Yeah, I saw that, it was Chris Patten. I think China missed a splendid opportunity to invite him over for the Second Return of Hong Kong.
Hong-Kong Protests
- Thread starter Pika
- Start date
looks like the security law is being seriously enforce.
Words From grey boy 2 cross post from PAKISTAN DEFENSE FORUM
Guys, this "Punk" will surely be the first "CASE" of "terrorist act" offense under the new "National Security Law"
He's trying to flee to UK with a oneway ticket right after he committed this vicious terrorist attack on our brave Policeman however one of his relatives sold him out (rumors because of the half a million reward put up by our ex-Chief Excecutive Leung Chun-ying)
Hopefully no less than "10 yrs" if not life prison
Words From grey boy 2 cross post from PAKISTAN DEFENSE FORUM
Guys, this "Punk" will surely be the first "CASE" of "terrorist act" offense under the new "National Security Law"
He's trying to flee to UK with a oneway ticket right after he committed this vicious terrorist attack on our brave Policeman however one of his relatives sold him out (rumors because of the half a million reward put up by our ex-Chief Excecutive Leung Chun-ying)
Hopefully no less than "10 yrs" if not life prison
Read carefully, I was talking about those convicted BEFORE enactment of the NSL.
It doesn’t invalidate their passport, but even minor crimes be grounds for refusal of entry. Since (in the case of BNO) they are providing only a “pathway to citizenship”, not a guarantee to enter the country.
A judge would have to be very careful with such rulings. The argument that the government is making is that the justice system is no longer independent AFTER the NSL. If someone is convicted of something like assault/assault on a police officer (such as the kid begging on the street) BEFORE the NSL, he would almost have to be turned away. Being he was convicted prior to the NSL, he cannot make the argument that he was a "prisoner of conscience". If a judge were to validate such an argument, almost all HK criminals eligible for BNO would flock to UK. Criminal organizations would love this.
It is naive to think that you have to be convicted of "crimes against humanity" to be turned away from the country. Almost all countries will turn away people with simple drug convictions. Most people in HK going to jail were not for "unlawful assembly", but active violence. Most people arrested for unlawful assembly were basically "catch-and-release" cases (much to the chagrin of some posters here).
The US has passed similar legislation for HK, so it is relevant. If a country is going to be sanctimonious and moralizing, then put your money where your mouth is. Most of these women are fleeing precisely because there is no rule of law.
I cannot speak directly for UK since I am not at all familiar with UK refugee approaches, but it if it is anything like Canada, good luck. Canada is seen as pretty welcoming to refugees, but the law is interpreted quite closely.
Were you not aware of their "laam chau" policy? We all burn together? Also called "Never cut apart". They got just what they wanted.
Anyway, the posturing by US/UK/AU is a joke. It's obvious that these governments are hoping for a quick capital injection from high net-worth individuals while they suffer from a COVID-19 recession. They all have visions of the money they got from the 97 handover and hope it happens again. If governments actually gave 2 cents about people (and not money), then a lot of things would be different.
Last edited:
Mr T
Senior Member
You mean the migrants that walked across borders shopping for a better benefit system because the first European countries they entered into weren't good enough? That's got nothing to do with Hong Kong. We're talking about people who will have a legal choice of moving to another country - maybe more than one. Most people regard legal migration in a very different light to illegal migration.
Anyway, Hong Kong residents are unlikely to move to mainland Europe. It will be places like the UK, Canada, Australia, Taiwan and maybe the US. The UK is actually one of the least prejudiced places in Europe and even does well on a global level (22 out of the 100 countries surveyed).
You're conveniently forgetting that one of the biggest issues with previous race rights movements wasn't just about where you could sit on a bus but whether you could vote. Apartheid South Africa didn't let non-Caucasians vote, except for a brief period when a handful of seats were allocated to people of multiple races.
What has been happening in Hong Kong is the result of a long-term issue of the effective disenfranchisement of the vast majority of Hong Kong residents due to votes not being given appropriate weight. Well-connected and/or wealthy people have undue influence via the Functional Constituencies and everyone else just gets a vote in the geographical constituences, which the former privileged people also get. Also the fact that the Chief Executive still isn't directly elected and clearly never will be now that the CCP is throwing its toys out of the pram.
So whilst the different movements are not exactly the same, they're similar enough to draw a comparison.
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I still think China is missing a golden opportunity to hoist the UK and US with their own petard by just sending them all the troublemakers.
Empty the jails and round up all known protestors not currently under arrest and put them on one-way flights to the UK/US, and issue them each a conformation of the revocation of their Chinese and HK citizenships and all associates rights and privileges, as well as a legal order banning them from all Chinese territory for life.
Some might argue that sets a bad example for others to try to cause trouble to get a free ride to the UK/US, but I would say the US and UK are already doing that with their offers. What China should do is call their bluff. Flood them with a few hundred thousand Chinese deplorables and it won’t be long before the financial pressure of it forces the US and UK to radically change policy. Many of those cockroaches will ultimate end up being made stateless as neither the US or UK wants them to be causing trouble on their own soil. That will be an effective deterrence for other traitors thinking of trying to sell out their homeland to the US and UK.
Empty the jails and round up all known protestors not currently under arrest and put them on one-way flights to the UK/US, and issue them each a conformation of the revocation of their Chinese and HK citizenships and all associates rights and privileges, as well as a legal order banning them from all Chinese territory for life.
Some might argue that sets a bad example for others to try to cause trouble to get a free ride to the UK/US, but I would say the US and UK are already doing that with their offers. What China should do is call their bluff. Flood them with a few hundred thousand Chinese deplorables and it won’t be long before the financial pressure of it forces the US and UK to radically change policy. Many of those cockroaches will ultimate end up being made stateless as neither the US or UK wants them to be causing trouble on their own soil. That will be an effective deterrence for other traitors thinking of trying to sell out their homeland to the US and UK.
Hi plawolf
I think Beijing is just being diplomatic, but deep inside its overjoy. China is trying a propaganda offensive here, letting the world know that she care for all HK and will be tough, to safe and protect its people. The serious enforcement will suffocate the protester and they have no choice but to emigrate, lets see what Uk, Australia and US will do , if they accept them. interesting times ahead indeed
I think Beijing is just being diplomatic, but deep inside its overjoy. China is trying a propaganda offensive here, letting the world know that she care for all HK and will be tough, to safe and protect its people. The serious enforcement will suffocate the protester and they have no choice but to emigrate, lets see what Uk, Australia and US will do , if they accept them. interesting times ahead indeed
Mr T
Senior Member
That's not actually true. BNO status is a type of British nationality, and BNO passport holders have always held the ability to enter the UK like any normal British citizen, i.e. without a visa or need to seek entry clearance at the border. It's just that up until now BNO passport holders did not hold an unrestricted right to live in the UK and could only stay for six months in any given year.
One thing I am not clear on is whether BNO passport holders had special restrictions on entry compared to regular British citizens. There's nothing in official guidance to say so.
However, the simple reality is that even if immigration officers might be concerned about a HK person's offending, that information may not be available. Landing cards have been scrapped, so there's no need to tip immigration officials off that you've been convicted of a crime. Unless the new system will see immigration staff scroll through pages of petty charges like shoplifting and unlawful assembly to find something relevant, one would assume that their offending would need to be of a type that meant it was captured and visible digitally.
Besides, even if an immigration officer realises a BNO passport holder has committed some offences and had jail time, I wouldn't be surprised if they were waived through on the basis of "I took part in the HK protests and the judge was heavy-handed at sentencing". It might lead to a delay at the border, but unlikely to be a flat refusal - and if it did, then you'd probably get an asylum claim.
Assuming there's any discretion, I don't think there's a real risk of opening the doors to Triad mobsters who cut people into pieces just because someone who got a few months jail time for "affray" is allowed into the UK.
The US is very hard on it, but that's not the case for the UK. Minor drug convictions do not lead to an automatic refusal of entry clearance. The UK is primarily concerned about people who have committed crimes in the UK with a sentence of 12 or more months in prison and are seeking to return. Possession of cannabis, for example, in the US or Canada is irrelevant.
Except that I'm not suggesting HK people should go to the US or that the US should be praised for their policies. What the UK is doing is completely separate.
I can promise you that anyone from Hong Kong claiming asylum isn't going to be refused because of a moderate amount of jail time related to the protests, unless it's clear there were involved in extreme and sustained violence. It's simply not part of how asylum claims are considered. The options to refuse asylum on the basis of criminality are very limited.
Again, that's got nothing to do with the vast majority of HK people that protested peacefully or voiced their views without taking to the streets.
There's no capital injection that HK residents can provide that would be of obvious use to the UK. Because it's not in the eurozone it can print its own money, and the Bank of England has been providing amazing support during the Covid-19 crisis. Besides, the richest Hong Kong residents will probably stay, because they're part of the ruling elite and benefit from everyone else being terrified of the authorities. Even those that are worried have already set up bolt-holes in other countries and moved money around - much like top CCP officials do. People like that don't need to use their BNO passports because they already can apply for an investor visa.
Whether the UK and other governments feel they need to do something or are worried about public pressure if they don't, there's no financial incentive in this. I suppose there are those that feel it would be helpful to have migrants that are likely to speak English and have a good education, but those are mitigating factors in agreeing to potentially mass migration rather than a reason for it. If the UK just wanted more high-skilled workers it would just agree Freedom of Movement with the EU in the current trade negotiations.
"I'm angry no one in the UK is stupid enough to vote for me anymore!"
Honestly, you can track the man's extremism with his declining electoral fortunes.
Last edited:
Mr T
Senior Member
By the way, was it AndrewS that said the UK immigration reform wasn't going to happen because the City of London/some large companies were going to intervene? Do they want to accept they were wrong, or are they going to double-down and say the bill won't get through Parliament?
Quickie
Colonel
That's how things work in the U.S. and other countries. I don't know why you don't see it as such.
Do you see the police in the U.S. as an example searching and detaining FBI or CIA agents while they are in the midst of their covert operation?