Vast protest in Hong Kong against extradition law - Page 47 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15042612
Patrickov wrote:I agree that this statement is generally correct, although if the law is as "full of loophole" as my Fellow Hongkonger suggests, it would have been so easy for the rich to exploit everyone else that, the breaking point would have been reached long before now.

Rich exploiting the poor is a feature of capitalism that existed long before our beloved CCP - this alone has no problem when economy was booming and our forefathers are getting lifted out of poverty. Not nowadays.
Don't get me wrong, Hong Kong's lawbook is quite mature - it is difficult to play with unless you have an army of accountants and lawyers and powerful connections working for you, that means the haute bourgeoisie...
China, on the other hand, the state intervene to stop rich assholes when they go out of hand or when they harm state interests, often by changing laws or arbitrary execution . Sometimes it is justified, sometimes not, but that’s something global capitalists have much trouble accepting.
Do remember however, China’s economy is much bigger and development stage disparity is huge, it’s a lot more difficult to apply country wide law without frequent “fixing”
#15042688
benpenguin wrote:- CCP army back then has no anti-riot equipment nor experience, just guns and military training.
- Local Beijing security forces are reluctant to move onto the protesters, so reinforcements were brought in.
- The reinforcing military police also has no anti-riot training - they came in, obeyed order and did the only think they know, then it quickly went out of hand.
On the other hand, the HKPF has dehumanized the protesters enough to kill and maim without Beijing's help :)


OK, so they were just unprepared. There are other examples of authoritarian regimes using tanks against civil disobedience, but it always results in the regime losing credibility.


Depends on what their media tells them, so the answer is no. e.g. Did the world gave China any sympathy when it suffered terrorist attacks in Xinjiang? Or any credit when they lead the world in renewable energy production?
As I say - we are only as good as our knowledge.



First question, the answer is yes. There was sympathetic talk after that knife attack a few years ago. But since then the Uighurs have been thrown in concentration camps, so the sympathy has evaporated.

Second question, yes and no. People are aware of efforts to use sustain energy but then, China is also the number one coal burner. People are aware of that too.

One thing people in China might have forgotten is that Australia proved aid to China for reforestation and helped develop the solar technology China now deploys, back in the 1990’s. As you say, we are only as good as our knowledge.
#15042736
foxdemon wrote:OK, so they were just unprepared. There are other examples of authoritarian regimes using tanks against civil disobedience, but it always results in the regime losing credibility.

Yep, and I'm not saying the CCP don't deserve the bad rap in 1989. Pretty sure there are shades of moral grey behind every tragedy - you will have to bear the consequences anyhow. I am making that example to discuss the reason why they roll in the tanks in Beijing but unlikely Hong Kong.

foxdemon wrote:First question, the answer is yes. There was sympathetic talk after that knife attack a few years ago. But since then the Uighurs have been thrown in concentration camps, so the sympathy has evaporated.
Second question, yes and no. People are aware of efforts to use sustain energy but then, China is also the number one coal burner. People are aware of that too.
One thing people in China might have forgotten is that Australia proved aid to China for reforestation and helped develop the solar technology China now deploys, back in the 1990’s. As you say, we are only as good as our knowledge.

I am well aware of how things are being reported in your media - perhaps I should try and illustrate better:
The news titles could read: "China fights coal pollution by investing in renewable energy", or "Despite advances in cleaner alternatives, China still lags behind as biggest polluter in the world."
"Xinjiang terrorists kill X victims in busy train station, government vows to seek justice for victims", or "Knife wielding attackers kill X in response to regime crackdown"
You can spin it either way and the titles would both be right.
Not to mention, the likes of CNN would sometimes just pull entirely fictional news out of their ass, using wild imagination plus a few recycled pictures.

Needless to say, China pulls the same shit but nobody listens to them because US owns worldwide MSM and social media, but within China that's the other way around. Good guys and bad guys are defined by the media - that was the point I'm trying to make.
#15042938
benpenguin wrote:Needless to say, China pulls the same shit but nobody listens to them because US owns worldwide MSM and social media, but within China that's the other way around. Good guys and bad guys are defined by the media - that was the point I'm trying to make.


To be fair, it is not that the Chinese didn't try to dominate the media down here. Their failure can only be explained by the inferiority of their system and people. They have to make use of a GFW and intensive brainwashing to get the majority in Mainland on their side. If their economy collapses things will go ugly rather quickly. As we can see, they are not really above ISIS when it comes to getting rid of "enemy" leaders, and they did not even do it properly. (on the other hand, Osama bin Laden was killed rather swiftly and smoothly)
#15042964
Patrickov wrote:To be fair, it is not that the Chinese didn't try to dominate the media down here. Their failure can only be explained by the inferiority of their system and people.
That's too broad a conclusion and it's easy to make, but I beg to differ... CCP suck at the media game, true. But don't forget the US played this game ever since WWII, and China is just catching up. Less than a decade ago even mainland Chinese intellectuals listen to the West over China.
And let's not forget our own background. We learn politics and history mostly through the lens of the West, sharing much of their values, but that's not always the objective truth. Truth is often multi-faceted and the media's spin plays a very big part.
As for superiority - that's an even more complicated question. I do see strength and flaws of mainland Chinese over Hong Kong people, and I personally know many mainlander colleagues and friends that I strongly respect. It is quite arrogant to call them inferior.
Patrickov wrote:They have to make use of a GFW and intensive brainwashing to get the majority in Mainland on their side.

I am very hesitant to call people "brainwashed" because we are all victims of it, myself included. The "free media" is not reporting truthfully either, you are just more conditioned to listen to them. As I say, China sucked at the media game, they have to block Western lies outside their borders in order to spread their own lies :lol: ... But many mainlanders I know are very knowledgable about world events, much more so than the average Hong Konger - they just see things from a different angle, being conditioned by their own media and upbringing.
Patrickov wrote:As we can see, they are not really above ISIS when it comes to getting rid of "enemy" leaders, and they did not even do it properly. (on the other hand, Osama bin Laden was killed rather swiftly and smoothly)

Uh... when was the last time CCP executed people on CCTV, eat dissident's hearts while taking pictures, torch entire cities while on cocaine and suicide bomb protests?
And why are we even comparing state sponsored murder? Anyway, if we have to get there I invite you to read up on CIA's history...They love sponsoring Islamists after all.

As I say, I don't believe in the moral superiority of the West over China - that doesn't mean I think the Chinese are spotless. As the city state on the great empire's border, it's very easy to hate her - justifiably too. Ask Sri Lanka and Bangladesh about India, ask the Eastern Europeans about Russia, ask the Cubans and Venezuelans about US... you will get very extreme views from both sides, from sourness to teeth-gritting hatred much like our own yellow and blues. It's quite natural, but try to be above that...
#15042968
benpenguin wrote:That's too broad a conclusion and it's easy to make, but I beg to differ... CCP suck at the media game, true. But don't forget the US played this game ever since WWII, and China is just catching up. Less than a decade ago even mainland Chinese intellectuals listen to the West over China.
And let's not forget our own background. We learn politics and history mostly through the lens of the West, sharing much of their values, but that's not always the objective truth. Truth is often multi-faceted and the media's spin plays a very big part.
As for superiority - that's an even more complicated question. I do see strength and flaws of mainland Chinese over Hong Kong people, and I personally know many mainlander colleagues and friends that I strongly respect. It is quite arrogant to call them inferior.

I am very hesitant to call people "brainwashed" because we are all victims of it, myself included. The "free media" is not reporting truthfully either, you are just more conditioned to listen to them. As I say, China sucked at the media game, they have to block Western lies outside their borders in order to spread their own lies :lol: ... But many mainlanders I know are very knowledgable about world events, much more so than the average Hong Konger - they just see things from a different angle, being conditioned by their own media and upbringing.

Uh... when was the last time CCP executed people on CCTV, eat dissident's hearts while taking pictures, torch entire cities while on cocaine and suicide bomb protests?
And why are we even comparing state sponsored murder? Anyway, if we have to get there I invite you to read up on CIA's history...They love sponsoring Islamists after all.

As I say, I don't believe in the moral superiority of the West over China - that doesn't mean I think the Chinese are spotless. As the city state on the great empire's border, it's very easy to hate her - justifiably too. Ask Sri Lanka and Bangladesh about India, ask the Eastern Europeans about Russia, ask the Cubans and Venezuelans about US... you will get very extreme views from both sides, from sourness to teeth-gritting hatred much like our own yellow and blues. It's quite natural, but try to be above that...

Russia is a rational actor that is predictable to a fault since late Tsarist times. In this sense Russia can be managed. The only unpredictable action of Russia in recent times was Afghanistan.

China on the other hand is irrational. It surprises countries so the reaction to China can wary from catastrophic to good for China.

European countries learned not to operate like that through a long period of time because it is inherently unstable. Trump is a recent phenomenon that makes people shit bricks because of this.
#15042975
JohnRawls wrote:China on the other hand is irrational. It surprises countries so the reaction to China can wary from catastrophic to good for China.
Predictability is indeed one of the things they need to work on - but again Trump surprised the hell out of them too. This unpredictability is quite dangerous to both countries.
#15043033
benpenguin wrote:That's too broad a conclusion and it's easy to make, but I beg to differ... CCP suck at the media game, true. But don't forget the US played this game ever since WWII, and China is just catching up. Less than a decade ago even mainland Chinese intellectuals listen to the West over China.
And let's not forget our own background. We learn politics and history mostly through the lens of the West, sharing much of their values, but that's not always the objective truth. Truth is often multi-faceted and the media's spin plays a very big part.

As for superiority - that's an even more complicated question. I do see strength and flaws of mainland Chinese over Hong Kong people, and I personally know many mainlander colleagues and friends that I strongly respect. It is quite arrogant to call them inferior.

I am very hesitant to call people "brainwashed" because we are all victims of it, myself included. The "free media" is not reporting truthfully either, you are just more conditioned to listen to them. As I say, China sucked at the media game, they have to block Western lies outside their borders in order to spread their own lies :lol: ... But many mainlanders I know are very knowledgable about world events, much more so than the average Hong Konger - they just see things from a different angle, being conditioned by their own media and upbringing.


I should have defined what I meant by using the word "inferior". I was not saying the Chinese were intellectually or (sometimes) morally inferior to the Westerners -- quite to the contrary, they often came out smarter, and sometimes more virtuous. And I do acknowledge that many Mainland Chinese, even for some of those in support of the Communists, have a better understanding of the world than most Hongkongers.

However, the Chinese are inferior in two ways.

First, they do not consider building a good System and keep it running is necessary. Rather, they only want to get the most share of whatever in reach, even if their desire is in breach of others rights / law / social agreement among other people's society. This is why China is so rampant of corruption and power abuse.

Second, they are too obsessed in "being the centre of the World". As far as we read from the media (although you might believe it biased), at least the Communists (and certainly the Nationalists) try to keep themselves going by instilling the idea that "they are helping the people to stand up again". The problem is, they never tried to make a case of gaining respect by properly respecting others' way. As a result, many simply do not have the idea of respecting others' security and freedom.

(Just one breaking 'news' before posting: I had a friend who just told me that he almost had his account 'sold' by the Bank of China. He never used Weixin, but got an official SMS from BoC saying that he 'asked' the card centre to confirm a credit card of his [he never used it] through Weixin. Finding his card intact, he immediately terminated his card, and started to plan withdrawing money from BoC. This clearly shows the Chinese have absolutely no sense of respect of others' data security and their entitled privacy)

These two reasons lead to my strong belief that the Chinese will do better if governed by Westerners. In fact, the late Liu Xiaobo as well as the historian Ray Huang (to other English users: Sorry that it's in Chinese, it's just that Mr. Huang told his students that they would have been a better official than himself, because of the cultural differences) also shared this idea, although I had already had mine before knowing either of theirs.

I'd also like to acknowledge that I am severely brainwashed by the Bible, especially the Book of Amos and Revelations. Otherwise I wouldn't have so strong a sense that "big wrongs must be punished, and nothing other than annihilation would serve justice".


benpenguin wrote:Uh... when was the last time CCP executed people on CCTV, eat dissident's hearts while taking pictures, torch entire cities while on cocaine and suicide bomb protests? And why are we even comparing state sponsored murder? Anyway, if we have to get there I invite you to read up on CIA's history... They love sponsoring Islamists after all.


It's rather obvious that the Chinese authority -- or their collaborators -- constantly try to hire thugs to beat up innocent people. The incidents on 21 July and 31 August are good examples, and the update I wished to post yesterday was exactly another such case, this time with someone hired to beat up a leader of the organisation which continuously called for peaceful demonstrations. I am not even talking about police violence here, which, given the power they are entitled / responsible for, is somewhat inevitable.


benpenguin wrote:As I say, I don't believe in the moral superiority of the West over China - that doesn't mean I think the Chinese are spotless. As the city state on the great empire's border, it's very easy to hate her - justifiably too. Ask Sri Lanka and Bangladesh about India, ask the Eastern Europeans about Russia, ask the Cubans and Venezuelans about US... you will get very extreme views from both sides, from sourness to teeth-gritting hatred much like our own yellow and blues. It's quite natural, but try to be above that...


I don't really think it is practical to believe enough people can be "above that" to make it no longer an issue.

Putting my belief aside, it is all about check and balance. We usually fear or hate some entity because the said entity is too strong to resist.
#15043048
benpenguin wrote:Another perspective from a Hong Kong Property Oligarch (Chinese with English subtitles). You might not agree with everything but he offers a window to what CCP leaders think about the crisis.


Well, this guy is exactly who I was talking about in post 15035381.

He talked about how the better-minded refused to serve China, and how some (presumably higher-up) officials wanted someone even he despised. This description fits the situation pretty well, I must say, although he also said that the young ones are brainwashed by Western media and the pan-Democrats, which I strongly disagree (as said in a previous post).

If anything, I despise Western media as well -- they either spew out garbage opinions (like the Guardian), or try to charge us for their so-called information (like the Telegraph).
#15043274
KASHMIR : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

YEMEN : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

Ecuador : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

hongkong : Western Population, holy shit this is some real oppression that we are going to end by making winnie the poo jokes.

I still remember the days when western media, governments and people cared so much about Libya now that the situation there is much worse, the only sound that is coming from these so caring people is silence.

Just like manufactured consent, this is nothing but manufactured rage, if China would have been a western bootlicking improvised shithole, no one would have given a fuck about Hong Kong.
#15043303
fuser wrote:KASHMIR : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

YEMEN : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

Ecuador : Western Population, sorry can't hear you.

hongkong : Western Population, holy shit this is some real oppression that we are going to end by making winnie the poo jokes.

I still remember the days when western media, governments and people cared so much about Libya now that the situation there is much worse, the only sound that is coming from these so caring people is silence.

Just like manufactured consent, this is nothing but manufactured rage, if China would have been a western bootlicking improvised shithole, no one would have given a fuck about Hong Kong.



I hope this message serves as an urge for the people to pay similar attention to other protests instead of a call for us to submit to Chinese tyranny.

And I seriously do not agree that Hong Kong will simutaneously be a Western bootlicking System, and an improvised shithole at the same time. These two are mutually exclusive here.
#15043326
Patrickov wrote:First, they do not consider building a good System and keep it running is necessary. Rather, they only want to get the most share of whatever in reach, even if their desire is in breach of others rights / law / social agreement among other people's society. This is why China is so rampant of corruption and power abuse.

Well, that's the empire being an empire - greedy, aggressive and overbearing - that's part of the reason why they succeed. Similar complaints are made towards every empire in history - it's not a unique Chinese characteristic.
Patrickov wrote:Second, they are too obsessed in "being the centre of the World". As far as we read from the media (although you might believe it biased), at least the Communists (and certainly the Nationalists) try to keep themselves going by instilling the idea that "they are helping the people to stand up again". The problem is, they never tried to make a case of gaining respect by properly respecting others' way. As a result, many simply do not have the idea of respecting others' security and freedom.

5000 years of Chinese history settled on the conclusion that, the empire can only be strong when united, like it or not. As avid readers of history, any CCP leader will not forget that.
You can certainly take the position of anti-imperialists and there's nothing wrong with it. But in Hong Kong's best interest - I believe peaceful co-existence with China is the only way out - that means revisiting the role of China in Hong Kong. The yellow camp will answer "no role, get off my lawn". The blue camp will answer "obey or else". Both answers do not bode well for our future.
The road-map for mutually beneficial, peaceful co-existence must involve 2 parts - war and diplomacy. In our collective anger, we now know war. We have brought inconvenience to the empire, and perhaps some pain. That is a good thing. We can have no diplomacy when we have no teeth.
But that was the easy part - the best result from this is mutual destruction - that's not in anybody's interest. We still want Hong Kong to prosper, not become a missile in the US-China conflict. But if we cannot settle on a possible vision of what Hong Kong wants to be, this is the only result.
I want peace - but as much as the Sinophile I am, I know Hong Kong is not ready for it. Justice must be served first for Hong Kong to move forward - for 721, 831 and many other crimes. But history will repeat itself if we do not have a clear vision forward. Making China our mortal enemy is not even a remotely viable one.
Patrickov wrote:I'd also like to acknowledge that I am severely brainwashed by the Bible, especially the Book of Amos and Revelations. Otherwise I wouldn't have so strong a sense that "big wrongs must be punished, and nothing other than annihilation would serve justice".

Yes that's indeed a thing. Right/wrong moral dichotomy is not how politics works, just the media. You have Christian belief and liberal western values, like many other Hong Konger, and that conditioned you to accept anti-China propaganda, and reject pro-China ones. You have those values because of your family upbringing, education and years of exposure to Hollywood movies, Reuter news, and Facebook shares. I wouldn't call that brainwashing, that's conditioning.
Myself I bounced between the two camps for a while and kind of settled on pro-China side, because of my experience in China and the stuff I read. We both have our bias, so do acknowledge it - but I think we can at least agree to look at things with Hong Kong's interest at heart.
Patrickov wrote:I don't really think it is practical to believe enough people can be "above that" to make it no longer an issue.
Putting my belief aside, it is all about check and balance. We usually fear or hate some entity because the said entity is too strong to resist.

Just speaking to you. We have enough zealots who only wants to go 攬炒 on China, or chop up protesters. We need cooler heads.
Patrickov wrote:He talked about how the better-minded refused to serve China, and how some (presumably higher-up) officials wanted someone even he despised.
The guy said nothing like that - I think in your hatred towards China, you heard something he didn't say. The "better minded" do not serve the government because it is a lot more profitable to serve the financial industry and the property barons. People kept saying Carrie making 5 Million annual salary is too much - but that's nothing comparing to property tycoons or iBankers in their glory days. It's just economics, please leave morals out of it :lol:
Patrickov wrote:If anything, I despise Western media as well -- they either spew out garbage opinions (like the Guardian), or try to charge us for their so-called information (like the Telegraph).
Your single minded hatred towards the CCP speaks differently...
#15043377
benpenguin wrote:Yes that's indeed a thing. Right/wrong moral dichotomy is not how politics works, just the media. You have Christian belief and liberal western values, like many other Hong Konger, and that conditioned you to accept anti-China propaganda, and reject pro-China ones. You have those values because of your family upbringing, education and years of exposure to Hollywood movies, Reuter news, and Facebook shares. I wouldn't call that brainwashing, that's conditioning.


However, some of this conditioning may also work in the reverse direction. I see myself significantly less inclined to what is presented than most of my associates, no less because of the stress of being whitewashed by "call for awakeness" messages from them. It is just that by being in power, the authorities are automatically expected to bear greater responsibilities, and when they don't, it is probably better to get rid of them as quickly as possible.

This does not automatically mean hatred. If those should be rid of serve the rest of us a favour and yield what they are not entitled then I am OK if they are not persecuted (CY Leung can be an example -- he's effectively been removed from power in 2017 so I do not go much further than condemning him on his more recent comments or calls for action against protesters nowadays). The necessity of force, if any, should hold just as long as the entity to be rid of clutches the said power. Himmler said one should hold thoughts like extermination of undesirable people as necessity rather than hatred (anyway that's my latest signature). Even if he was lying, the core principle still holds: Hatred does not solve anything, and it is best not to have it.

benpenguin wrote:Just speaking to you. We have enough zealots who only wants to go 攬炒 on China, or chop up protesters. We need cooler heads.


It depends on how one sees the situation, but social problems arise exactly because not everyone can have a cool head all the time. It is unrealistic to make sandboxes assuming enough people have cool heads. In other words, policy making needs to address how stakeholders might feel, in addition to all the legal, procedural and technical aspects.

By default, whoever has more power is more responsible, and unless we can prove they have zero ability to make a difference (which, unfortunately, would mean they are too incompetent to be trusted with power) I cannot say they do not deserve this. Placing the focus of the blame on those offended, harmed or even hurt by the policy is simply wrong.


benpenguin wrote:The guy said nothing like that - I think in your hatred towards China, you heard something he didn't say. The "better minded" do not serve the government because it is a lot more profitable to serve the financial industry and the property barons. People kept saying Carrie making 5 Million annual salary is too much - but that's nothing comparing to property tycoons or iBankers in their glory days. It's just economics, please leave morals out of it :lol:


First thing first, I do not think the Hong Kong officials are overpaid. However, the incumbents are either too incompetent or too ill-minded to be trusted with power.

The video around 10:00 clearly shows the person being rather emotional in disagreeing the high official's preferred person, and I think his description of the conversation accurately describes what the higher orders in the Chinese leadership actually want -- an obedient shithole who (I presume) would carry out their hidden agenda without dissent. (I cannot decide whether Carrie Lam is one, but some might say she tries her best).

He made three points of criticism right afterwards, at least two of which I agree. The one thing I do not agree is his list of culprits (or the order he put it) near the end of the video, as I have mentioned in the previous post.

benpenguin wrote:Your single minded hatred towards the CCP speaks differently


This statement requires extensive elaboration. I consider this as a rather non-factual categorization, and does nothing to prove my previous statement untrue. Why would one expect another person to have no negative opinion against an entity which is seen as on his/her side?
#15043616
Patrickov wrote:It is just that by being in power, the authorities are automatically expected to bear greater responsibilities, and when they don't, it is probably better to get rid of them as quickly as possible.
It depends on how one sees the situation, but social problems arise exactly because not everyone can have a cool head all the time. It is unrealistic to make sandboxes assuming enough people have cool heads. In other words, policy making needs to address how stakeholders might feel, in addition to all the legal, procedural and technical aspects.
By default, whoever has more power is more responsible, and unless we can prove they have zero ability to make a difference (which, unfortunately, would mean they are too incompetent to be trusted with power) I cannot say they do not deserve this. Placing the focus of the blame on those offended, harmed or even hurt by the policy is simply wrong.

No argument here - for me, the current Hong Kong government is past their use-by date and must be reformed. These useless bureaucrats will bear the full responsibility of the current crisis, and some perhaps even punished for their crimes. Any resolution they suggest will not be accepted by Hong Kongers anyway, so they might as well do us one last service, that is to eat all the flak head-on, then go to jail. They can take the Liason office with them while at it. But all that will achieve is to buy the next government some time, and this will all happen again if we cannot answer the China question: what is China's role in Hong Kong? How should we deal with / work with them? What does Hong Kong want, besides "out of my lawn"? I feel that all the yellow camp does is playing "David vs Golliath", I am talking about diplomacy and city statehood.
The protesters are saying "revolution of our times" - if this is a revolution, it means we are trying to gain power and reform. That's good, but now they have the responsibility to answer the question - what are they going to do with that power, besides vendetta? If the yellow camp is destroying stuff while still laying all responsibilities in the hands of the government, they can at most have my pity for police brutality - but not respect.
Patrickov wrote:The video around 10:00 clearly shows the person being rather emotional in disagreeing the high official's preferred person, and I think his description of the conversation accurately describes what the higher orders in the Chinese leadership actually want -- an obedient shithole who (I presume) would carry out their hidden agenda without dissent. (I cannot decide whether Carrie Lam is one, but some might say she tries her best).

No, that's not what he said - he is saying these people do not have the political acumen to sit on the throne, because they are bureaucrats(吏) not politicians(官), and Beijing has been negligent in their duties of choosing CE, and winning the hearts of mind of Hong Kongers. They needed to pick somebody they can trust, but the best guys are all making shitloads of money in the property / financial markets and just couldn't bother with politics. The hidden agenda thing is your own projection...
Carrie Lam is obviously a bureaucrat - being one all her life - seeing how she fails miserably at reading the public, heeding her advisors, and have no personal charisma, we all know what she is. She did tried her best - not as chief executive, but as a bulldozer.
benpenguin wrote:This statement requires extensive elaboration. I consider this as a rather non-factual categorization, and does nothing to prove my previous statement untrue. Why would one expect another person to have no negative opinion against an entity which is seen as on his/her side?
I have actually been on this forum for more than a decade and you have always been attacking China in your posts since I saw you - but I see you have since gotten more moderate. So, if this isn't what you are, I apologize for making that comment.
#15043654
benpenguin wrote:And this will all happen again if we cannot answer the China question: What is China's role in Hong Kong? How should we deal with / work with them? What does Hong Kong want, besides "out of my lawn"?


China should see Hong Kong as somewhere to be changed as little as possible, and themselves the custodian. Do NOT try to remodel Hong Kong in their own vision. Instead, find somewhere else to carry out their experiments. As for "not allowing Hong Kong to be a base of anti-China or anti-Communism", well, the Chinese Communists, and to a lesser extent, the Chinese people themselves, are the real ones who ignited such sentiment. If they fail to acknowledge this, anywhere can be a base of anti-China or anti-Communism. Don't they see what Malaysia and Kazakhstan have become?

I say this not in a Hong-Kong-centric way. Why does Hong Kong have to be so important anyways? I actually like the idea that China, or at least a significant portion of it, be as good to live as Hong Kong is (or used to be). Many Hong Kong Secessionists hold their idea just because they lost hope of that. Therefore, I strongly disagree their call (and, instead, believe the Secession Question is a false proposition), but I cannot really blame them.

Making China "livable" is the ultimate solution of the Hong Kong problem. As a Chinese scholar Gu Yanwu said, "Everybody is responsible for the fate of the world". The Chinese only have themselves to blame if their place is such a shithole, and should not lie to others and force they way (as they have been doing). If they really cannot stand it anymore, then I won't hesitate to say "burn this bitch down", but afterwards, please be serious to build something that works -- together.

Of course, there's a "dark side" of the above argument -- If they think foreign administration is better (as many of them prove by action) then why is it not right to make the said foreign people or system be their Governor(s)?


benpenguin wrote:I have actually been on this forum for more than a decade and you have always been attacking China in your posts since I saw you - but I see you have since gotten more moderate. So, if this isn't what you are, I apologize for making that comment.


To put it simply, my observation is that different groups / races of people have different abilities, and the Chinese people seem not the best in the category of administrative ability or fairness. Because this is a politics forum, it is probably natural for me to give negative comments against China or the Chinese people most (if not all) of the time, and hold contempt for those who (constantly) vow the opposite.

It is a fact that I am often seen by other people as radical, irrational or -- I agree the most -- inconsistent. I do not intend to compare, but I believe there is at least one poster who has, early in this thread, posted some statements that I found excessive or impractical, even though it's in agreement with my general ideas. However, I wish not to disclose more details of the said post(s).

As I mentioned near the end of post 15043033, the strength and nature of our reactions towards a person / group / organisation, often reflects the impression or influence of the said person / group / organisation. Considering the above comment, I will look into more about the potential meaning of my words might bring before making posts.
#15043742
Kris Cheng & Jennifer Creery wrote:Hong Kong police accused of targeting mosque with water cannon blue dye as communities conduct clean-up

Hong Kong police have come under fire for allegedly targeting a major mosque in Tsim Sha Tsui with a water cannon truck. Members of the public assisted in a clean-up operation after blue dye from the crowd control truck stained the building’s steps on Nathan Road.

At around 4pm on Sunday, the entrance of the Kowloon Masjid and Islamic Centre – the city’s largest mosque – was doused with coloured liquid as officers attempted to clear the area of pro-democracy protesters heading north.

Several journalists, bystanders and Civic Party lawmaker Jeremy Tam were hit by the blue stream – including Philip Khan, a local Muslim businessman who was a member of the chief executive election committee.

“I think the police [were] intentionally targeting us. There were no protesters around earlier,” he said. “Would they fire this kind of stuff at a government house?”

Khan told reporters that the incident was an insult to Islam, adding: “Don’t they know what religious respect means? Doesn’t the Basic Law say we have freedom of religion?”

Mohan Chugani, the former Chairman of Indian Association and member of NGO Unison, was also injured and sent to a hospital to have his injuries examined.

Members of the public came out to clean the front of the mosque by sweeping dye from its steps and wiping down its gates.

The Civil Human Rights Front – a coalition of pro-democracy groups – condemned the incident as an affront to the dignity of places of religious worship. It said that, according to news clips, there were too few people outside the building at the time to warrant the use of the water cannon truck.

“It is totally unnecessary to disperse the crowd by using water cannon. However, the police officers did not consider the circumstance as well as the dignity of the place of religious worship,” its statement read. “The use of water cannon caused injuries of citizens and damaged the Mosque. It demonstrates the police officers are abusing their power and force to insult place of religious worship, and thus put social harmony at risk.”

The Front also expressed regret over the “lack of common sense and insensitivity to religion,” calling on the police commission to deliver an apology to the religious community as well as Hong Kong society at large.

‘Unintended’

At around 8:30pm, the police released a statement saying the incident was “unintended” and “unfortunate.”

“Following the incident, the police… immediately contacted the Chief Imam as well as Muslim community leaders to clarify the situation and to show our concern,” its statement read.



At roughly 9:40pm, police representatives went to the newly cleaned Kowloon Masjid in an attempt to explain Sunday afternoon’s blue dye incident.

Sunday saw tens of thousands take to the streets of Kowloon despite a police ban on a cancelled march – organised by the Front – against the government’s anti-mask law. The controversial measure was implemented two weeks ago using the 1922 Emergency Regulations Ordinance in response to large-scale protests, sparked by an ill-fated bill which would have enabled extraditions to China.

The unrest, now entering its 20th week, has since evolved into sometimes violent displays of dissent over Beijing’s encroachment, democracy and the police’s handling of the crisis.

Hong Kong Free Press


Goddammit, this can lead to Jihads! :eek:
  • 1
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 53

Yes, I did, and you know it. See the title of th[…]

I refuted your claim, and provided the source. […]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymaWq5yZIYM Hol[…]

Trump and Russiagate

I hope all is well that sounds great we have lots[…]