Over the past few months, both mainstream and alternative news outlets have been covering massive protests in Hong Kong where tens of thousands of people have taken part in demonstrations that have since devolved into violence both with police, counter-protesters, and others. These protests have seen injuries on both sides and have now caught the eye of the world.
But the question is more nuanced than simply whether or not one supports the protests. After all, we have seen plenty of protests in the past that, at first glance, seemed legitimate, but unfortunately turned out to be merely tools of Western governments. So the first question is “Are the protests legitimate or are they a color revolution?” In 2019, it is no longer safe to assume that protesters are organic. However, it is also not safe to assume that every action of civil unrest is because the United States has organized a coup.
The Back Story
Before we look into whether or not the protests are legitimate, it is important to understand the trigger for the demonstrations that are currently taking place. The first protests in Hong Kong began in response to a proposed extradition bill that would have seen individuals who are wanted in territories with which Hong Kong does not have an extradition agreement to be detained. Many of the opponents of the bill felt that it would have placed both Hong Kongers and visitors to the territory essentially under the jurisdiction of mainland China, thus making the “one country, two systems” setup obsolete. Others, however, argued that the extradition bill made sense. After all, since it would be difficult to negotiate an extradition agreement with Taiwan or China, it would be useful to at least provide some sort of avenue for justice for individuals who committed crimes and subsequently crossed the border to evade jail time or other punishment.
It is worth noting that the bill was submitted by the Hong Kong government. It is also worth pointing out the complexities of the “One country, two systems” agreement whereby the British, after decades of imperialist rule over Hong Kong, ceded it back to China in 1997. The British forced Beijing to accept a number of conditions such as the agreement that Hong Kong would draft a mini-Constitution and retain its capitalist system, own currency, legal and legislative system as well as individual rights and freedoms. However, this agreement was only to last for fifty years, when the agreement is set to expire and Hong Kong is to be fully returned to China in 2047.
The first protests began in late March and early April and gradually increased in June when hundreds of thousands of protesters entered the streets. June 12 saw an increase of violence with clashes between protesters and police, who brought out the tear gas and rubber bullets. An even larger march began on June 16. On July 1, hundreds of thousands of people turned out for the annual July marches and a number of these protesters split away from the main demonstration to break into the Legislative Council Complex where they vandalized a number of government symbols and briefly occupied the building.
Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam suspended the bill on June 15, declaring it “dead” on July 9 though she did not clearly state that the bill would be withdrawn or not revisited. Executive Council members Regina Ip and Bernard Charnwut Chan then stated publicly that the government would be making no more concessions.
Protests have continued throughout the summer and have resulted in increasingly violent confrontations between police and activists. In addition, pro-China “triad” members (organized crime) clashed with the protesters. A portion of the local residents also began to counter-protest the original protesters and clashes then broke out between the two.
For instance, on July 21, a mob of men dressed in white shirts attacked protesters, travelers, and journalists at a Hong Kong train station, injuring 45 people and leaving the train station floor stained with blood.
Demands being made by the protesters have gradually increased in number. They have called for the following:
- An independent inquiry on police brutality
- Release of arrested protesters
- Retraction of the official characterization of the protests as “riots”
- Direct elections for the positions of Legislative Council members and the Chief Executive
- Complete withdrawal of the extradition bill from the legislative process
- Resignation of Carrie Lam
Who Is Behind The Protests?
As soon as protesters took to the streets, Chinese government officials were accusing the United States and its NGO networks of being behind the movement as an effort to weaken China and cause chaos in the process of eventual reunification. Many in the alternative media immediately began reporting on the color revolution taking place in Hong Kong while the mainstream Western press began praising the protesters for their courage and criticizing the Hong Kong police for their brutality.
So is there any evidence that the Hong Kong protests are controlled or being directed by the United States or its NGO community that has created so many color revolutions across the world? The short answer is yes.
For instance, one of the recognized leaders of the protest movement is Joshua Wong, who is a leader and secretary-general of the “Demosisto” party. Wong has consistently denied any links to the United States and its NGO apparatus. However, Wong actually traveled to Washington DC in 2015, after the conclusion of the Hong Kong Umbrella Revolution to receive an award given to him from Freedom House, a subsidiary of the National Endowment for Democracy. Demosisto has been linked with the National Endowment for Democracy as well.
For those that may be unaware, the NED is an arm of the US State Department designed to sow discord in target countries resulting in the overthrow, replacement, or extraction of concessions from governments of target countries.
Indeed, Jonathan Mowat adds to the recent historical understanding of the controlled-coup and color revolutions in his article, “The New Gladio In Action: ‘Swarming Adolescents,’” also focusing on the players and the methods of deployment. Mowat writes,
Much of the coup apparatus is the same that was used in the overthrow of President Fernando Marcos of the Philippines in 1986, the Tiananmen Square destabilization in 1989, and Vaclav Havel’s “Velvet revolution” in Czechoslovakia in 1989. As in these early operations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and its primary arms, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) and International Republican Institute (IRI), played a central role. The NED was established by the Reagan Administration in 1983, to do overtly what the CIA had done covertly, in the words of one its legislative drafters, Allen Weinstein. The Cold War propaganda and operations center, Freedom House, now chaired by former CIA director James Woolsey, has also been involved, as were billionaire George Soros’ foundations, whose donations always dovetail those of the NED.
Nathan Law, another leader of the Hong Kong protests and rock star of the Umbrella Revolution, is also closely connected to the National Endowment for Democracy. On the NED website, “World Movement for Democracy,” in a post entitled “Democracy Courage Tribute Award Presentation,” where the organization mentions an award it presented to Law. In the article, it states,
The Umbrella Movement’s bold call in the fall of 2014 for a free and fair election process to select the city’s leaders brought thousands into the streets to demonstrate peacefully. The images from these protests have motivated Chinese democracy activists on the mainland and resulted in solidarity between longtime champions of democracy in Hong Kong and a new generation of Hong Kong youth seeking to improve their city. The Hong Kong democracy movement will face further obstacles in the years to come, and their idealism and bravery will need to be supported as they work for democratic representation in Hong Kong.
Interestingly enough, Joshua Wong has shown up to express “solidarity” with other protest movements engineered by the United States and its NGO apparatus, particularly in Thailand where Western NGOs and the US State Department are controlling both the protest movement and the former government.
For a short overview of how such operations work, watch the video below, a BBC report on the Oslo Freedom Forum which shows some of the leaders of today’s Hong Kong protests as well as leaders of the Umbrella Revolution and other global “protest movements” being trained by the US State Department/NGO apparatus in 2013.
Also see my previous articles on the topic linked below:
- Color Revolutions 101: The Making Of A Controlled Revolution
- The History And Science Of Color Revolutions Part 2
- The History And Science Of Color Revolutions Part 3
- The History And Science Of Color Revolutions Part 4
Notably, these protests are receiving heavy media coverage as well as the ever-present logo (umbrellas), both hallmarks of color revolutions and social media giants Twitter and Facebook have accused China of spreading disinformation via their accounts and have been removing or blocking pro-China accounts indicating that someone in the halls of power in the West would like to see the protests continue.
So Why Does The US Support The Protests?
The United States State Department and its subsidiary color revolution apparatus does not support protest movements because it supports right and freedom for people in other countries. After all, the US government as a whole does not support rights and freedom for its own people. So, in full knowledge that the US government does support the Hong Kong protesters, the question then arises, “Why?”
There are at least three reasons why the US is supporting the Hong Kong protest movement, none of which involve the rights of Hong Kongers. First, with China set to fully acquire Hong Kong in 2047 and growing integration between Hong Kong and China over the next three decades, the United States does not want to see China grow any stronger as an economic, military, or diplomatic powerhouse. The full return of Hong Kong to China would further Chinese growth in all three of these areas.
Second, the United States benefits from a weaker Chinese government and one that is not able to fully impose control on every citizen within its borders. This is why the US has funded destabilization movements all across China, many with real concerns, as well as terrorist attacks in areas where China is planning to develop in the third world.
Lastly, Hong Kong currently acts as a tax haven for Western corporations and as a dumping ground for wealth that needs to avoid taxation. Chinese control may very well threaten that wealth, particularly in light of the fact that the Trump administration is moving forward on an apparent plan to put the United States on a more fair footing with China in terms of international trade through tariffs and increased worker protections.
Geopolitical Concerns
In short, by maintaining Hong Kong as-is, the United States would maintain an outpost alongside China’s borders. However, China not only views Hong Kong as physical territory and financial wealth, it understands that, in a trade or real war with the United States, Hong Kong can be used to not only physically position military forces but it can also be used to economically loot the mainland.
It should be noted that China has never given up on the re-absorbing Taiwan and Hong Kong, even threatening to do so with military force if necessary.
Do The Protesters Have Legitimate Concerns?
While the United States may be funding and directing many of the protest leaders in Hong Kong, the fact remains that the protesters themselves as well as the many people who support them have legitimate reasons to be protesting. Indeed, in the case of Hong Kong, it appears that the nefarious American desire to weaken China and protect its corporate tax haven have intersected with the very real need of Hong Kongers to preserve what’s left of the liberty they have.
In order to understand this, it is necessary to understand that there is a plethora of opinions on the Hong Kong issue within Hong Kong itself. First, it seems the dividing line of opinions often centers around age, heritage, and geopolitics. From reading mainstream reports and watching a number of videos, it is apparent that the majority of protesters are young, even university-educated people who have lived their lives in Hong Kong while the counter protesters seem to be older, with a stronger heritage link to China. This older generation should not be conflated with oldest, however, as it appears that many are from the “baby boomer” era more-so than the elderly generation before it. That being said, age is not a clear cut line of difference, however, with a number of younger and older people choosing to support opposite sides. Like any protest movement, the majority of the people of Hong Kong can be found going about their everyday business, teetering on the edges of any engagement whatsoever.
One such reason that the oldest and the youngest protesters seem to intersect, however, is, in the case of the oldest, a memory of what life was like in neighboring China before the Cultural Revolution and the ability to watch that way of life change for the worst and eventually horrific. The youngest members of the “anti-China” crowd may be viewing the issue similarly for the completely opposite reason, precisely the fact that they grew up in a time knowing nothing but freedoms their neighbors could scarcely dream of.
It is also important to point out the cultural difference in Hong Kong, which is essentially Chinese culture at heart, but one that has embraced capitalism and has experienced rights that mainland Chinese people can only dream of. Based on Common Law, this includes the right to freedom of speech. As the Financial Times wrote in 2018,
For more than two decades, citizens and residents in the former British colony of Hong Kong have enjoyed a wide range of freedoms and legal protections unthinkable in any other part of the People’s Republic of China. These protections, guaranteed by the territory’s tradition of judicial independence, are the bedrock of the city’s extraordinary success as a regional entrepôt. It is precisely because of these legal safeguards that many international companies, including most global media organisations, have chosen to base their regional headquarters in Hong Kong.
As mentioned earlier, one reason the “lease” of Hong Kong was pushed back for so long a time (to be fully realized in 2047) is because it would erase an entire generation of people who remembered what such little freedom was like compared to the zero freedom afforded by China. However, what was perhaps unintended was a birth of an entire generation of people who only knew that freedom and are not as keen to give it away as others may have been. This is one reason you can see young people in the streets with signs supporting freedom of speech and even calling for the right to own and bear arms. In other words. you are able to see so many people who have been denied rights Americans take for granted or are under threat of losing even more of their rights desperately trying to gain or retain them, all while many Americans march in the streets to have those same rights taken away. Clearly, it is true that freedom is treasured the most when it is lost.
This threat of Chinese takeover is very real. With its brutal authoritarian methods of control, social credit systems, slave labor economy, and polluted food supply, many young Hong Kongers are rightfully terrified of what “one country, one system” will mean for them. China is a communist nightmare, no matter how much Western leftists would like to portray otherwise.
Nowhere is there more clear an example of “Western” arrogance than a widely-circulated video where an angry Australian lectures young Hong Kong protesters on how much “better everything is gonna be” when China takes over both Hong Kong and Taiwan. Coming from a country with virtually no rights and doing business in another, it may be par for the course for him. But there is something incredibly irritating to watch his denial of these protesters’ legitimate concerns and his lecturing on the part of the authoritarian regime that will soon be in power.
This (the threat of quickly descending into the clutches of Chinese authoritarians) is the very real concern the Western NGOs have seized upon in order to foster social unrest in Hong Kong.
Violence – Violent Counter Protests
There have been numerous videos depicting violence coming from both sides of the isle. On one hand, violence on the Hong Kong side has been blamed on anarchists, often a typical method of specific types of anarchists as well as police false flagging in order to justify a crackdown. Other videos have surfaced showing protesters beating “journalists” and those who disagree with them. The justification given by the protesters were that the individuals were “Chinese agents,” a claim that may or may not be true.
Likewise, we have seen numerous videos of counter-protesters also engaging in violence against the Hong Kong protesters, many of whom being members of Hong Kong/Chinese organized crime as mentioned earlier. The videos depicting police attacks against protesters have also been widely circulated in the media.
Scale Of Protests VS Counter Protests
The Hong Kong protests have spread from Hong Kong itself to all across the world with the immigrant community engaging in demonstrations in their adopted countries. Likewise, counter-protests have expanded globally.
There is very little doubt that the protests against greater Chinese involvement in Hong Kong have been much larger than those supporting it. One need only look at the numbers of the protests that took place on August 17 where 1.7 million people showed up to march.
What A Good Outcome Would Look Like
To claim that the protesters have a legitimate cause while, at the same time, pointing out that the US is directing the leaders of their movement may seem contradictory but, unfortunately, it is not. It should be possible to any unbiased observer to understand that the protesters are justified in their fear of being taken over by a country that just finished slaughtering 80 million people and that is currently oppressing each and every one of their citizens. It should also be possible to understand that the Western NGOs have seized upon this fear and desire for freedom for its own nefarious purposes. Only those who wish to promote an ideology would refuse to mention both aspects of the protests, something both the mainstream and alternative media outlets have unfortunately been guilty of.
So with all this in mind, what would a positive outcome be?
1.) First, the United States must cease using its NGO community or intelligence agencies to direct and manipulate an uprising or unrest in Hong Kong. The future of Hong Kong is for Hong Kongers to decide, not under the manipulation of Western NGOs. The US must immediately cease fostering dissent in other nations. If the US wants to counter Chinese empire, it must do so by offering economic and other incentives and not by threats, social unrest, or violence.
2.) None of the protesters’ demands thus far are unreasonable. There should be an independent inquiry as to the techniques being used by police, police brutality, and the connections these tactics have to the growing Chinese influence in Hong Kong. Protesters who have been arrested for their political views (not those arrested for offensive violence, rioting, or peddlers of foreign influence) should be released. While official categorizations are no issue to fixate upon, the protests should be reclassified as what they are, protests. Elections should be instituted and the people of Hong Kong should elect their Legislative Council and Chief Executive directly. Withdraw the extradition bill completely from consideration until a reasonable proposal can be drafted, discussed, and agreed upon. Carrie Lam is widely known as a tool of Beijing and, for this reason, a gradual, orderly, and democratic transition of power should take place.
In addition, while not official protest demands, the solidification of the rights to free speech, expression, possession of weapons, and privacy should take place.
3.) Just as the United States should stop inserting itself into the domestic life of Hong Kong, so should China immediately cease any and all attempts to control public opinion, social discourse, and political life in Hong Kong. Because of China’s lack of human rights within its own borders, there is a legitimate reason for Hong Kong to desire complete separation from the mainland. Thus, if China is not interested in becoming a free society, the “One country, two systems” policy must be extended abandoned and Hong Kong should remain independent.
Conclusion
By now, it should be relatively clear that many of the leaders of the Hong Kong protests are controlled and directed via the network of United States intelligence agencies and NGO apparatus for the purpose of protecting its corporate tax haven, keeping a friendly outpost on the Chinese border, and sowing seeds of discord within China itself.
However, the protesters are absolutely right in their concern for what will happen if they become part of China – i.e., another human tragedy that is the result of Communist authoritarianism exhibited by the Chinese government.
Thus, both the official and the mentioned unofficial demands are entirely reasonable. The people of Hong Kong must not be forced to live oppressed under authoritarian Chinese rule. Because the US has its own interests that do not involve freedom or human rights, it would be wise of the Hong Kong protests to abandon their Western-backed opposition leaders and find real organic leaders that are not taking orders from the West.
They should, however, continue to press for the rights they have and the rights they deserve.
About Brandon
Brandon Turbeville writes for TheOrganicPrepper.com and his own website, BrandonTurbeville.com He is the author of ten books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. His books can be found in the bookstore at BrandonTurbeville.com and on Amazon.
Turbeville has published over 1500 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, civil liberties and, most notably, geopolitics and the Syrian crisis. His most recent release is a book of poetry, “Dance, Amputee.”
What are ‘organic protestors”?
Pat
Protesters who are not being paid or given privileges for being there.
They play keyboards that have never been sprayed with any pesticides.
Sorry about that. Just couldn’t resist.
Organic means natural instead of manipulated, modified or instigated by foreign governments and outside influences.
I take serious issue with this,
“1.) First, the United States must cease using its NGO community or intelligence agencies to direct and manipulate an uprising or unrest in Hong Kong. The future of Hong Kong is for Hong Kongers to decide, not under the manipulation of Western NGOs. The US must immediately cease fostering dissent in other nations. If the US wants to counter Chinese empire, it must do so by offering economic and other incentives and not by threats, social unrest, or violence.”
No one can tell me with a straight face that the United States does not have a legitimate interest in the economic and political status of Hong Kong. Like it or not, the USA IS a part of this world. We can either direct events or we can be the victim of events. To say “we should just mind our own business and leave the rest of the world to its fate” is naive at BEST.
Bill Paxton had a great line as Morgan Earp in Tombstone…”Live and let live,? They’re BUGS, Wyatt ! There’s no living with bugs.”
This sounds a lot like battered wife syndrome thinking to me. We’re going to sweet talk and bribe China into being fair trade partners after decades of intellectual and technological theft and gross trade imbalances? Who thinks like that?
Ever hear of EMAD? Economic Mutually Assured Destruction. Economics is warfare by other means…and we have been getting our asses kicked up and down the street for half a century. I say it’s time for a change. I’m not a big Trump fan, but on this I totally agree with him.
Is America perfect? No. But you don’t change horses in the middle of the stream. You dance with who brought you. And the rest of the world is even worse than we are. Cry about that inequity all you like, but that’s the world you live in.
Even the Chinese know that only a fool fights in a burning house! This article seems to be doing just that.
Sorry. I try to stay mostly positive on this site out of respect for the owner and readership, but this had to be said.
Charles,
When you call those who oppose meddling in other’s affairs “naïve at Best”, you are speaking against the philosophy of this nation’s founders.
It also indicates you may be a government troll.
The United States has been under criminal rule for over 150 years.
Our “dual elite system” has some parts visible but, most are not.
The fact you ignored the George Soros involvement says volumes.
And since you seem to like throwing around quotes, Lenin is credited with saying: The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.
Just what are we seeing here?
I’m not responsible for 150 years of corruption, are you? And who are you calling a “government troll”, soi boi?
All I got out of your reply was that you seem totally on board to surrendering US hegemony to the Chinese, regardless of the national security and economic implications. That sounds like George Soros and Antifa to me. No wonder you’re quoting Lenin!
Methinks thou doest protest too much.
And…we’re done here.
@Charles: the reason the US should surrender its hegemony is because it does NOT have the right to meddle in, attack, and destroy other countries, which is what it has been doing frantically since the end of WW2. And, in any case, the US is losing the hegemony anyway because it cannot control the world, nobody, not even your adored, might, hegemonic USA.
Furthermore, while the the decline of the hegemonic empire has been ongoing for some decades, team Trump, which is nothing more than a gang of psychopathic thugs, is accelerating that process.
You may not be a big fan of Trump, but being “with him” on this means you are contradicting yourself, and you don’t even realise it.
Conclusion: the psychopath-run, rogue empire-in-decline is a downward slide. The only way to stop it is to become a responsible, respectful member of world society, which includes abiding by international law and treaties the US has signed up to. It is a simple as that, but most definitely beyond the intellectual capabilities of the current administration.
Bwahaha! You demented globalists make me laugh.
God Bless America!
You mean that the US should be free to meddle into the affairs of a sovereign state, while the US just went through 2 years of hysteria accusing Russia of doing the same (falsely) to the US?
I call that schizophrenia.
Just as US should stop inserting itself into domestic life in HK, so China should immediately cease any and all attempts to control public opinion, social discourse and political life in HK”….Let’s add that China should cease attempts to control public opinion, social discourse leading to influencing the 2020 election in the US.
Like we refrain from influencing elections in Russia and Israel? You need to understand that this is a worldwide problem that probably HAS no fix except rigorous vetting of electors and laws limiting corporate campaign contributions and restricting where “dark money ads” may appear.
I would have to be Pollyanna on a drunken binge toked out on hashish to believe that any of those solutions will be implemented in what remains of my lifetime.
LOL yall act like you are going to change anything happening there. This was always going to happen and it’s a far cry from over. I’d worry more about your own backyard before some folks in China. Don’t fall for the “watch this ball trick”.
Can’t imagine the suggestions you make for a good outcome will happen. China isn’t going to back down – and neither is U.S.
The Deep State was created and is controlled by the British. Specifically the QUEEN and her PRIVY COUNSEL. They are NAZIS. They and their Bank of England/Rothschild’s, are the EVIL behind all the World Wars, Subversion, Sedition and Treason EVERYWHERE.
Those acting in the name of the Crown and taking the name of the Crown in vain to abuse The People are the problem. The Royal Family may be more than willing hostages than most, but have little real power.
A little old lady who spends her time photo-opping around the world in charge of the Globalist Deep State? How realistic is that. Oligarchs control the figurehead, not the other way around.
Britain was captured just like the U.S. was, just longer ago in history.
China is not a friend to America. Like much of the oriental world, China is a brutal Communist regime. Don’t ever put yourself in a situation where you are in a Chinese prison. They think nothing of the most brutal torture you can imagine and they harvest the organs of prisoners at will.
“Brutal Communist regime”? China has changed a lot since you were there.
Tell that to the political prisoners who are having their ORGANS harvested on a daily basis! Mostly Muslims and Christians who were black bagged for nothing more than believing in God.
Yeah, all of a sudden we are seeing propaganda demonizing China that we haven’t seen in decades. Why do you think that is? Even if the statements are factually true, the timing is suspect.
Israel bombed the USS Liberty, strafed the life boats and dropped commandos onto her deck despite the US flag being prominently displayed. Yet they are a “friend”. Let’s get something totally clear: NO NATION HAS ANY FRIENDS … just those who, wary of reprisals, refrain from attacking.
Communism is creeping into the United States at unprecedented rates. Brutality is not far behind. The modern education system is creating brutal, unreasonable, little communists every day that school is in session.
The brutality was always there; its just that only poor whites got the subhuman treatment. The securely middle class and wealthy could count on their social networks, money and a good lawyer to live even a little above the law.
The collapse of the middle class brought everyone, but especially a lot more whites, into the beatdown zone.
This made things more dangerous for everyone, including the middle class and wealthy since the price of protection was raised and weighted towards being politically connected, especially to insiders.
Brandon has put worth a well organized and thought-out essay which provides excellent background information and discusses various positive and negative options. Having spent some time in Asia and a little time in China I can put forth that the Communist Party will NEVER allow Hong Kong to be free. They cannot allow freedom protests or economic riots in Hong Kong to succeed. They are in a catch 22 however, because businesses fear instability and Hong Kong is a cash cow for the Communist Party. Already individuals and companies are moving money out of Hong Kong to other international locations and converting their HK$ to US$, GBP and other currencies. A friend told me there has been a huge increase in visa requests to Europe and Australia. IMHO, the very best Hong Kong can hope for is status quo.
If “freedom protests or economic riots in Hong Kong” succeed, they will spread to the mainland where US economic pressure on China has put a fuse to the powder keg that previous ChiCom policies created. On the mainland, even though the populace is largely disarmed, there is no military on earth that could stop the uprising of the Chinese people. The young men in the army are already pizzed that there are not enough women to start a family even IF they could find the money to do so. The way to arm yourself in war is to find someone who already has a firearm and take it from him. LOTS of Chinese are quite capable of doing just that and, large as the Chinese standing army is, they are grossly outnumbered by other citizens.
I don’t know how many loyal soldiers Xi can count on, but I am supremely confident that is isn’t enough. Once a decision to rebel has been made, the balance of power will tip rapidly.
The Chinese COULD solve this by getting rid of Lam, dropping the extradition law in exchange for being allowed to set up a satellite court and jail on HK. That way they solve the original problem wherein they could not prosecute economic fraud occurring on the mainland because, by the time the fraud was detected, the perpetrators were back in HK and immune to prosecution.
The protestor’s original issue was the “never see them again” extradition law. They knew that the trip over the bridge to the mainland was one-way and permanent and would likely involve torture and certainly, regardless of the facts, result in a guilty verdict. Setting up the jail / prison ON HK and permitting familial / legal visitation on the Western model would solve that issue FOR 18 YEARS.
In 2047, China gets full control of the island. Anybody still there who isn’t willing to live under the ChiCom regime is an idiot.
Indeed.
U.S. and NATO warhawks are upset about being unable to instigate Chechen-styled uprisings in China, not human rights.
It’s the same US vs THEM. Each believing it has it’s own belief system that warrants it. God help us all because this will lead to WAR.
Which begs the question which one is right? But you shouldn’t be asking that question. You should be asking which one will WIN?
That’s the most important one of all.
Give them the SAME “rights” as they had under the British. The world stood by while the drug pushers , the British Government used it’s military to push opium onto China and received the Hong Kong after the Opium Wars. 200 years of British colonialism never bothered the world, the world was compliant when there was no “democracy” under the drug runners. (The British Government) But then while the US holds foreign lands as “protectorates” I suppose it can’t support China can it?
Britain was a great empire during the revivals. Some of the most noted reformation preachers came from Britain. Not so much now that it has forgotten God and tolerated evil. The Bible says, “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.”
Those reformation preachers were funded by the same system that brutally crushed many independent nations. The Bible also says “let him who has not sinned with her cast also the first stone.”
History is always a mixed bag. Empires are great only if you are the conqueror.
Yow Bill, somehow I dont think those preachers were getting any government money.
Bill: Where in the Bible does it say “let him who has not sinned with her cast also the first stone”? Are you misquoting John 8:7 where, if you read it in its original language of Greek, says “Let the one among you who has not made a mistake throw the first stone upon her”? Those to whom Jesus said this made a mistake, in that they didn’t follow the law that they cited. The law stipulated that the man was to be stoned, the woman only if it was not rape.
Empires can be conquerors, but if based on injustice, they are the opposite of great.
In every place where there are people, some form of government will emerge. The founders of America for example said,”Our form of government was made only for a moral and religious people and it is wholly inadequate for the governance of any other.” When people reject the Bible which George Washington declared to be the bedrock on which our republic rests, then they are asking to lose their freedoms and to move to a system of chains and restraints under a totalitarian government rather than allowing the Word of God to restrain their actions. One way or the other mankind has to be restrained by some form of government or else total kaos will ensue.
A well balanced article. The only part that I found wanting was the conclusion where all the “shoulds” were mentioned. All the things that “should happen” will not, because of the entrenched forces involved. One thing that the author might have mentioned is what has been happening to the Uyghurs and Falun Gong practitioners. A rich Westerner can order human organs with an eleven day waiting period. That means prisoners are in torture cells waiting for harvest time. many of the Falun Gong fled to Hong Kong to escape a horrible death. One must not forget that Chairman Mao was from an Illuminati bloodline family through his Caucasian relatives, so in the end there is very little difference between East and West..
I don’t always agree with Brandon, but found this article very enlightening, and agree with his conclusions. I do not find it surprising that there is outside involvement, but the ppl of Hong Kong do have legitimate concerns. They know what is coming, and regardless of their age, they dont want to lose the freedoms they have. To paraphrase Brandon (and isn’t there a song with similar lyrics?), you don’t know what you had until you’ve lost it. THAT should be the wake up call for America.
The communist will eventually move in and slaughter thousands and disappear the leaders.The communist will make an example of Hong Kong.The communist is this country will want to do the same against patriots,christians,white men and trump supporters.NEVER surrender your firearms. Because what happens in Hong Kong will happen here.
The use of the term Chicoms reveals a person mired in cold war rhetoric, with no idea what China really is; likely never been there also…No, Chinese people don’t dress all the same anymore. Too many US propaganda movie for you, methinks.
JoBlo: I have no objection to using the term “Chicoms”, and I have been to China and speak Chinese.
The Chicoms are not the Chinese people, rather they are the oppressors of Chinese people. With them in power in China, is there any hope for the Chinese people, or even of peace in the world?
Hong Kong rioters are a little spoiled; the French Yellow Vests have more serious issues with police brutality, with hundreds if not thousands of serious maiming injuries from police tactics, like the use of tear gas canisters powerful enough to blow off a hand (those victims should’ve used a lacrosse stick) and otherwise firing to wound. Yet France is a putative real democracy.
In any case, Hong Kong is far less strategically important than South Korea to the U.S. in real terms, and there are those who advocate with good reason to abandon an active U.S. MIC presence in South Korea, which at least is its own legit country.
Hong Kong is far more vital to the globalist imperialists, who have little geopolitical real estate of their own to base financeering from. Apparently they have convinced U.S. nationalist imperialists that ‘saving’ Hong Kong and returning it to the Western fold is a legit play. This isn’t realistic to any thinking person; Hong Kong was leased real estate and U.K.’s lease expired. So Hong Kong should be some kind of bargaining chip to the Trump administration, an affront to the Chinese only Trump might yet get away with.
As to the legitimacy of the Hong Kong protests… that’s a complex question because any ‘right’ to protest is validated by real apprehension of problems and solutions and not just a raw grab for political power. The extradition bill was more a pretext for than cause of unrest, which was already simmering.
The Hong Kong super rich created a neoliberal paradise of extreme wealth disparity and corruption while Beijing promised the U.K. and the West, by legal treaty, hands-off rule from afar till 2047. Of course people are going to riot from the social disaster, but then blame Beijing, not themselves. Very convenient for the Hong Kong elite, especially the insiders. Calling for democracy is meaningless if you have nothing to vote for, and no plan to address the deficiencies of representative democracy.
Western-styled democracy would solve nothing. They would still blame Beijing for any troubles caused by rampant crony capitalism. Hong Kong’s rioting brain trust seems to want to be like Taiwan, gaining quasi or full independence with none of the expense and responsibility of real independence. China and the West would compete for geopolitical favour and this will pay for everything including gay plaster over the cracks of society.
Taiwan at least, has the real estate and resources to play that game. Hong Kong, not so much.
Aug 19, 2019 1.7 Million People Defy Police, March in Hong Kong
One of the biggest protests in Hong Kong history. 1.7 million people joined the Hong Kong protest on Sunday fighting against Beijing and the the Chinese Communist Party’s attempts to destroy Hong Kong’s freedom and democracy.
https://youtu.be/kmmaRbSunPs
Good grief, Hong Kong was never a democracy. Trying to say Hong Kong freedom has anything to do with real democracy endangers our own fight to preserve and expand our degraded democratic rights. Jingoism is a poor substitute for understanding. Simple misdirection is an old but reliable social engineering as well as propaganda trick.
The last British governor, Chris Patton, did try to introduce some democratic reforms, once it seemed not to matter as much anymore, but these were rejected by both London and Beijing.
Hong Kong was a neoliberal wealth extraction machine, and neither Beijing or London wanted to kill that golden goose, however dirty the gold was mined. Overt rule by the British was replaced by more or less indigenous Tycoons, beholden to Western economies and so could be trusted to carry on more or less like before.
Who the hell wants the ‘freedom’ to live in cages as a home – not as a stunt, but forever? Or make others live that way (always a few takers, obviously). When the British left Hong Kong rule to the Tycoons, nothing changed except the subhuman treatment given to the people who did the work was less driven by racism.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2084971/Hong-Kongs-cage-homes-Tens-thousands-living-6ft-2ft-rabbit-hutches.html
https://yp.scmp.com/news/features/article/105139/life-inside-55-sq-ft-sleeping-suitcases-cooking-next-toilet-and-living
Beijing did nothing to fix this, and promised not to intervene; well, now they take the fall. Had British rule remained, there would have been no democratic inoculation to deal with, but probably still riots over poverty and living conditions and Beijing would be the hero of the masses.
Brandon Turbeville is wrong to claim that people like Joshua Wong are mere puppets of U.S. machinations. Just because people like Joshua Wong take advice from U.S. sources doesn’t make him a puppet. If it weren’t for real problems facing the people of Hong Kong, they couldn’t have gotten a quarter of Hong Kong’s population out in a demonstration.
After all, I’ve read and taken advice from Mao Tse Tung, does that make me a puppet of the Chinese communists?
I looked at Brandon Turbeville’s web site and find a mixed message—some of which is true, some of which show that he doesn’t understand international affairs as well as he thinks he does. Like any person, he has information that I simply haven’t had the time and resources to research, but on others it appears that he has swallowed hook, line and sinker Russian and Arab propaganda, which is hard not to do because the U.S. media lies so much. This article contains some half-truths typical of communist propaganda.