Hong Kong Protesters Appeal To Trump For Support.

[Guest]

On 9/14/2019 at 6:31 PM, Jan van Eck said:

He is a troll.   That is why. 

2 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

< bad moderator, bad.  Trolling is BAD. >

You can't beat this stuff

 

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

Much can be read through the lines here, and much can be said in retort. 

One person refers to American "misbehaviour". Kent State was a non-violent protest by unarmed students against the Vietnam war. Those students were gunned down in cold blooded murder by state troopers acting upon orders. Murder is a misbehaviour? How utterly repugnant.

On the issue of opinion, upon what basis? In the courts of every jurisdiction in the western countries, evidence must be fact, not hearsay. Using this as the standard to judge, to those who opine, show your facts. Opinion based upon your direct experiences or facts can be discussed objectively. Opinion based upon hearsay, such as what is presented by the western presstitutes, is not evidence: it is ignorance and bigotry. No western court of law accepts hearsay, so why should I? 

The general opinion here is that China is evil and USA is good. Yet, after some 3 months of "protests" in Hong Kong, which are in fact escalating to violent riots, no "protester" has been gunned down and no troops have been sent into the fray. This lays rather bare the hypocrisies of certain people here.

Free speech is the highest of human standards attainable. So let's have a moment of reflection. A person who reduces murder to misbehaviour is accepted without a peep from others. People who feel they have the right to use hearsay to criticise others are accepted without a peep. But when I reflect their hypocrisies in a mirror back to them, I am a labelled a "troll".

Thank you.
 

[Marcin + 519]

I have just read the article at South China Morning Post about the today's protests.

The protesters are literally: "throwing petrol bombs at police and government buildings", "setting numerous fires".

And it is allegedly like today for 16 weeks.

AND NO CASUALTIES. Nobody was killed.

I mean if the protests like this started in New York, they would be finished after the first few days with 10 protesters probably

shot on the spot for attacking policemen and they would be presented in the media as terrorists.

National Guard will mobilized the second day and the third day it would be over with all protesters in custody.

Even in Europe that is much more peaceful place police would never allow for such actions, there would be rubber bullets,

thousands of policemen and probably army mobilized and it would be over after a few days.

Hong Kong is a really safe place to live and to protest. For me it is total anarchy.

[Marcin + 519]

OK protesters have legitimate, human demands (free elections, democracy),

but the violent methods of their protests are so barbarian.

[Guest]

On 9/20/2019 at 3:36 AM, 4cryingoutloud said:

The general opinion here is that China is evil and USA is good. Yet, after some 3 months of "protests" in Hong Kong, which are in fact escalating to violent riots, no "protester" has been gunned down and no troops have been sent into the fray.

Well done. The authorities have not outright murdered anyone, just beaten the shit out of them in subways. Lovely. Ask yourself why they have become violent, rather than praise authority for not 'gunning anyone down'. You say no one has been murdered yet like they should be grateful. ''We haven't sent the army in yet''. Wow. Well done. You're my heroes. If the whole world wasn't watching what do you think would be happening? Unreal.

47 minutes ago, Marcin said:

but the violent methods of their protests are so barbarian.

Maybe the authorities should listen? Then there wouldn't be further protests?

54 minutes ago, Marcin said:

in New York, they would be finished after the first few days with 10 protesters probably

shot on the spot for attacking policemen and they would be presented in the media as terrorists.

No, hundreds of thousands of protesters in NY would actually be listened to. You saw the footage of how many people initially protested yes? You think if that was NY they would all be labelled as terrorists? Hundreds of thousands of people cramming the streets. I have a feeling whatever law it was would be changed. People in NY would not be beaten up and having rubber bullets shot at them and beaten up in subways. 

47 minutes ago, Marcin said:

protesters have legitimate, human demands (free elections, democracy),

Yeah, democracy, that little thing they're fighting for. 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

By the way, instead of continually praising China, maybe people should READ THE THREAD TITLE.

Is the whole of HK just full of idiots yes? But you guys know better?

 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Marcin said:

AND NO CASUALTIES

Apart from suicides over it. Well done.

Police haven't officially killed anyone. Yet. Woooh. Bravo.

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

Yeah, if this was USA they'd be called terrorists. OK. 

[Guest]

Could find you 1000 of these if you like?   No casualties though, yay. That's ok then.

And this is without sending the army in. 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

On 9/20/2019 at 3:36 AM, 4cryingoutloud said:

So let's have a moment of reflection.

Yes let's. Good idea. Maybe 'reflect' on your morals first, then get back to me?

On 9/20/2019 at 3:36 AM, 4cryingoutloud said:

no "protester" has been gunned down and no troops have been sent into the fray

And you wonder why people say ''troll'' ??  You honestly think that's a reasonable sentence?? 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

#troll

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

4 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Yes let's. Good idea. Maybe 'reflect' on your morals first, then get back to me?

And you wonder why people say ''troll'' ??  You honestly think that's a reasonable sentence?? 

True, free speech implies people express opinions. However, opinions based upon hearsay have no validity. If you have facts to shed light, please express. If you take issue with my posts, please state which fact you dispute.

Allow me to say.. You may wish to read the Basic Law of Hong Kong, which codifies the two-systems principle. In it, you should find who is responsible for law and order, and for the police. This should lead you to consider how Hong Kong is governed, by whom, and the structure of government. From this you should see Hong Kong is governed by an Executive and all internal matters are the responsibility of that Executive: including all police forces.

You allege 'China' [presumably, you mean the government in Beijing] has beaten protesters. Please provide a factual account for this. You see, I can find no such account. I do find western media stories alleging some protesters have been beaten by THE POLICE, not by soldiers [aka troops]. The fact is: China has not sent troops into Hong Kong. As the police are comprised of Hong Kong residents and are under the jurisdiction of the Executive, the fact is plain: 'China' has not beaten any protesters.

To the topics of morals and trolls, I should like to hear you definitions of such. In any case, I infer your comments are made in the context of personal attack upon me. So much for morals.  

[Guest]

Unbelievable.

[Guest]

If you could tear yourself away from this ''China is amazing'' stuff for 5 minutes, you would see I said authorites or Police.

It is YOU who is trying to turn the thread into ''well China hasn't done anything''. Maybe you should re-read what I actually put. 

My point is protesters have been abused. Your entire argument seems to be ''well it wasn't technically China so it's ok''

13 hours ago, DayTrader said:

The authorities have not outright murdered anyone

13 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Maybe the authorities should listen

Also, for about the 80th time, READ THE THREAD TITLE. Even the title is NOT about China. 

Do NOT talk to me about morals when you are praising the police for not yet gunning anyone down.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

7 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Also, for about the 80th time, READ THE THREAD TITLE. Even the title is NOT about China. 

Is this the latest Ethanol thread?  Because those ethanol threads are riveting, and remarkably well debated by cool heads.  

[Guest]

It's so rivoting that some people ONLY have opinions about their own threads and in one topic, out of the entire world of geopolitics.

#EGO

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 9/19/2019 at 10:36 PM, 4cryingoutloud said:

Kent State was a non-violent protest by unarmed students against the Vietnam war. Those students were gunned down in cold blooded murder by state troopers acting upon orders.

While this comment had zero to do with the situation in Hong Kong, it is factually incorrect, other than the observation that the students at Kent State were in a protest against the Vietnam War.  What happened was that someone, presumably the Governor of the State of Ohio, had ordered out a National Guard unit to that campus.  It turned out to be a rag-tag unit, undisciplined, mostly staffed by redneck wannabe soldiers who did not want to actually be in real combat with other soldiers shooting at them, they just wanted to play with guns and trucks and run around in combat clothing and put on those big boots.  So the undisciplined rednecks formed up on a knoll perhaps 250 feet from the protesters, and one of the men started live shooting, so the others joined in. 

There were no "State Troopers," no policemen were "under orders" to shoot anyone, it was a worthless "national guard" group that never should have been allowed to leave the barracks.  It is not established that any "Order" was ever issued.  Although there were investigations, no plausible trail could be established, and no one was ever charged (or at least, convicted) of manslaughter. Part of that reason was that it became impossible to establish who shot which gun.  

This even was and is a serious stain on America, and it demonstrates what happens when discipline is out the window.  And, to be remembered (and the professional army of today has absorbed this lesson) there are certain people who cannot be in the military, as they are a danger both to themselves, the unit, and the public. 

[SERWIN + 749]

On 9/11/2019 at 9:47 PM, Enthalpic said:

 

 

On 9/11/2019 at 9:35 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

 

What a useless BITCH!! Part of the Trio of Doom that actually made it into congress

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

zero to do with the situation in Hong Kong,

Of course it isn't, why would it be? That would make sense.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

I don't know how I managed to miss the developments on this page.  Amazing stuff.  Slipped right by me. Unreal. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 9/22/2019 at 4:28 PM, DayTrader said:

Could find you 1000 of these if you like?   No casualties though, yay. That's ok then.

And this is without sending the army in. 

Looks like she took a rubber bullet into the face.  One inch either way and she would be blinded. Just lovely. 

As an editorial aside, I would opine that the people in the streets are not protesting for a restoration of "democracy."  What they really wish is a restoration of "freedom."   You can argue that Freedom and Democracy are two sides of the same playing card;  I would not, and go farther and declare that, without Freedom, you have no Liberty, and without Liberty, you can never have a democracy, either direct, Parliamentary, or Republican.   Something to think about, in these perilous times. 

And now you know why Mr. Francis Scott Key was looking through the Perilous Night to see if the Flag yet did wave.....  The soul of the country was on the line at the Battle of Baltimore Harbor. Something to think about.  Liberty, on occasion, is actually something you have to go fight for. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Slipped right by me. Unreal. 

was all yesterday I think, you were maybe busy dealing with assholes?

hahah as in people, but wanna hear the joke anyway

Edited September 23, 2019 by Guest

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

11 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

While this comment had zero to do with the situation in Hong Kong, it is factually incorrect, other than the observation that the students at Kent State were in a protest against the Vietnam War.  What happened was that someone, presumably the Governor of the State of Ohio, had ordered out a National Guard unit to that campus.  It turned out to be a rag-tag unit, undisciplined, mostly staffed by redneck wannabe soldiers who did not want to actually be in real combat with other soldiers shooting at them, they just wanted to play with guns and trucks and run around in combat clothing and put on those big boots.  So the undisciplined rednecks formed up on a knoll perhaps 250 feet from the protesters, and one of the men started live shooting, so the others joined in. 

There were no "State Troopers," no policemen were "under orders" to shoot anyone, it was a worthless "national guard" group that never should have been allowed to leave the barracks.  It is not established that any "Order" was ever issued.  Although there were investigations, no plausible trail could be established, and no one was ever charged (or at least, convicted) of manslaughter. Part of that reason was that it became impossible to establish who shot which gun.  

This even was and is a serious stain on America, and it demonstrates what happens when discipline is out the window.  And, to be remembered (and the professional army of today has absorbed this lesson) there are certain people who cannot be in the military, as they are a danger both to themselves, the unit, and the public. 

Thank you. I stand corrected. The Murderers were the National Guard.  But an important fact is the Governor gave explicit "permission" to release the Guard upon the students. In all other jurisdictions, permission by such a senior official means culpability.  But in the USA, cold blooded murder, yet nobody held accountable. 

It is relevant to Hong Kong, as it shows a very direct comparison between how "authorities" in the USA deal with "protesters" versus how protesters are managed in Hong Kong.  In plain words, Kent State displays clearly the utter hypocrisy and self-righteousness of some people in this thread. 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, 4cryingoutloud said:

In plain words, Kent State displays clearly the utter hypocrisy and self-righteousness of some people in this thread. 

 

If you take 1 example in American history and try to compare with 2019 HK then yeah, guess you have some kind of point? As always, USA bad, China good. Bore me some more. They haven't gunned anyone down yet, so they are heroes. We get it. Christ.

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

12 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Looks like she took a rubber bullet into the face.  One inch either way and she would be blinded. Just lovely. 

As an editorial aside, I would opine that the people in the streets are not protesting for a restoration of "democracy."  What they really wish is a restoration of "freedom."   You can argue that Freedom and Democracy are two sides of the same playing card;  I would not, and go farther and declare that, without Freedom, you have no Liberty, and without Liberty, you can never have a democracy, either direct, Parliamentary, or Republican.   Something to think about, in these perilous times. 

And now you know why Mr. Francis Scott Key was looking through the Perilous Night to see if the Flag yet did wave.....  The soul of the country was on the line at the Battle of Baltimore Harbor. Something to think about.  Liberty, on occasion, is actually something you have to go fight for. 

So true, something to think about. Your point, re liberty and democracy are not opposite sides of the same coin, is philosophically very interesting. I surmise especially so for Americans, upon whose country the principles of freedom, liberty, and democracy were founded. By implication, if the two ideals can be segregated, then liberty may be manifested without a democracy. This leads then to isolating the meaning of liberty; which definition has been debated since the Greeks. Interesting.

Turning to Hong Kong [HK], the impartial observer would conclude HK has never had a democracy in its entire history. HK was integral to Imperial China, then became a colony of the UK, then became integral to modern China. But have the ethnic Chinese residents of HK ever experienced liberty? 

Under UK rule, the answer is a definite no. The UK colony was an apartheid state, and a very brutal one against the ethnic Chinese. Not only had these people no freedoms, no priviledges, and no liberties, they had no human rights. So here is something else to think about: why would would any rational, ethnic person in HK choose to drape him/herself with the UK flag? Who, in their right mind, in the name of liberty, would want the support of an oppressor?

Under the Basic Law of Hong Kong today, the answer is a definite yes. The Basic Law defines, in black and white text, the basic freedoms and liberties. Readers may be surprised to learn the Basic Law gives HK residents fundamental human rights for free speech, lawful assembly, education, language, property ownership, external relations, and the Self Autonomous Region. NO such human rights were granted by UK. How interesting to see human rights granted by "Communist China". 

Thus the claim, HK residents want a return to liberty, is a dubious claim. HK residents enjoy more liberty today than ever before, so return to what?  The fact the "protests" continue is proof of such liberty. Some here argue the "authorities" have willfully attacked the protesters. The peaceful protesters have morphed into violent protesters, ransacking properties and beating innocent civilians unconscious to the point of critical injury. The police are responding to such violence, just as any police force would do in any western country.

What HK needs is a truce; in fact, the Executive body has called for this, but the "protesters" refuse and continue their rampages - and THAT is certainly something to think about.

Though western presstitutes deliberately choose not to report facts, a fact now laid bare is the funding and support the "protesters" receive from the USA NED.  This is also something to think about.

Much has been made of the fact the SAR Agreement expires in 50 years. The insinuations are that after 50 years, HK will revert fully to "Communist China" rule and thus all liberties will be forever lost. This is supposition resulting from ignorance, self-righteousness, and bigotry. Who can say this will occur? Who has such a crystal ball? Has any person here ever considered the possibility "Communist China" may wish to continue the SAR? 

A perpetual SAR is in fact possible. But it will never be, if foreign governments continue to interfere and threaten China's territory and sovereignty. 

By waving foreign flags, the protesters are shifting away from their initial protest against a bill, long since withdrawn, and into a demand for independence. The plain word for this is secession. No government in history ever permitted secession.