• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hong Kong lawmakers barred by Beijing from office

Kelfuma

Banned
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
708
Reaction score
107
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Hong Kong lawmakers barred by Beijing from office - BBC News

Beijing has made an unprecedented intervention in Hong Kong politics to block two lawmakers from taking office.

Pro-independence elected lawmakers Sixtus Leung and Yau Wai-ching have refused to pledge allegiance to Beijing when being sworn in.

Beijing has now interpreted a section of Hong Kong law to mean any official who does not swear the oath properly cannot take office, said state media.

The move comes after weeks of chaos in the Hong Kong legislature.

There were also protests, and some scuffles, in Hong Kong on Sunday night, with at least four arrests.

Hong Kong's Chief Executive CY Leung said his government would "fully implement" the ruling.

For Hong Kong's democracy movement, China's intervention is a challenge to freedom of expression and judicial independence, but for Beijing the bigger picture is paramount.

All talk of independence is seen as threatening and elsewhere in China, separatism is a crime and campaigning for independence results in a lengthy jail term.

To allow elected members of Hong Kong's legislature to use such a high-profile public platform to insult China and talk of a Hong Kong nation was unthinkable.

Hong Kong's courts do still uphold the freedoms promised when Britain handed the territory back to China nearly two decades ago.

But this intervention from Beijing is a reminder that China is determined to decide the limits of those freedoms.
 
I don't think you understand the issues in HK. Recent polls have suggested that over 83% of the public agree with banning those two fools. Even their own constituents that voted for them (Less than 40,000 votes in a city of 7 MILLION got these two imbeciles elected) have abandoned them.

Picture this. A radical right congressman, supported with a pathetic amount of votes in his district due to low voter turnout. His first day in the House of Representatives for his Oath of Office, he states "I DO NOT solemnly swear to defend the Constitution of the USA, as Texas is not a part of the USA. Texas is an independent nation. **** the USA, **** all you niggers, long live Texas!"

Switch USA to China and Texas to Hong Kong, and that, in a nutshell, is exactly what these two imbeciles said in Cantonese.
 
I don't think you understand the issues in HK. Recent polls have suggested that over 83% of the public agree with banning those two fools. Even their own constituents that voted for them (Less than 40,000 votes in a city of 7 MILLION got these two imbeciles elected) have abandoned them.

Picture this. A radical right congressman, supported with a pathetic amount of votes in his district due to low voter turnout. His first day in the House of Representatives for his Oath of Office, he states "I DO NOT solemnly swear to defend the Constitution of the USA, as Texas is not a part of the USA. Texas is an independent nation. **** the USA, **** all you niggers, long live Texas!"

Switch USA to China and Texas to Hong Kong, and that, in a nutshell, is exactly what these two imbeciles said in Cantonese.

Well, Hong Kong is a democratic, Western value based city isn't it? It would make sense for the people (at least the younger generations) to want to move closer to the West as opposed to moving closer to Beijing. It can only end in one of two ways: either Hong Kong becomes complete Chinese and everyone who hates Beijing leaves or they achieve the impossible - independence.
 
Well, Hong Kong is a democratic, Western value based city isn't it? It would make sense for the people (at least the younger generations) to want to move closer to the West as opposed to moving closer to Beijing. It can only end in one of two ways: either Hong Kong becomes complete Chinese and everyone who hates Beijing leaves or they achieve the impossible - independence.

Not true. We are a Chinese city with mere elements of democratic, Western values.

We were never allowed to vote while the British were in control, for any government position. CE / Governor was just 1 example. For instance, currently our "functional constituencies", or representatives in our legislature (aka Congress) are hand-picked stooges by various industry organizations and unions (ie. the chair of the UAW automatically getting a seat in the US Senate). However, this is a legacy situation left to us by the Brits, who hand-picked ass-kissing locals that worked for Taipan (British tycoon interests) to such positions back in the day. We are have actually been given the right to vote for our legislators post-handover, and in an increasing number (we can currently vote for 50% of our representatives).

This figure was slated to increase. Under previous terms and draft suggestions made public by the 1997-2002 government and Beijing authorities (such dreams have been destroyed by the so-called "pan democrats" in recent years), a draft as follows:

- By 2017, we would have been given the right to vote for 75% of our legislature, with our CE (ie. Mayor) candidates selected by a 1,200 person panel (made up of members of the legislature, business tycoons, basically the "establishment"), then voted in by popular vote (1 citizen, 1 vote)
- By 2022, 25 years after the handover, 100% of our legislature would be from direct voting, with the same method for CE elections
- By 2027, a white paper on allowing the legislature itself, which would by then be directly voted in, to screen CE candidates for popular vote (slowly sounding like the US presidential election system, eh?)
- By 2037, it was the HOPE OF THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT, that such progressive steps to DEMOCRACY could be then tested in various other special regions in China (such as Shenzhen, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and other major cities or areas).

Instead, we got ****ing anarchists that destroyed the dreams, not just of many people in Hong Kong, but for many, many of our Chinese compatriots in China, of a slow progression to a more democratic political system.

Some things cannot be won all at once. Most of us prefer this path better, instead of shoving "freedom" down our throats ala Iraq.
 
In the 1950s London proposed to Mao that Hong Kong be reorganized to have democracy so that voters could directly elect their colonial leaders from among themselves.

It wasn't exactly going to be freedom or independence but it would be a world better than what they had.

images

Hong Kong Occupy demonstrators show British Colonial Flag during protest against Beijing, September 14, 2015.


Mao's reply was that he'd send in the People's Liberation Army to liberate HKG from any such idea as democracy. End of proposal.


Presently the CCP Dictators in Beijing know they absolutely cannot repeat a Tiananmen Massacre in HKG. So their final firewall against either universal suffrage in HKG or independence by popular referendum is gone.

Democracy advocates in HKG want a public universal suffrage referendum on independence. In Beijing heads are exploding against it. We see who wants the public referendum and who does not want it at almost any cost.
 
Last edited:
Poll finds fewer Hongkongers identifying as Chinese, thanks to Occupy

Growing number of respondents put city ahead of country amid Occupy Central protests


Hongkongers' sense of Chinese identity has hit a record low, a Chinese University survey conducted during the Occupy Central protests found, as local student organisers plan their overtures to state leaders in Beijing.

Only 8.9 per cent of the 810 people polled last month identified themselves as "Chinese", according to the telephone survey carried out by the university's Centre for Communication and Public Opinion Survey.

That was one of four options presented to respondents of the poll, 26.8 per cent of whom chose "Hongkongers" as their identity. Forty-two per cent chose "Hongkongers but also Chinese" and 22.3 per cent went with "Chinese but also Hongkongers".


Poll finds fewer Hongkongers identifying as Chinese, thanks to Occupy | South China Morning Post


CCP Dictators in Beijing and their Fanboyz are losing it more each passing day. The whole of the population is not yet in favor of independence, but the trend is clear.
 
Last edited:
I don't think you understand the issues in HK. Recent polls have suggested that over 83% of the public agree with banning those two fools. Even their own constituents that voted for them (Less than 40,000 votes in a city of 7 MILLION got these two imbeciles elected) have abandoned them.

Picture this. A radical right congressman, supported with a pathetic amount of votes in his district due to low voter turnout. His first day in the House of Representatives for his Oath of Office, he states "I DO NOT solemnly swear to defend the Constitution of the USA, as Texas is not a part of the USA. Texas is an independent nation. **** the USA, **** all you niggers, long live Texas!"

Switch USA to China and Texas to Hong Kong, and that, in a nutshell, is exactly what these two imbeciles said in Cantonese.


Abandon them? The claim in the first paragraph needs a link or some kind of proof, evidence, documentation. Disagreeing with the two legislators would not be unusual, but to "abandon" them would need some meat on those bones.

images

Hongkongers protest demonstrate against Beijing's rule over their city.



Elected legislators refusing to take a loyalty oath is a bit like the Confederacy in the USA in 1861, yes. Refusing the oath is an act of rebellion that is public and it ranks among the first signs of the increasingly brewing formal separation by Hongkongers from their foreign rulers in Beijing.

Alien dictator rulers.
 
Last edited:
Tangmo,

Those are zoomed-in pictures of demonstrators in 2003 (against Article 23) and 2014 (Occupy). We're talking about the issue now, 2016. Even if they were supposedly related, again, they "won" their seats based on 40,000 votes, which are the supporters we are talking about here, so your photos are irrelevant.

And unlike the Occupy Wall Street protests, the Occupy protests here in 2014 caused a **** ton of economic damage, not to the rich elite, but to the everyday working class. People look at the low hit to GDP figures and cry that the protests did not take a hit...because real estate and the stock market were doing well, which offset any hits to the everyday Hong Konger. Public transport drivers that work 12 hours a day for under 3k USD a month, sanitation workers making less than 800 USD / month, restaurant and catering staff along the routes making less than 2k / month...many, many people had almost three months of 0 income. There's a reason the bus drivers union came out and started beating up protesters in 2014.

In regards to the current situation, recent interviews and articles have all shown that over 70% of the people that voted for these two "legislators" regret their vote, and would vote for non-"independence" candidates in the soon-to-take-place by-election.

I don't understand how you can defend these idiots.

Under the Basic Law, an anti-sedition law (Article 23) must be implemented for Hong Kong to uphold it's end of the bargain for "one country, two systems", which was actually the same law as HK had back when the UK was the boss. For some reason, it was never "grandfathered" into HK's constitution (the Basic Law) during the handover. It was held off from implementation due to the protests (in your photo) of 2003. These stupid kids and their moronic antics have caused huge problems for the city's governance. Due to their ignorance and arrogance (these two greenhorns still refuse to apologize for their actions, have protested at the government offices by leading rabble against the police, again using knife-tipped umbrellas, destroying public property, and destroying public paved roads to get brick projectiles to fling at police, while calling on Taiwan to "take back" Hong Kong, asking the US and the UK to intervene, generally trying to stay in the spotlight), the pro-Beijing parties are now close to holding a "filibuster" proof super majority, and would be able to implement Article 23.

The issue with Article 23 is that, back in the colonial days, the British used their version of the law to suppress Communist (PRC) and Nationalist (Taiwan) sympathizers. It was a law that almost everyone in HK was against, but under the British, Hong Kongers had no say whatsoever. China has allowed Hong Kong to implement the law itself, yet the pan-democrats (many of which represented vested interests that SUPPORTED the UK version of this law while the Brits were here) have fear mongered people into resisting it's implementation.

Either HK implements the law itself, or China will force it down HK's throat.

If you want to read up on this issue (it is actually quite a big one from a global perspective, as it is already snowballing into various issues related to China's relations with the US and SE Asia) I will post the relevant articles if know how to read Chinese, since, you know, this is about Hong Kong. If you want to get more background information about the backlash against these idiots, head on over to International Edition | South China Morning Post (South China Morning Post). It's one of the few English language MM papers available here (the other being The Standard, The Standard.
 
Tangmo,

Those are zoomed-in pictures of demonstrators in 2003 (against Article 23) and 2014 (Occupy). We're talking about the issue now, 2016. Even if they were supposedly related, again, they "won" their seats based on 40,000 votes, which are the supporters we are talking about here, so your photos are irrelevant.

And unlike the Occupy Wall Street protests, the Occupy protests here in 2014 caused a **** ton of economic damage, not to the rich elite, but to the everyday working class. People look at the low hit to GDP figures and cry that the protests did not take a hit...because real estate and the stock market were doing well, which offset any hits to the everyday Hong Konger. Public transport drivers that work 12 hours a day for under 3k USD a month, sanitation workers making less than 800 USD / month, restaurant and catering staff along the routes making less than 2k / month...many, many people had almost three months of 0 income. There's a reason the bus drivers union came out and started beating up protesters in 2014.

In regards to the current situation, recent interviews and articles have all shown that over 70% of the people that voted for these two "legislators" regret their vote, and would vote for non-"independence" candidates in the soon-to-take-place by-election.

I don't understand how you can defend these idiots.

Under the Basic Law, an anti-sedition law (Article 23) must be implemented for Hong Kong to uphold it's end of the bargain for "one country, two systems", which was actually the same law as HK had back when the UK was the boss. For some reason, it was never "grandfathered" into HK's constitution (the Basic Law) during the handover. It was held off from implementation due to the protests (in your photo) of 2003. These stupid kids and their moronic antics have caused huge problems for the city's governance. Due to their ignorance and arrogance (these two greenhorns still refuse to apologize for their actions, have protested at the government offices by leading rabble against the police, again using knife-tipped umbrellas, destroying public property, and destroying public paved roads to get brick projectiles to fling at police, while calling on Taiwan to "take back" Hong Kong, asking the US and the UK to intervene, generally trying to stay in the spotlight), the pro-Beijing parties are now close to holding a "filibuster" proof super majority, and would be able to implement Article 23.

The issue with Article 23 is that, back in the colonial days, the British used their version of the law to suppress Communist (PRC) and Nationalist (Taiwan) sympathizers. It was a law that almost everyone in HK was against, but under the British, Hong Kongers had no say whatsoever. China has allowed Hong Kong to implement the law itself, yet the pan-democrats (many of which represented vested interests that SUPPORTED the UK version of this law while the Brits were here) have fear mongered people into resisting it's implementation.

Either HK implements the law itself, or China will force it down HK's throat. <<snipped due to length of the two posts>>



The thread does focus on the two rebellious legislators who, when heads cool and hearts resume their normal pace, will likely survive the sh!tstorm over their impulsive insurrectionist approach. It's much too soon to start such antics in the legislative chamber of HKG. However, there are always a few that get out ahead of the majority.

We can hash over the Brits and their 100 years of colonial rule forever. The bottom line is that the 100 years of British rule to the 1997 reversion of HKG to Beijing sovereignty radically and fundamentally changed HKG -- forever. There is no going back to the traditional ancient ways of China and its dynasties of emperors with their absolute oligarchic corrupt rule.

CCP Dictators in Beijing are indeed a new dynasty of absolute rulers in business suits that Hongkongers in increasing numbers want nothing to do with. CCP by the standards of a Chinese dynasty is a young dynasty. Which is why the present dynasty of CCP rulers are also very nervous.

They botch HKG and they'd become persona non grata globally and be viewed decisively through the region as a menace, as nothing resembling a peaceful and neighborly rising regional power. CCP Dictators are already known throughout the East Asia, SouthEast Asia and Indian Ocean strategic region as bellicose, belligerent, aggressive, overbearing -- and fact free in virtually all of their millions of miles of territorial claims concerning land, sea, air.
 
The 'one country, two systems' policy will never change in any circumstances..
So I believe our government is just doing what they have to to maintain society peace for the people.
 
One country two systems is a bogus fraud that is cooked in Taiwan and on the way out in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong Umbrella Movement leader of student demonstration participant groups Joshua Wong speaks to media in Hong Kong November 11, 2014 during what became 79 days of Occupy Central.
th



Hong Kong and Taiwan have new and vigorous independence movements. In HKG it is the Umbrella Movement connected to Occupy Central and the new political parties that advocate a universal suffrage referendum on sovereign independence, in no sooner than ten years time so the public can be engaged. The public is increasingly open.

In Taiwan it is the Sunflower Revolution that seized the parliament building in 2014 to rouse Taiwanese to elect the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party leader Tsai Ing-Wen as first lady President and to give the DDP the majority control of parliament for the first time.

Potus-Elect Trump is going for the CCP jugular when he focuses on Taiwan. CCP is going to have to show its throat or take some teeth into it instead, which is what will happen. HKG is already uplifted by Trump and his hawk advisors who have a three-fer starting up of China-Taiwan-HKG.



Prominent Hong Kong democracy and independence student groups leaders Jeffrey Ngo and Joshua Wong in New York November 17, 2016 where Ngo is currently a student. The 20 year old Wong was in USA from Hong Kong and in Washington DC to speak before the U.S. Congressional-Executive Branch Commission on China, Nov. 19th.
14859442_10210494306254798_26312847_o.jpg



Speaking in Washington before the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Joshua Wong, photo right, urged President-Elect Donald Trump to support the proposed Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act which is expected to be enacted by the U.S. Congress in 2017. The proposed law would require the U.S. president to certify to the Congress that HKG is in fact "autonomous" in its governance as stipulated in the 1997 agreement with UK that returned HKG to Beijing.

CCP guaranteed no change to HKG governance for 50 years which Beijing has already betrayed numerous times as a flat out lie. The title of the thread is further proof of the CCP lies and malicious intents against democracy and human rights in HKG.



Beijing engages in ‘unprecedented’ op-ed battle with Hong Kong activists on self-determination


25 October 2016

Pro-democracy student leader Joshua Wong rejected Song’s argument, saying that Hong Kong was not part of the People’s Republic China when it was established in 1949, but had been a British colony since 1842. “This shows that Hong Kong was indeed entitled to self-determination in accordance with international law,” said Wong.

Mr. Ngo and Mr. Wong wrote in the World Policy Blog earlier: “We ought to regain Hong Kongers’ right to self-determination from the international community so that the people, rather than the authoritarian regime in Beijing, can truly decide our own future.”


https://www.hongkongfp.com/2016/10/...attle-hong-kong-activists-self-determination/
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom