Hong-Kong Protests

dratsabknihcllik

Junior Member
Registered Member
An insightful interview with Steve Bannon on Hong Kong and its importance within the US-China economic nexus. He also gives his standpoint on why China has been reluctant to use heavy-handed tactics on HK protesters and why the city matters to the PRC more than mainlanders wish to believe.

Wait a minute. As far as I recall you were preaching how brutal HK authorities had been and insinuated that they were controlled by China.
Do you have the courage to stick to your point?
 

dratsabknihcllik

Junior Member
Registered Member
Of course you're not saying the driver should have been beaten up.

However instead of focusing on condemnation of the fact with visual and video that he was beaten up, debating over whether he might or might not have deliberately driven into the crowd (considering he was already trapped on all sides by a crowd and barely moving in the video clip) serves to deflect the conversation away from what is a blatant act of mob violence.



So, I will appropriately like to point out for the purposes of the thread, that regardless of whether the driver's maneuver was an accident or deliberate -- let's remember that the driver was beaten to a bloody pulp which we have clear video evidence for, and who is another victim on a growing list who's suffered due to mob violence from crowds dressed in black shirts that has now become increasingly common in the city.
Just one word aptly describes the action of certain elements: obfuscation.
 

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Of course you're not saying the driver should have been beaten up.

However instead of focusing on condemnation of the fact with visual and video that he was beaten up, debating over whether he might or might not have deliberately driven into the crowd (considering he was already trapped on all sides by a crowd and barely moving in the video clip) serves to deflect the conversation away from what is a blatant act of mob violence.



So, I will appropriately like to point out for the purposes of the thread, that regardless of whether the driver's maneuver was an accident or deliberate -- let's remember that the driver was beaten to a bloody pulp which we have clear video evidence for, and who is another victim on a growing list who's suffered due to mob violence from crowds dressed in black shirts that has now become increasingly common in the city.

Is condemnation of mob violence on an unarmed individual really something worth commenting or arguing over? It's a moot point; you're preaching to the choir by condemning this act.

The original post included this video to insinuate that this was somehow an unprovoked attack on an innocent taxi driver who merely was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Which very well may have been the case. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that OP's premise is generally unfounded and that there are a bevy of "theories" as to what really transpired.

The accusation that I had posted, however true or untrue that may be, is to illustrate that anyone can repost or "pass on" an unsubstantiated theory of events and use the footage to push his or her political agenda.
 

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't know where you guys stand on this, but I would mark the HK protests as the beginning of a great US-China conflict.

It's clear to me that the HK riots are not about freedom and democracy, but about forcing the CCP to use heavy handed tactics to force international sanctions on China. The US and co. hopes that this will slow down Chinese economy and destabilize the Chinese leadership and China. America can then initiate military action in the SCS and even on to the mainland to Balkanzie China.

I honestly think leaders in Mainland wouldn't be interested in a major US-China conflict just for the sake of political future of HK. It's highly doubtful anyone in US establishment would want it as well. The right strategy might be quietly reduce the significance of Hong Kong to a level where it's not an issue of current proportions. Let the other cities take it over in all business and financial aspects as much and as soon as possible.
Let's face the realty. HK glory days as business and financial hub are already numbered since the establishment of greater bay area connecting 9 regional cities, ready to take over Hong Kong as business hubs, even the financial component if possible. Shanghai is being groomed to be a future global financial hub. LSE turned down HKSE bid to take over. Instead, LSE would want to go with Shanghai bourse. British are practically saying screw with the judiciary independence of our own common law system, we'll go with money. These protests would only speed up the process of hollowing out of Hong Kong, thereby considerably reducing the degree of Hong Kong's possible domino effect over Mainland. Mainland has offered Mainland born HK permanent residents to relocate back to China with an option of choosing any city they like with full hukou benefits starting Oct 1. Incentives for business communities to relocate to Shenzen or even Zhuhai is quietly ongoing. What is left is the financial community which will sooner or later slowly move out to Singapore or even Shenzen where Ping An and China Merchant already are. Things are not simply working out as it used to be before.
Those kids have hedged with the wrong bet. They should have tried to move out of Hong Kong over to Shenzen, or should have tried to integrate themselves in the larger regional business hubs. Hong Kong as it is has no future for them to grow. These protests wouldn't go anywhere as one of their main demands is off the table, ie one person one vote. That's the red line Hong Kong cannot cross. The rest is just sort it out among yourselves.
Current Hong Kong leadership selection model drawn by Mainland is closely based on DNC and RNC where the committees decide who should be on the ballot box. And it's not one person one vote that counts, it's the electoral college that decides who is the winner. Hillary won something like 3 millions more popular votes and she still lost the election. What a democracy! They should have done their due diligence before burning the subway.
 

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Wait a minute. As far as I recall you were preaching how brutal HK authorities had been and insinuated that they were controlled by China.
Do you have the courage to stick to your point?

Way to go for failing to distinguish between police brutality, which at most times are of the officer's own accord, and the systematic & planned Tiananmen-style crackdown that would've been the responsibility of the PLA.
 

SinoSoldier

Colonel
NTD is literally an entity as part of the Falun Gong media network that includes the likes of Epoch Times.

Perhaps you were not aware, or perhaps you were aware but felt like Bannon's commentary still somehow made it worthwhile being posted here, however it may be useful in future to flag it as a FLG media product with the level of judgement that it deserves.

It's an interview with a prominent figure within the Trump administration (or used to be, but either way an important player) and offers a rare view into how US officials may view the HK pawn in the grand scheme of China-US relations.

You may disagree with NTD's rightward slant but there should be no complaint against what is essentially a raw, unredacted interview.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
It's an interview with a prominent figure within the Trump administration (or used to be, but either way an important player) and offers a rare view into how US officials may view the HK pawn in the grand scheme of China-US relations.

You may disagree with NTD's rightward slant but there should be no complaint against what is essentially a raw, unredacted interview.
Depends on who it's with. Bannon is ostracized politically and was fired from the white house. He works for Breitbart, which is considered by most Americans to be a niche outlet for insane angry conservatives ranting nonsense. So it's very questionable what value there is in Bannon's view at this time. Previous to his departure, you could argue that he holds a very high position of power in the US government but now, his relevance is unclear at best and cannot be assumed to represent anything of importance. Raw interview just means that the footage wasn't manipulated to mean something that the interviewee didn't mean but it does nothing to enhance the relevance of the interviewee.

PS. Not too late to answer this one, especially the last paragraph where you were asked me to provide numerical evidence for what percentage of the rioters were violent and I responded asking you to provide numerical evidence for why you assumed them to be the minority at all:
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/hong-kong-protests.t8580/page-147#post-572153
 
Last edited:
while I slept, this summary appeared:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


claiming "tens of thousands of masked protesters" yesterday,

so I'd appreciate a possibly more accurate estimate from members with knowledge of events on the ground please

(I thought the number had been lower: below ten thousand)
 

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Depends on who it's with. Bannon is ostracized politically and was fired from the white house. He works for Breitbart, which is considered by most Americans to be a niche outlet for insane angry conservatives ranting nonsense. So it's very questionable what value there is in Bannon's view at this time. Previous to his departure, you could argue that he holds a very high position of power in the US government but now, his relevance is unclear at best and cannot be assumed to represent anything of importance. Raw interview just means that the footage wasn't manipulated to mean something that the interviewee didn't mean but it does nothing to enhance the relevance of the interviewee.

Here we go again...it shouldn't matter which outlets Bannon wrote for or how American MSM generally portrays him to be. One doesn't get selected into Trump's cabinet as chief strategist without at least some inkling of geopolitical insight and understanding of the US' greatest political & economic foe.

Listen to this guy's take on HK's political & economic influence on G2 relations, and the ramifications of the CCP's response to both the HK crisis and the trade war, before throwing him under the "conservatives-ranting-nonsense" bus.
 
Considering we have no proof of whatever the driver's intent was or wasn't, but we do have proof that he was swarmed and beaten bloody and half to death, perhaps sympathy should be more appropriately directed to the victim of actual confirmed violence first.
the events according to the SCMP article I linked above:
"In Sham Shui Po, a taxi driver in his 60s rammed into a crowd of protesters and injured a woman. Angry masked groups then pulled the driver out of the car and beat him, before he was later rescued by firefighters. Beaten unconscious, his face and head were covered in blood while the windows of the taxi were smashed."

(hope it's obvious I'm unable to comment on this occasion)
 
Top