claiming that the added statute would give Beijing arbitrary power to arrest and extradite anyone, even those merely passing through Hong Kong, into mainland China for incarceration or worse.

Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, assumed that correcting the omission was straightforward and failed to anticipate the storm that followed. Even as Lam officially suspended and then subsequently withdrew the bill to amend the extradition provisions, the fury of the protests continued.

After successfully forcing Lam to backpedal, the protesters pressed forward with more demands, including exoneration of those arrested, Lam’s resignation, and universal suffrage for the selection of members of the Legislative Council and the chief executive.

Around the end of August, my friend shared this observation with me: “Whatever organization is behind supporting and promoting this unrest is apparently well funded and highly organized, with weekly schedules on what and where the disturbances will take place.”
...
Cont'd next post due to character limit
 
Cont'd from previous post due to character limit

...
Bankrolled by National Endowment for Democracy
As reported by various sources, a main source of funding support is the National Endowment for Democracy. The NED is in turn funded by the US Congress to finance organizations around the world that advocate democracy and human rights. Some 18 organizations identified as active in China have received funds from the NED. Six of the 18 are known to operate in Hong Kong.

Lest anyone think that this is the first instance of NED involvement with Hong Kong, it’s not. The NED also bankrolled the Occupy Central movement that took place in Hong Kong in 2014. Fomenting unrest in the name of struggling for democracy and freedom is consistent with the NED’s mission.

This time, however, the ringleaders took the protests to a new level, not only in terms of duration and level of violence, but also in taking their case to Washington. These supposed representatives of Hong Kong asked the US Congress to ensure their freedom and democracy.

That the US had nothing to do with the handover between Britain and China seemed immaterial to these young aspiring freedom fighters. It was also equally a no-brainer for bipartisan members of Congress to propose the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019, which is likely to be enacted by the full body.

“No brainer” because it doesn’t take any brains for Congress to take this action and it also entails no cost, because any reaction to such legislative action won’t be consequential to their constituents. But the cost to all the people of Hong Kong, not just the handful of activists, could be major.

With the Hong Kong act in hand, the US government can then feel empowered to tell the Hong Kong government how it should govern, which the Hong Kong government would reject, and Beijing would vigorously object on the grounds that the US has no right to interfere..

Then the US would feel that it has grounds to remove the recognition of Hong Kong as a special administrative region of China and with it, the removal of China’s Most Favored Nation status.

That’s a move the administration of President Donald Trump would implement as part of its goal to decouple China and the US.

If that were to come to pass, the people of Hong Kong would be the losers. Without its special status, the city would be just one of many, and not even as valuable to Beijing as neighboring Shenzhen. Any economic advantages Hong Kong enjoys now would disappear.

About five years ago, I had the occasion to conduct a video interview of Joshua Wong, one of the young dissident leaders who testified before Congress. My impression of Wong at the time, when he was still a high-school student, was that he was articulate and energetic and had seized the mantle of being a democracy advocate as a career.

I don’t know if he went on to college; I suspect that he found being a dissident an easier living and facing the media limelight more rewarding than pursuing higher education. He showed appalling ignorance of Chinese history and culture.

A generation disconnected from China
Wong represents the generation born after the handover. This generation of young people have no sense of what British colonial rule was like but have somehow acquired a romantic idea that being a British subject was golden.

In reality, Chinese subjects under colonial rule had no say in the selection of their rulers and no right to cast ballots for any official posts. In contrast, the Basic Law negotiated between China and Britain provides for selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage in gradual steps leading to a full vote by the populace before the end of the 50-year transition.

Mark Pinkstone, an Australian journalist with 50 years of experience in Hong Kong, said, “The Basic Law, the constitutional document that supports ‘one country, two systems,’ provides freedoms of expression, speech and religion. Not one of them has been eroded since the handover in 1997. The current demonstrations are living proof of that.”

Pinkstone’s point of view, of course, contradicts the protesters’ claim that the loss of freedom is the reason for the demonstrations. Perhaps a legitimate adjudicator of the two conflicting points of view is the Human Freedom Index monitored by the Cato Institute, based in Washington.

According to the latest index, Hong Kong is ranked No 3, trailing only New Zealand and Switzerland. The index ranks 162 countries and autonomous regions based on 79 measures of personal and economic freedom. The US is ranked 17 as measured by the same indicators. It would appear that young Hongkongers don’t appreciate how well off they are.

Failings of the Hong Kong government
Of course, the Hong Kong government must bear responsibility for the buildup to this summer of discontent. After the handover, the city government did not introduce a curriculum that would teach children what it meant to be Chinese and their affiliation with the Chinese culture. Instead of identifying with and being proud of their Chinese heritage, they grew up estranged and feeling that it would have been better to be faux British.

The succession of post-handover governments also saw the need to generate affordable housing but did nothing about it – or could not because the real-estate tycoons that control the Hong Kong property market opposed it. The frustration of wages not keeping up with the rising cost of cramped housing led to a boiling point in 2014, and again five years later.

The World Economic Forum published a survey of people from 25 nations who were asked if they thought their own government was heading in the right direction or not. The survey was conducted between October and November of 2016.

China emerged leading the pack, with 90% of its citizens responding that their government was on the right track while only 10% thought not. The US was squarely in the middle, ranked at 13, with 35% of its citizens thinking their government was going in the right direction and 65% disagreeing.

Unfortunately, Hong Kong was not separately polled, but if I had to guess, I would suspect that the sentiment of Hongkongers toward their government would be closer to the US than to China.

Sadly, if the young people of Hong Kong decide to cast their lot with the US, they will become disillusioned by a dysfunctional democracy that they’ll get to see up close. And they will miss the opportunity of hitching their future to a China going in the right direction.
 

SteelBird

Colonel
Another thug being shot in the leg, View attachment 54444 it's a shame the aim wasn't higher!
I saw a video on Youtube recording the moment a policeman was shooting a protester (not sure where it hit) while that protester was attacking police. The commentator said police was practicing self defense. The protester's wound wasn't lethal and he later being sued for attacking police. Sorry, I can't find that video anymore so cannot post it here.
 
Top