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
    there are around 80 millions CCP members in China, with their family members all together that is about 240 million. I don't think any political party on this planet could be more representative than CCP.

    Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2
     
  2. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,689
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    How many of them are enjoying freedom and civil rights??

    The creamy layer/elite will be in thousands and the remaining all will be like factory workers for CCP, And worse these guys have to listen and defend CCP for little pay.

    This is not because that they love CCP ideology, majority in China do not like CCP.

    CCP will and must give away for liberal governance otherwise , in this age of globalization and connected world it will become difficult for CCP to survive.
     
  3. tramp

    tramp Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    579
    Location:
    Mumbai
    When will the Chinese hen develop tits to feed the crying chicks?

     
  4. tramp

    tramp Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    579
    Location:
    Mumbai
    It's not for nothing that the phrase 'as thick as thieves' developed.

     
  5. ice berg

    ice berg Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    289
    You are either trolling or been lazy not reading the articles I provided:


    If you actually are reading the articles, you will notice that right after your quotes:
    ........ Hong Kong, she duly told Deng, was British by virtue of three treaties which were valid in international law, two of which were cessions. These were substantial obligations. China could not simply disregard them. If it wanted to resume the whole of Hong Kong, the only way in which it could legally do so would be through varying the terms of the existing treaties, by agreement with Britain.

    .... agreement on administration must come first. For the time being, she concluded, the two countries should pursue discussions at a diplomatic level.

    Here comes the most important one:

    Deng returned to the offensive by repeating his rejection of continued British rule in more categorical terms. If he agreed to let Britain stay in Hong Kong beyond 1997, he said, he would be no better than the traitors of the Qing dynasty who had first yielded Chinese soil to Britain under treaties which were illegal and invalid. He could not do it. China must resume sovereignty over Hong Kong, and sovereignty must include administration. The British flag would have to go. The British governor would have to go. And it would be China alone which decided what policies were 'suitable' for Hong Kong in the future. None the less, he said, China hoped that Britain would 'co-operate' in the transition, and it was prepared to enter into 'discussions' to that end. But it would not be bound by their results. If they failed to produce an agreement acceptable to China within two years, then China would announce its own policies for Hong Kong unilaterally. The meeting was over.

    Read and read it again till you understand what was been said here. No British administration, no British flags and China got to decide what policis were suitable for Hong Kong. These are plain English. For the British it was about leaving behind a british administration, to have some saving grace. It was never about the constitution.

    Want more plain English instead of your BS?
    Cottrell's evidence is mostly that it is not, but he fails to mention the airport issue and the 1991 Memorandum of Understanding signed by John Major in Beijing. These showed that the Chinese-British row is only marginally about constitutional change. The central issue is China's persistent contention that, whatever its promises of autonomy, sovereignty and administration are inseparable

    http://www.amazon.com/The-End-Hong-Kong-Diplomacy/dp/0719552915
    BOOKS - THE END OF HONG KONG - NYTimes.com

    http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com...rned-before-china/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

    “For the British Prime Minister this was a discussion about sovereignty and administration. For the Chinese, there was never any question about the recovery of sovereignty,” Mr. Akers-Jones wrote. In 1984 Britain and China signed a treaty declaring all of Hong Kong would be handed back to China in 1997.

    Source: http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com...rned-before-china/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

    Of course the UK gave up the Kowloong. Read my quotes again from my previous post:
    Belatedly, Thatcher had taken advice from diplomats whose logic she respected - Youde, and Sir Percy Cradock, Britain's Ambassador in Peking. They told her to expect that China would press for a resumption of the whole of Hong Kong in 1997; and that Peking wanted to turn Hong Kong into a 'special zone' of China, where the practice of capitalism would be permitted. They also warned her that Britain's hold on Hong Kong was more tenuous in practical terms than a reading of the 19th-century treaties might suggest.
    Though Hong Kong Island and Kowloon had been ceded to Britain 'in perpetuity', there was no physical border between these ceded portions and the New Territories, and no way in which Britain could defend or sustain the ceded portions if China wanted to take them back together with the New Territories.


    Again, not my words. Read it again and again till you get it.

    P.S I have provided enough links and sources to back up my claim. Maybe you should read them more carefully. There is no reason to argue for the sake of arguing , right?
    Against better judgement I actually spend time digging up sources. The least you can do is actually read them, right? Show some respect to people who actually give you a chance to learn something.
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2014
  6. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    India
    If what you are saying is true, why didn't PRC take Hong Kong over sooner? :wave:

    Also the article has two parts.

    1. Obiter dictum
    2. Ratio decidendi

    Also please do not take anything personally. You will be surprised how many non-trolls exist with whom a happy exchange/#disagreement is possible.

    I am sure if we met for a drink we will able to say what we have to say. To be honest you have made me go and read up more about hong kong and i thank you for that since it is informative and interesting. I believe you have the skill the support your position with sources but we have to look at the fact:

    Also I am sure you are aware of the above terms and their uses.

    In the context of your quotes they were not ignored by me but are they authoritative. You are basically saying PRC would have invaded Hong Kong. and that is why UK gave up Hong Kong Island and Kowloon.

    If you were saying UK gave up Hong kong too easily that can be communicated in a better way.

    I am sure UK understood that Hong kong Island and Kowloon was not easy to manage and also the leased part was definitely integrated into the small part owned by UK. but it does not say anywhere that it was impossible. The UK wanted to continue but PRC refused according to international law and according to lease that ended 99 years. Also UK ownership of Hong kong Island and Kowloon were supported according to international law. I am sure the calculation was - is it worth to keep Hong Kong Island and Kowloon compared to trying to get PRC for the better use of the word "uncomfortable". What is the price of giving up the land. The UK had to justify that to Hong Kong people and also to their own people.

    To keep it simple use a simple link:

    Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Also to support your view point:

    Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

    (I am sure you will read the whole article - especially the end where PRC can want to do unreasonable measures - like invade - but reasonable people interject).

    Is PRC known to be a failed state and one that does not does not honor agreements and follow International law. The handover was done on 1997 and under one country two system with a document that was drafted by UK, CCP and Hong Kong people.

    The fact that PRC waited until 1997 shows there was some reason. And to determine if you are authoritative that PRC would really have invaded Hong Kong:

    (from the link above).

    Unless you are a high ranking official and have the transcripts to the negotiations held in October and November and what was exactly said. The fact is that PRC did not invade Hong Kong and the fact is that UK gave up Hong Kong Island and Kowloon and the fact is that Hong Kong get a Constitution that prescribed many items that have never been established inside PRC land (like right to protest, freedom of speeach, and even vote in elections and the selection of its leader and parliament by universal suffrage and even apply transparent legal procedure).

    I am sure that if you continue to express your position you will eventually end up saying the Najing Treaty was unequal. Is it authoritative argument.

    The reason PRC gave Hong Kong people the Hong Kong constitution was because UK and Hong Kong people extracted it from CCP knowing that they want to impress and display a model to Taiwan. The CCP leader at the time Deng Xiao Ping focus was on Taiwan. Invading Hong Kong must have been a option but not a solution.

    And there are many sources that say PRC will invade Taiwan yet ... also why not before

    What is the fact. One can apply many different approach to analysis. Jiang Zemin is intelligent no doubt. But what is the fact:



    Tung Chee-hwa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Hu reprimands Tung - The Standard

    It is never too late to invade Hong Kong. If PRC finds it too difficult to manage Hong Kong that is a option and I am sure leaders in CCP like Lu Ping are saying that now. Hong Kong invasision is still possible today why bother complying with the Hong Kong Constitution and agreement with UK until 2047.

    According to you and your sources that is the best approach and not follow internationally recognized agreements.

    The agreement between UK and PRC is a perfect example of a conflict creator and there will be many test for PRC in the upcoming future. If the CCP leaders think that Taiwan is not worth it why do they bother with this in Hong Kong. Already CCP has had to make decision that they would never do inside PRC.

    [​IMG]

    CCP really knows how to take pictures and squeeze. Also please read the CCP constitution when you have time.

    Like I said I know that the intellectuals in CCP that manage Hong kong are not like you. They know the truth and are pragmatic and more in tune with the business community of Hong kong. These are the people that have made Hong Kong for the past 17 years grow economically and will make sure that it does in the future because Hong Kong is important to PRC.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  7. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Actually the Chinese Communists are breathing a sigh of relief.

    The media report is totally indicative of the relief from the fear that gripped them that the protests may cause an upheaval and a challenge to the Communist way of life.

    The media blitz of the Communist Mainland has come whole hog to glorify the Communist way of life and mushy pith of love for the Motherland and such holistic humbug that had hit rockbottom a few weeks back, sending shivers down the CPC's spine.
     
  8. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The chicanery of the Communist Chinese of the Mainland is exposed.

    While lauding and showcasing the end of the protest and airing views that are favourable, they club these views as that of the majority, but fight shy to air the views that are contrary to their agenda and the Communist Mainland's agenda.

    This also shows how the common Chinese folks are misled by such skilful disinformation and made to believe the unbelievable.

    But then the Communists have made pulling wool into a fine art.
     
  9. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    This says it all.
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2014
    Compersion likes this.
  10. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    India
    Beijing Meeting Considers Imposing Martial Law on Hong Kong

    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1005287-beijing-meeting-considers-imposing-martial-law-on-hong-kong/
     
  11. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    India
    Communist Party Factions Divided on How to Treat Hong Kong - The Epoch Times

    Communist Party Factions Divided on How to Treat Hong Kong

    Sometime where there is a impasse ... wonder what the truth is
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2014
  12. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Can the students resist the brute power of the Communist Mainland Govt?

    Even Taiwan is now chipping in.

    From here, where does the movement go?
     
  13. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    India
    Who advised to the hong kong government to cancel the talks. :frusty:

    it would have been better to have done the talks and record it by transcript and video to show. after that people would judge if government if students are mature and reasonable. everything has to be done according to hong kong constitution. and my feeling is the government would have had a good chance to show the students to be unreasonable and demanding unreasonable since expressing such issues requires expertise and advanced knowledge about the hong kong constitution. sometimes the opportunity not taken when right in front of the face. now students will say government is unreasonable.

    if hong kong government is worried it would set a bad precedent and link to Tienanmen square (where student leaders also demanded talks) this is whole different ball game. and hong kong has set too many different precedents that have never been done in PRC. and also in future.
     
  14. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    There is the good possibility that the protests can start again.

    But this time the Communist Chinese Govt will hit hard, more so since they don't care about international condemnation when it comes to any challenge to the Communist way of governance and a threat to the very existence of the Communist Party.
     
  15. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,689
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    People are planning a big rally in Hongkong and protesters numbers are increasing !!
     
  16. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    God Bless the Mainland Communists and their rulers.
     
  17. DON1118

    DON1118 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    india
    chinis should nuke Hong Kong for rejecting writ of midal kingdom
     
  18. nimo_cn

    nimo_cn Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,984
    Likes Received:
    786
    nukes are prepared for thugs like India.

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

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,689
    Location:
    Somewhere
    First have a Tienanmen Square in Hong Kong and then come back.

    The HK chaps have given you shivers in your pants.

    Control them, first or perish.



    Give them democracy as promised when you bent down and kowtowed to the British to get HK.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  20. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,689
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page