Thousands of Hong Kong students start week-long boycott

Discussion in 'China' started by Ray, Sep 23, 2014.

  1. nimo_cn

    nimo_cn Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,984
    Likes Received:
    786
    http://www.telesurtv.net/english/ne...s-Linked-to-US-Government--20141002-0011.html

    Wikileaks: HK Protests Linked to US Government

    Previous cables show links between United States agencies and the Hong Kong protest movement, as Beijing warns that the protests are China's "internal affairs."
    The United States funded groups linked to the ongoing Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, according to whistleblowing website Wikileaks.

    The website tweeted that key figures behind the demonstrations are linked to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S. foundation “dedicated to the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world,” according to its website, but which has been linked with coup attempts and "regime change" plans in Venezuela and elsewhere.

    US State Department/NED funded Hong Kong protest movement "Occupy Central" http://t.co/TFvob8Ragf

    — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) octubre 2, 2014



    The Occupy Central movement erupted in Hong Kong last weekend, with organizers stating that over 80,000 people turned out to protest against Beijing's “white paper” on eligibility criteria for standing for election to ruling positions in 2017.

    A Wikileaks cable released September 4, 2008 from the American Consulate in Hong Kong to the Secretary of State offices of Condelezza Rice, refers to a US State Department funded project, The Hong Kong Transition Project.

    Whilst a cable dated July 2, 2009 discusses demonstration turnouts and how to make them more successful in the future. Whilst a 4 Jan 2010 cable from the American Consulate in Hong Kong to the offices of the Secretary of State looks at increasing the effectiveness of political messaging on future demonstrations.

    The revelations come as China has warned that foreign meddling in its affairs will not be tolerated. “Hong Kong is ... a special administrative region of China, and Hong Kong affairs are completely China’s internal affairs,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying stated.

    The spokesperson stated the Chinese government is “resolutely opposed to any country attempting in any way to support such illegal activities like 'Occupy Central'.”

    ﹉﹉﹉﹉﹉﹉﹉﹉
    the so called occupy central movement has been manipulated by the American government since the very beginning.

    HK has been deeply infiltrated by western agents, time to clean them off.

    Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2
     
  2. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,141
    Likes Received:
    8,562
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Anything going wrong in the world, somebody thinks USA behind it. It gets old.
     
  3. nimo_cn

    nimo_cn Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,984
    Likes Received:
    786
    As if America is innocent.

    I am so relieved that wikileaks is not founded by Chinese, otherwise it's pure CCP propaganda against the innocent America.

    Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2
     
  4. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    If the Western countries are sponsoring and organising the HK protest, then it does speak highly of the organisational skills to mobilise such a huge mass, as also the weakness of the Communist regime not being able to snuff it out when the movement was nascent and isolating the movement from Western influences.

    Surprising that the Mainland Communist Govt which is so sensitive to foreign influences failed to notice this coming.
     
  5. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    China caught in a bind?

    They can't do a Tienanmen out here because the population has many foreigners around.

    So, what can China do?

    This is getting embarrassing for China.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
  6. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    730
    Location:
    India
    I feel that the locals are not capable to stand up to the intellectuals of CCP and that is where the "overseas" tag comes in. it is to distract and perhaps on the other side if true to make it a balanced play ground i suppose. how else can the locals have a sudden mature growth in execution and delivery.

    But again if someone does not have the skill and knowledge and is taught and guided by others (non-local) it still takes the person to appreciate and select and execute.

    Also another viewpoint is that guidance from overseas is on principles that are universal and the guidance from overseas is similar to the many PRC people that go and study overseas every-ear.

    Bo Guagua - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Xi Mingze - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I still feel the local hong kong protesters dont really know what they are doing. what happens next is the question ... what is the goal

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29700156

     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
  7. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Mr Tien is the leader of the pro Beijing party.

    That fact itself indicates how false is the Chinese Communist Mainland propaganda that the protests are being fuelled from foreign shores. And if its so, then the Communist party and its acolytes apparently are disillusioned by the Chinese Communist Party's mode of functioning.

    It shows the growing dissatisfaction in Hong Kong with the Mainland Communist actions and directions.
     
  8. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    730
    Location:
    India
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    seems to be it is like a carnival feeling
     
  9. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,246
    Location:
    Universe
    Wow interesting
    1.CCP agreed autonomy to HK for 50yrs
    2.CCP want to change const. for 2017 elections in favor of communists
    3.HK'rs come out to streets,It is impossible for CCP to crackdown like Tianname square

    People realized it or not but this is real GAME CHANGER for CCP rule &WHY

    4.If CCP agree to give freedom to chose leader for HK'rs then mainland ppl also ask freedom to choose their leaders :pound:
    5.If CCP not agree protests will continue till 2017 ,big embarrassment for CCP and they motivate mainland ppl to come out

    final outcome
    6.Small ignition will burn entire street be ready for 2017-18.
     
  10. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Lord Patton was the last Governor and Commander-in-Chief of Hong Kong, and oversaw its handover to the People's Republic of China in July 1997.

    There is no doubt that the Communist Chinese Govt is renegading on the commitment if so blithely gave the British Govt to ensure that handing over of Hong Kong to China.

    It is important to note that the territories of Hong Kong were not entirely ceded to Britain at one time.

    The cessions were divided into three periods.

    In 1842, Hong Kong Island was formally ceded in perpetuity to the United Kingdom under the Treaty of Nanking.

    In 1860, after China's defeat in the Second Opium War, the Kowloon Peninsula and Stonecutter's Island were ceded in perpetuity to Britain under the Convention of Peking.

    In 1898, under the terms of the Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory, Britain obtained a 99-year lease of Lantau Island and the adjacent northern lands, which became known as the New Territories.

    Therefore, ALL of Hong Kong, apart from the New Territories, was ceded to UK in perpetuity!

    Hence, under no circumstances, the contention of our Chinese posters that Hong Kong was under a 99 years lease is correct. In fact, it is bogus and contrived.

    It is only the New territories which were under the 99 year lease and was to be returned to China. The rest of Hong Kong as per the treaty was always to be that of Britain!

    However, crafty that the Chinese are, they promised the moon (and Britain fell for it since they were already a moth eaten power unable to manage its own country) and Britain agreed. And so the fake 'One Nation, Two Systems' came into being, at least superficially and cosmetically.

    In accordance with the "one country, two systems" principle agreed between the UK and the PRC, the socialist system of PRC would not be practised in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), and Hong Kong's previous capitalist system and its way of life would remain unchanged for a period of 50 years until 2047. The Joint Declaration provides that these basic policies should be stipulated in the Hong Kong Basic Law and that the socialist system and socialist policies shall not be practised in HKSAR.

    However, given the fear of Communists of democracy, they quietly and with a sleight of hand, the cold steel grip of the Mainland Chinese commenced griping the jugular of HK and stifling the concept of "one country, two system". The aim was to make it 'one country, one system" and keep a charade that the "two system" is in vogue.

    Given the shrill cries that of morality and democracy lesson that are handed out so regularly by the West to other non Western Nations, it is evident that these cries are false and agenda driven and not really true in intent.

    If indeed, there was morality and democracy as the cardinal philosophy of the West and not that of an agenda driven humbug, Britain and the West would have stridently and honest supported the demand of the Hong Kong protesters.

    They shied away because of their own economic interest and gave the clarion call that the normally use to chastise those countries their agenda prompts them to hold in ridicule, a quiet burial.

    The hypocrisy of the West stand exposed.

    Lord Patton is right and possibly the sole voice when he suggests that, " the UK was reluctant to raise difficult issues with Beijing because of fears of losing trade opportunities.

    Ministers should speak out publicly rather than talk "behind their hands".
     
  11. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Hong Kong betrayed: Testing future of China’s freedom

    [​IMG]
    Protesters in Hong Kong

    The pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong are the story of the hour, in my book. Hong Kong is important itself (it has 7 million people). But what’s happening there is a test of the future of freedom for China’s billions.

    Without which — mark it well — eventually there will be a war.

    My own appreciation for that danger was gained during the 1970s, when I was posted in Hong Kong for The Wall Street Journal.

    In 1984, with end of Britain’s lease on most of the colony but 13 years away, Britain and China signed their Joint Declaration.

    This promised democratic reforms (“one country, two systems”), including universal suffrage in Hong Kong by 2017. Even so, the Journal urged Britain to take a hard line by holding out for Hong Kong Island, to which Britain owned title in perpetuity (like the Falklands).

    That argument infuriated Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. She vented this when she visited the paper’s editors in 1990, calling the editorials “hurtful.” Then she leaned her capacious bosom forward, stared at the editor across the table, and demanded: “Do I make myself cleee-ah?”

    I’d left the Journal by then, but Dan Henninger tells me Bob Bartley didn’t bat an eyelash. He just flashed “one of the largest Bartley Cheshire Cat grins of all time.” Nor did the paper back off.

    Both Thatcher and Bartley have left this mortal coil, but the promises China made during those years are what is being tested today. Students are risking their lives to redeem the guarantees. Their protest ranks with the pro-democracy demonstrations that erupted in 1989 at Tiananmen Square.

    That’s when a lone protester faced down a column of tanks of the Red Army. It was one of the most astonishing pictures of individual courage ever filmed. During Tiananmen, incidentally, more than 1 million people came into the streets of Hong Kong to show solidarity.

    Yet Hong Kong could prove more important than Tiananmen. This is because if freedom comes to China, it is going to enter through Hong Kong. The city already had its taste of liberty, if only a taste, and it just is never going to forget.

    The reason this is coming to a head now is that the Red Chinese have been breaking their promises. What they mean by universal suffrage, The Post pointed out this week, is that everyone gets to vote for candidates approved by the Communist camarilla.

    Journalists and editors are being beaten, judges — famously independent under Britain — are being harangued to be “patriotic” to the Communist line.
    And a major civil servant has reportedly just admitted in court he’d received a $1.3 million payoff from “Beijing,” as the Communist capital is known.

    This is a moment to remember that the West has its own obligations in Hong Kong.

    The point was made last month in The Financial Times by the last British governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten (who had famously wept when Hong Kong was handed over to the Communists).

    Patten wrote that he wanted to “invite an interrogation of Britain’s sense of honor.” The United Kingdom, after all, was a party to the Joint Declaration, the treaty under which the Communists guaranteed to preserve Hong Kong’s way of life for 50 years after 1997.

    America has its own obligations. The United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 requires our government to report regularly on Hong Kong’s progress.

    It has done a sporadic job of that at best — partly because Congress recently failed to fund the report, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t seem to care.

    And several months ago, two of Hong Kong’s tribunes of democracy — Martin Lee, founding chairman of its Democratic Party, and Anson Chan, a former chief secretary of Hong Kong — came to Washington to remind America of its obligations.

    The Obama administration palmed them off on Vice President Joe Biden.

    All in all, it’s hard to imagine, at this point, that President Obama will lead on China.

    That in and of itself deserves to become an issue in the runup to the 2016 election. Natan Sharansky likes to say that war doesn’t break out between democracies.

    If the Chinese Communist Party can’t tolerate democracy in Hong Kong, where in China will it ever be found — and how will China’s designs on the world be tempered?

    Do I make myself clee-ah?
    Hong Kong betrayed: Testing future of China’s freedom | New York Post
     
  12. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,133
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    No matter what the Communist vassal of a HK Govt wants to do, the protesters are not giving in.

    Democracy is a very powerful elixir of life.
     

Share This Page