Hong-Kong Protests
- Thread starter Pika
- Start date
Hi AndrewS
I think its John Huntsman Jr the US ambassador at that time, During the Jasmine revolution.
Mr T
Senior Member
So this new security law. Wow, I'm not sure it could have been more unfocused and wide-ranging. It even grants Chinese state security immunity from being detained or even have their vehicles searched. So if they arrest the wrong person or accidentally kill someone during an interrogation, they just need to waive their badges, say they were performing official duties and it's all good. (Before anyone says action could be taken in the mainland courts, yeah good luck with that).
Hell, given their vehicles can't be searched, they can now kidnap people and take them over the border without worry about being stopped by the HK police. They don't even need to bother with the new law. Or they may use that right in conjunction with the procedure to take suspects for trial in mainland China to "save time" if they want to try to avoid publicity for as long as possible.
The Hong Kong Bar Association has a fairly good critique of the new law. For a start the offences are incredibly vague. In particular I thought this point was especially good:
So anyone who receives money from overseas - even if through a legitimate and peaceful NGO - could be prosecuted if the CCP or HK government decides that their work is "hostile". There is no reference to having to be violent. "Hostility" can be peaceful or lawful. Opposition parties are hostile towards incumbant governments because they oppose government policies and seek to impliment their own manifestos.
The scope of the new legislation isn't just terrorism, it clearly can cover opposing the HK government in what until now were legitimate and legally-protected ways. Indeed, this smacks of Singapore's laws where the government can silence anyone that criticises it too strongly or in a way that's embarrassing.
Hell, given their vehicles can't be searched, they can now kidnap people and take them over the border without worry about being stopped by the HK police. They don't even need to bother with the new law. Or they may use that right in conjunction with the procedure to take suspects for trial in mainland China to "save time" if they want to try to avoid publicity for as long as possible.
The Hong Kong Bar Association has a fairly good critique of the new law. For a start the offences are incredibly vague. In particular I thought this point was especially good:
So anyone who receives money from overseas - even if through a legitimate and peaceful NGO - could be prosecuted if the CCP or HK government decides that their work is "hostile". There is no reference to having to be violent. "Hostility" can be peaceful or lawful. Opposition parties are hostile towards incumbant governments because they oppose government policies and seek to impliment their own manifestos.
The scope of the new legislation isn't just terrorism, it clearly can cover opposing the HK government in what until now were legitimate and legally-protected ways. Indeed, this smacks of Singapore's laws where the government can silence anyone that criticises it too strongly or in a way that's embarrassing.
Yeah, that's exactly the way it is now. Problem?
They can print their critique on rolls of toilet paper.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Sounds a bit soft for me but it's in the right direction. I said seeing what those terrorists could do in broad daylight in Hong Kong, there needs to be a crash course cultural revolution over there to get things on track quickly but I guess this will have to do.
Mr T
Senior Member
I think that the UK government had been looking to work with other countries in case there were large outflows of HK residents, so it will probably welcome this (tentative) plan from Australia. Even if it doesn't lead to enhanced residency rights Australia could offer asylum, which just leads to the same thing anyway.
Lol then just kiss a good luck for those hong konger. First when they came Aussie and Brit will bring flower and balloons to welcome. Then when they don't have any values left? Well well it will be different story. Look how African and middle east refugees being treated in Europe right now! At the end what different between Hong konger and mainland Chinese? Nope, just the same old color subhuman in their perfect Aryan race eye. Last time i check those Aussie blamed Chinese for their corrupted politician and all other things. Heck even forest fire in Australia is Chinese fault
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Well, in a way the cockroaches are getting their wish as they demand special treatment above and beyond what ordinary Chinese citizens get.
If one was purposefully to design a movement that maximises escalation (of demands, violence and scope) while minimising control and direction, you would be hard pressed to design something more suited at maximising chaos with next to no chance of being able to reach a negotiated settlement with. Which is precisely the point.
The HK protest movement was not designed or operated to achieve any results other than maximum chaos and disruption. It is impossible to negotiate with them because they wanted everyone’s demands to be met at the same time, with any olive branches offered up by the authorities seized upon as a sign of weakness to justify making even more unreasonable additional demands.
This is a classic hallmark of foreign organisation and direction, as no legitimate home grown protest movement would be so delusional or sinister. Because the only possible outcome to such outrageous and intransigent behaviour would be a crack down by the authorities.
One only need to compare the HK movement to BLM to see the stark differences between what a foreign intelligence agency created AstroTurf regime change movement Hell bent on revolution; compared to a legitimate homegrown grassroots protest movement trying to achieve tangible objectives within the nations existing legal and political frameworks.
They got off lightly, as the original plan hatched and co-ordinated in some bunker in the US or US controlled territory was to have these brainwashed fools all machinegunned and/or ran over by PLA tanks, while being live-streamed to the world to cause maximum outrage and effectively force the EU and the rest of the world to join America on its trade war against China.
I will also include Wolfie's reply to you in this post as it picks up something that I noticed the other night on TV
It was a TV news segment and it was a relevant spokesman for a main party in either the US or UK (can't remember which)
The guy was talking about the threat of Protest leaders being imprisoned under the new security law and started talking about how in previous "civil rights" protests, the likes of Nelson Mandela were imprisoned or Martin Luther King assassinated, but this did not stop the movement from succeeding in the end.
My immediate thought was "are you for-real?" The Hong Protests were genuinely being compared to the struggle of ethnic groups to achieve legal and cultural equality with other ethnic groups in their country. In Hong Kong we have members of exactly the same ethnic group seeking to avoid legal and cultural equality, with their ethnic peers and indeed seeking to maintain nothing more than elite privilege.
It was and is farcical!
Indeed what were they looking to achieve as clearly it was not the spread of a "Freedom and Democracy" movement into the mainland. This became apparent the moment they started to attack anyone that looked or sounded like a mainlander.
My Cantonese is not good enough to try and describe these protestors in their own language, but I suspect the phrase would translate as "Nobody Wants Idiot Child".