ff

More dumbed down? re Hong Kong Act of Congress

Recommended Posts

An act of Congress becomes the law of the land when passed.  Giving political support to Hong Kong is one thing. Making that political support an act of law is entirely another thing.  Law means the application of the bill cannot be discretionary. The Bill contains provisions that, by law, will force the USA government to take any and all actions against China, inter alia, for not giving universal suffrage to residents of Hong Kong. Universal suffrage was never and is not a priviledge granted by the UK, nor accepted by China, as part of the hand-over nor as part of the Basic Law.  Thus, the USA is attempting to unilaterally change the Basic Law of Hong Kong.  Also, the Bill refers to a "Government of Hong Kong" when in fact no such government exists.  The true government is PR China, which has granted the SAR to Hong Kong. Hong Kong is administered by the Executive Council, not governed by it.  By claiming a 'government of Hong Kong", the USA is attempting to usurp the government of PR China.  USA citizens should think very carefully about this proposed law, as it will force any administration hence to take hostile action against a nuclear power in the event its provisions are not manifested. In essence, the Bill is a precursor for a declaration of war. Why? PR China will never give universal suffrage.  Do Americans want to be forced by their own laws into a nuclear conflict?  Only a dumbed-down, drugged-up, apathetic, pathetic society would accept this. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/trade-deal-jeopardy-after-senate-passes-bill-supporting-hong-kong-protests-infuriating

 

 

  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not unexpected. Any tool that works in hegemonic war is appriopriate.  It is patriotic for United States to make as much harm as possible in any area available. All the following means will be used by US: pressure on China regarding Taiwan, Hong Kong. Next step i expect in 2 years is revoking 1 China policy and official declaration that Taiwan is a country and official ceasing of political relations with China. China expects this too and this is already calculated. The dangerous  move will be the next one. US will try to deploy US forces on Taiwan. This is when the war could start. China is preparing for this particular contingency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the development of events, before war starts, nuclear war, there would be many smaller moves by both countries. Remember China needs maximum 10 year, 3653 days of passage of time to win hegemonic war. US must push situation to the brink, to war before this time passes. 120 months. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

55 minutes ago, Marcin said:

It is not unexpected. Any tool that works in hegemonic war is appriopriate.  It is patriotic for United States to make as much harm as possible in any area available. All the following means will be used by US: pressure on China regarding Taiwan, Hong Kong. Next step i expect in 2 years is revoking 1 China policy and official declaration that Taiwan is a country and official ceasing of political relations with China. China expects this too and this is already calculated. The dangerous  move will be the next one. US will try to deploy US forces on Taiwan. This is when the war could start. China is preparing for this particular contingency.

Lots of not good guesses, as China's line against Hong Kong has been very opposite to Tiananmen some 30 years ago, and trying to conflate this beyond just Hong Kong is preemptory in the extreme.

Edited by remake it
no conflagration
  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, remake it said:

Lots of not good guesses, as China's line against Hong Kong has been very opposite to Tiananmen some 30 years ago, and trying to conflate this beyond just Hong Kong is preemptory in the extreme.

I do not understand your comment. I am not judging China or US. I just think that Hong Kong and Taiwan are very good tools to use by US against China. US can and is attacking China through this Hong Kong related legislation. I just mentioned that this is part of salami strategy. Better tool, next tool is to use Taiwan issue to harm China. This can happen only after January 2020 presidential elections, after Tsai wins. One of the final punches is to renege on One China Policy. Big hit but the earlier used the more effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This bill is a good chance for the US government to show some bipartisanship.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Marcin said:

I do not understand your comment. I am not judging China or US. I just think that Hong Kong and Taiwan are very good tools to use by US against China. US can and is attacking China through this Hong Kong related legislation. I just mentioned that this is part of salami strategy. Better tool, next tool is to use Taiwan issue to harm China. This can happen only after January 2020 presidential elections, after Tsai wins. One of the final punches is to renege on One China Policy. Big hit but the earlier used the more effective.

China owns Hong Kong so hegemony is not at issue, and whatever the USA thinks they are achieving with respect to this Act will not wash with China, and all the while there remains this overarching trade war which nobody seems overly keen to end soon and only stands to be further muddied by the US stance on Hong Kong: the US seem to be shooting themselves in the foot at the expense of an appearance of being really, really concerned... as in an Act to show for it (as others just laugh at the contradiction they expose themselves to on Israel's persecution of Palestinians).

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

Only a dumbed-down, drugged-up, apathetic, pathetic society would accept this. 

There it is 🤣🤣

10 hours ago, remake it said:

as China's line against Hong Kong has been very opposite to Tiananmen some 30 years ago

I wonder why ...?

@frankfurter - the reason we initially argued if you remember was due to comments like this. Whatever you think of me or my opinions, I would challenge you to find a comment of mine about the entire Chinese population (calling people droids etc does not count - that's a comment about the warped government and 1984 aspects of your society, it's not a fault or criticism of the citizens themselves, far from it - it's more a reference to those among you who seem happy being droids and defend the system, potentially due to fear in fairness though and points systems, so I am genuinely empathetic if that's the case). 

However it seems to be fine for you to criticise the entire American population, again and again? Can you please explain why every American in your eyes is dumbed down, drugged up and pathetic? I'm curious. Even your thread title says 'dumbed down'. If anyone says anything negative ever about China at all they are wrong yes? Just instantly wrong? Is that it? Or is it more ''how dare anyone speak their mind about China in any way?!!''   #nba

The arrogance of your society, if that is the case, is a little worrying. Pooh doesn't like opinions. We get it. Even from his own people. 

I won't even bother further with remake's comments as he is a bot.

Edited by DayTrader
  • Great Response! 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

An act of Congress becomes the law of the land when passed. 

Umm, no it doesn't. 

It requires the president's signature to become law, and that assumes no challenge in federal court. Apparently they didn't teach you that in Chinese civics class. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HR 3289:
 

Quote

Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019
This bill addresses Hong Kong's status under U.S. law and imposes sanctions on those responsible for human rights violations in Hong Kong. (Hong Kong is part of China but has a largely separate legal and economic system.)
The Department of State shall certify annually to Congress as to whether Hong Kong warrants its unique treatment under various treaties, agreements, and U.S. law. The analysis shall evaluate whether Hong Kong is upholding the rule of law and protecting rights enumerated in various documents, including (1) the agreement between the United Kingdom and China regarding Hong Kong's return to China, and (2) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The bill extends existing annual reporting requirements on matters of U.S. interest in Hong Kong through 2027 and expands such reports to include assessments of (1) limits to Hong Kong's autonomy, either self-imposed or due to China's actions; and (2) whether rescission of Hong Kong's special treatment would further erode Hong Kong's autonomy.
The President shall annually report to Congress on Hong Kong's enforcement of U.S. export controls, including whether items of U.S. origin have been used for mass surveillance in China and whether Hong Kong has been used to evade sanctions on North Korea or Iran.
The State Department shall notify Congress if any proposed or enacted law in Hong Kong negatively impacts U.S. interests, including by putting U.S. citizens at risk of rendition to China.
The President shall impose property and visa-blocking sanctions on foreign persons responsible for gross human rights violations in Hong Kong.

 
This thread is starting from a false premise. Go read the bill. I've provided the synopsis above. This bill forces absolutely no action on any international entity. In fact, the only requirement is for the President - he must evaluate and report to Congress annually on the status of Hong Kong's autonomy and whether continued designation of Hong Kong as a 'Special Economic Zone' is justified and in the best interest of the Hong Kongese People.
So lets analyze...
 

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

 Law means the application of the bill cannot be discretionary.

Not entirely true... President gets to determine execution of said law. Theoretically you are correct, but until the Supreme Court Starts ruling differently, for all practical purposes, no.

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

The Bill contains provisions that, by law, will force the USA government to take any and all actions against China, inter alia, for not giving universal suffrage to residents of Hong Kong.

Ah, nope. Does not force anyone in government to take any action against China.
And the bill references 'universal suffrage' exactly once - when it references "Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China" - Chapter III, Article 26 to be exact (but I'm no expert...)
12 hours ago, frankfurter said:
Universal suffrage was never and is not a priviledge granted by the UK, nor accepted by China, as part of the hand-over nor as part of the Basic Law. 
 
Actually, it is. 
Chapter III, Article 26 of the basic law:

Quote

Permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law.

 

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

 Thus, the USA is attempting to unilaterally change the Basic Law of Hong Kong. 

Nope. See above. Not changing any Law of Hong Kong. Suffrage was already in Basic Law. There is nothing true about this statement.
12 hours ago, frankfurter said:
Also, the Bill refers to a "Government of Hong Kong" when in fact no such government exists. 
 
Wrong again. See Chapter 4 of "Basic Law: Chapter IV : Political Structure"
Section 1:    The Chief Executive
Section 2:    The Executive Authorities
Section 3:    The Legislature
Section 4:    The Judiciary
Section 5:    District Organizations
Section 6:    Public Servants
All defined. Unless you have a different definition of government - but this would be trying to argue that a city or state government wasn't a government because it was subject to the Federal government. All governing bodies that govern people, aka, All governments.

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

Hong Kong is administered by the Executive Council, not governed by it.  By claiming a 'government of Hong Kong", the USA is attempting to usurp the government of PR China. 

Ah, no, no, and no. Has a Chief Executive, An Executive Council, Legislature, Judiciary, and Districts. It's a government as defined by the word government.
Not attempting to usurp power either. That's in the basic law.
Again, no part of this statement is true.

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

USA citizens should think very carefully about this proposed law, as it will force any administration hence to take hostile action against a nuclear power in the event its provisions are not manifested.

Wrong again - not forcing (as discussed above), no hostile action (as discussed above - also, ), and no action required (also above).
Nuclear power - oooo... are we supposed to be intimidated? Or what's the point of mentioning this?

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

In essence, the Bill is a precursor for a declaration of war.

 
Precursor for declaration of war? The bill allows for the eventual cancellation of a special privilege because the condition the privileged was granted on is no longer true. It's not a punishment... it's not even a revocation of a special privilege for crying out loud! It's the allowance for the POSSIBILITY of some FUTURE POTENTIAL revocation of A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

PR China will never give universal suffrage. 

Probably true - even though they promised it in their basic law. (WOW, something that was correct in this - I missed that on my first pass!)

12 hours ago, frankfurter said:

Do Americans want to be forced by their own laws into a nuclear conflict?

 


How is this forcing us into any conflict? And how exactly would that conflict go nuclear?

So how'd a "dumbed-down, drugged-up, apathetic, pathetic" American do assessing the situation here? Because it seems acceptable to me...

 

 

Reference for those of you tired with being told "Basic Law - anything against China is
wrong!"
https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basiclawtext/index.html

  • Great Response! 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KABOOM!! This is what's known as 'knowing your shit'

#factscanbeuseful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Umm, no it doesn't. 

It requires the president's signature to become law, and that assumes no challenge in federal court. Apparently they didn't teach you that in Chinese civics class. 

You should learn the requirements for a law in the USA as apparently you overlooked several aspects that allow the opposite.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

In fact, the only requirement is for the President - he must evaluate and report to Congress annually on the status of Hong Kong's autonomy and whether continued designation of Hong Kong as a 'Special Economic Zone' is justified and in the best interest of the Hong Kongese People.

Do you read what you post or simply not understand it?

25 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

The President shall impose property and visa-blocking sanctions on foreign persons responsible for gross human rights violations in Hong Kong.

 

  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, remake it said:

You should learn the requirements for a law in the USA as apparently you overlooked several aspects that allow the opposite.

The moron bot strikes again! 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The moron bot strikes again! 

Says the person not knowing the requirements for Acts to become laws in the USA.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

how'd a "dumbed-down, drugged-up, apathetic, pathetic" American do assessing the situation here? Because it seems acceptable to me...

 

Otis11, you done mighty fine, mighty fine indeed! 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, remake it said:

Says the person not knowing the requirements for Acts to become laws in the USA.

Looks like you've slipped a transistor there buckwheat. 

Here, let me google that for you: 

Quote

10 Steps to Become a Law

Step 1: A Bill Is Born
Anyone may draft a bill; however, only members of Congress can introduce legislation, and, by doing so, become the sponsor(s). The president, a member of the cabinet or the head of a federal agency can also propose legislation, although a member of Congress must introduce it.

Step 2: Committee Action
As soon as a bill is introduced, it is referred to a committee. At this point the bill is examined carefully and its chances for passage are first determined. If the committee does not act on a bill, the bill is effectively "dead."

Step 3: Subcommittee Review
Often, bills are referred to a subcommittee for study and hearings. Hearings provide the opportunity to put on the record the views of the executive branch, experts, other public officials and supporters, and opponents of the legislation.

Step 4: Mark up
When the hearings are completed, the subcommittee may meet to "mark up" the bill; that is, make changes and amendments prior to recommending the bill to the full committee. If a subcommittee votes not to report legislation to the full committee, the bill dies. If the committee votes for the bill, it is sent to the floor.

Step 5: Committee Action to Report a Bill
After receiving a subcommittee's report on a bill the full committee votes on its recommendation to the House or Senate. This procedure is called "ordering a bill reported."

Step 6: Voting
After the debate and the approval of any amendments, the bill is passed or defeated by the members voting.

Step 7: Referral to Other Chamber
When the House or Senate passes a bill, it is referred to the other chamber, where it usually follows the same route through committee and floor action. This chamber may approve the bill as received, reject it, ignore it, or change it.

Step 8: Conference Committee Action
When the actions of the other chamber significantly alter the bill, a conference committee is formed to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate versions. If the conferees are unable to reach agreement, the legislation dies. If agreement is reached, a conference report is prepared describing the committee members' recommendations for changes. Both the House and Senate must approve the conference report

Step 9: Final Action
After both the House and Senate have approved a bill in identical form, it is sent to the president. If the president approves of the legislation, he signs it and it becomes law. Or, if the president takes no action for ten days, while Congress is in session, it automatically becomes law.If the president opposes the bill he can veto it; or if he takes no action after the Congress has adjourned its second session, it is a "pocket veto" and the legislation dies.

Step 10: Overriding a Veto
If the president vetoes a bill, Congress may attempt to "override the veto." If both the Senate and the House pass the bill by a two-thirds majority, the president's veto is overruled and the bill becomes a law.

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have proved your statement was not correct...

9 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Or, if the president takes no action for ten days, while Congress is in session, it automatically becomes law

10 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

If both the Senate and the House pass the bill by a two-thirds majority, the president's veto is overruled and the bill becomes a law.

 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Umm, no it doesn't. 

It requires the president's signature to become law, and that assumes no challenge in federal court. Apparently they didn't teach you that in Chinese civics class. 

Just a quick reminder of what you proved you did not know a moment ago.

Edited by remake it
made large and bold so that Mr Ward would not miss the obvious.
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, remake it said:

Just a quick reminder of what you proved you did not know a moment ago.

Proving yet again you know how to strain gnats. How many times have those edge cases occurred? Precisely, since I know you have nothing better to do. I'm well aware of how laws are passed and how rare those occurrences are. Are you? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ward Smith said:

Proving yet again you know how to strain gnats. How many times have those edge cases occurred? Precisely, since I know you have nothing better to do. I'm well aware of how laws are passed and how rare those occurrences are. Are you? 

Such a persistent theme here to attack the poster when, instead, you are shown with your own words that you do not know what you are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, remake it said:

Such a persistent theme here to attack the poster when, instead, you are shown with your own words that you do not know what you are talking about.

Offended I tell you that you know how to strain gnats? Amusing. You've never denied being a bot, I'll give you that. 

BTW out of hundreds of thousands of laws passed in US history, successful veto overrides equals 111. I'm more than confident that wasn't what Frankenfart had in mind with his nonsensical post. Likewise interesting how you seem to follow him around. Is he your programmer or just handler? 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and btw - sorry for the poor formating and such above... computer was glitching and I had to run.

Can't believe I'm doing this... Ok.

1 hour ago, remake it said:

Do you read what you post or simply not understand it?

 

First off, the only requirement is for the president. The line you just quoted says 'The President Shall' 

Second, the US at large already does "impose property and visa-blocking sanctions on foreign persons responsible for gross human rights violations"... 

 

Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, certain members in China already, Russia... I'm sure I forgot a bunch... oh, and a broad one against "any Foreigners who meddle in Elections"

Only difference? It ends the sentence with "In Hong Kong" instead of leaving it open to the whole world. Not changing anything, just making it specific.

34 minutes ago, remake it said:

So you have proved your statement was not correct...

 

Seriously? leaving it unsigned 10 days while congress is in session is essentially approving it (just without wanting to give it your formal endorsement).

Actually, your overruling a veto is applicable here given how much support this bill has...

I'd call it nit-picking, but maybe our international friends may not actually be aware of this path. Ok, fine.

 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

First off, the only requirement is for the president. The line you just quoted says 'The President Shall' 

Second, the US at large already does "impose property and visa-blocking sanctions on foreign persons responsible for gross human rights violations"...

"Shall" means it is a legal requirement, while the "property and visa-blocking sanctions" you mention are actually legislated as distinct from imposed by general means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@frankfurter you are over reacting as @Otis11 already said this is more or less standard tool used by United States to apply pressure on many countries (exclusively authocratic countries, not free ones). I am 100% with this action by United States. What I do not like is that US omits a lot of less important countries that also commit barbaric deeds against their populations. In case of Hong Kong we cannot discern this Act from current US-China conflict. I take it as not benevolent we support democracy act but more like part of hegemomic conflict. Until US revokes One China policy and stops foreign relations with China or would like to station US troops at Taiwan we can all sleep well. Hong Kong has limited strategic importance for China. Chinese reactions are muted, they have to show outrage it is the pattern of behaviour but limited outrage.

Why latest 15 comments are about US legislative process, why it is important for this topic apart from we formally discuss effects of such process ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.