Hong Kong

[Purgatio]

And how much more economic damage will Hong Kong have to suffer under in the meantime? Retail premises like Best Mart and small businesses and restaurants have been attacked and destroyed and ransacked by these vandals (https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3036664/hongkongers-will-pay-heavy-price-protest-vandalism-and-lasting), a bank was set on fire, (https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/26/asia/hong-kong-destruction-support-intl-hnk/index.html) not to mention the economic cost that comes from the disruption of public transportation routes (https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/11/07/hong-kong-protests-rack-enormous-vandalism-repair-bill-incl-hk10-5m-property-maintenance-costs-govt-says/), many business owners have suffered because they don't have riot insurance or lack sufficient insurance coverage to cover the damages inflicted on them (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-insurance/hong-kong-firms-lacking-riot-insurance-pick-up-pieces-from-protest-damage-idUSKBN1X001P)

Even if you come back and compensate these innocent business owners after the fact, the damage has already been done, anyone who has run a business knows how hard it is to balance the books and if rioters have thrown up a gigantic repair cost on your shoulders out of nowhere, and you aren't exactly getting lots of business when the streets are crowded with protestors clogging up public spaces, what are you supposed to do? Shut down? Close shop? Go bankrupt and hope the compensation comes eventually? How many more innocents must suffer to appease the rioters' lust for violence?

It isn't a lust of violence. They've been provoked into it, so I doubt more violence in the form of a crackdown will help. You just seem to hate peaceful resolutions.

Did you even read the articles at all? One of them involved a shopkeeper, K. K. Man, whose shop has been attacked several times and vandalised and he has no idea how he is going to pay back the repair bills, or if he even can since if he pays the bill the rioters may come back and do it again to him. People like him have a life to live and a family to support, and its chilling how little human empathy people in this thread have for the innocent shopkeepers, retail outlet owners and small businessmen just trying to make a living and make ends meet and whose very life has been turned upside down by selfish vandals who have no care or concern for anyone else but themselves, who think they can inflict property damage en masse and they can hurt people's lives and futures and it doesn't matter. The Hong Kong Rioters should be ashamed of themselves for what they've done to people like K. K. Man - but they aren't. They have no shame.

[Purgatio]

And how much more economic damage will Hong Kong have to suffer under in the meantime? Retail premises like Best Mart and small businesses and restaurants have been attacked and destroyed and ransacked by these vandals (https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3036664/hongkongers-will-pay-heavy-price-protest-vandalism-and-lasting), a bank was set on fire, (https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/26/asia/hong-kong-destruction-support-intl-hnk/index.html) not to mention the economic cost that comes from the disruption of public transportation routes (https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/11/07/hong-kong-protests-rack-enormous-vandalism-repair-bill-incl-hk10-5m-property-maintenance-costs-govt-says/), many business owners have suffered because they don't have riot insurance or lack sufficient insurance coverage to cover the damages inflicted on them (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-insurance/hong-kong-firms-lacking-riot-insurance-pick-up-pieces-from-protest-damage-idUSKBN1X001P)

Even if you come back and compensate these innocent business owners after the fact, the damage has already been done, anyone who has run a business knows how hard it is to balance the books and if rioters have thrown up a gigantic repair cost on your shoulders out of nowhere, and you aren't exactly getting lots of business when the streets are crowded with protestors clogging up public spaces, what are you supposed to do? Shut down? Close shop? Go bankrupt and hope the compensation comes eventually? How many more innocents must suffer to appease the rioters' lust for violence?

The rioter's lust for violence?
You really love demonizing people to justify gratuitous violence against them.

Do you even care about all the innocent shopkeepers and small business owners whose establishments have been vandalised and graffitied and whose windows have been smashed and who have no insurance because it was unaffordable and they have no idea how they are going to stay afloat or cover all the costs and expenses? Or do their lives and their very existences just not matter to you at all?

[Genivaria]

The rioter's lust for violence?
You really love demonizing people to justify gratuitous violence against them.

Do you even care about all the innocent shopkeepers and small business owners whose establishments have been vandalised and graffitied and whose windows have been smashed and who have no insurance because it was unaffordable and they have no idea how they are going to stay afloat or cover all the costs and expenses? Or do their lives and their very existences just not matter to you at all?

No I don't put that much stock in property damage compared to the brutal police violence against the protesters.
You may care more about property and money then human lives but don't expect the rest of us to.

[Purgatio]

Do you even care about all the innocent shopkeepers and small business owners whose establishments have been vandalised and graffitied and whose windows have been smashed and who have no insurance because it was unaffordable and they have no idea how they are going to stay afloat or cover all the costs and expenses? Or do their lives and their very existences just not matter to you at all?

No I don't put that much stock in property damage compared to the brutal police violence against the protesters.
You may care more about property and money then human lives but don't expect the rest of us to.

I should have guessed then. These aren't rich tycoons you know, these a small mom-and-pop shopkeepers who don't exactly earn a lot, all they want is to make a living for themselves in the peaceful trade and occupation they have chosen, to work hard and build a secure future for themselves and their families - in my book, that's a human right, as it should be for any decent person. The ability to start a business that isn't hurting anyone and conduct that trade in peace and without violent disturbance from rioters smashing down your windows and looting your store and vandalising your establishment and sticking you with a repair bill you can't afford - that matters to me, as it should matter to any decent person. You wanna talk about human rights? What about the basic human right of individual self-determination, or the ability to engage in private ordering for your future, the ability to live an individually empowered, self-directed, autonomous life? The very normative heart of why we consider human rights to be significant in the first place? The dignity that comes with the ability to make something of yourself and pursue your heart's dreams and wishes and desires?

You don't care about any of that, and in so doing expose for the hypocritical lie it is your so-called concern for "human rights", for the unprincipled sham that it is.

[Genivaria]

No I don't put that much stock in property damage compared to the brutal police violence against the protesters.
You may care more about property and money then human lives but don't expect the rest of us to.

I should have guessed then. These aren't rich tycoons you know, these a small mom-and-pop shopkeepers who don't exactly earn a lot, all they want is to make a living for themselves in the peaceful trade and occupation they have chosen, to work hard and build a secure future for themselves and their families - in my book, that's a human right, as it should be for any decent person. The ability to start a business that isn't hurting anyone and conduct that trade in peace and without violent disturbance from rioters smashing down your windows and looting your store and vandalising your establishment and sticking you with a repair bill you can't afford - that matters to me, as it should matter to any decent person. You wanna talk about human rights? What about the basic human right of individual self-determination, or the ability to engage in private ordering for your future, the ability to live an individually empowered, self-directed, autonomous life? The very normative heart of why we consider human rights to be significant in the first place? The dignity that comes with the ability to make something of yourself and pursue your heart's dreams and wishes and desires?

You don't care about any of that, and in so doing expose for the hypocritical lie it is your so-called concern for "human rights", for the unprincipled sham that it is.

Yes here's where you resort to making shit up again but here's the thing boyo, the majority of Hong Kong SUPPORTS THE PROTEST.
You're desperate to try and portray the protesters as an extreme minority but the people of Hong Kong have spoken for themselves and you hate that.

[Purgatio]

I should have guessed then. These aren't rich tycoons you know, these a small mom-and-pop shopkeepers who don't exactly earn a lot, all they want is to make a living for themselves in the peaceful trade and occupation they have chosen, to work hard and build a secure future for themselves and their families - in my book, that's a human right, as it should be for any decent person. The ability to start a business that isn't hurting anyone and conduct that trade in peace and without violent disturbance from rioters smashing down your windows and looting your store and vandalising your establishment and sticking you with a repair bill you can't afford - that matters to me, as it should matter to any decent person. You wanna talk about human rights? What about the basic human right of individual self-determination, or the ability to engage in private ordering for your future, the ability to live an individually empowered, self-directed, autonomous life? The very normative heart of why we consider human rights to be significant in the first place? The dignity that comes with the ability to make something of yourself and pursue your heart's dreams and wishes and desires?

You don't care about any of that, and in so doing expose for the hypocritical lie it is your so-called concern for "human rights", for the unprincipled sham that it is.

Yes here's where you resort to making shit up again but here's the thing boyo, the majority of Hong Kong SUPPORTS THE PROTEST.
You're desperate to try and portray the protesters as an extreme minority but the people of Hong Kong have spoken for themselves and you hate that.

You clearly haven't bothered to read my previous posts. I've made it clear time and time again that I've never suggested the Hong Kong Rioters are a tiny minority, the majority of the nation supports their vile and repugnant violence.

But individual human rights matter to me, they are individual and cannot be unilaterally taken away even by the majority. Your dignity and personhood matter even if the majority of the populace doesn't think so. Innocent businessmen and small shopkeepers like K. K. Man, his basic right to engage in a peaceful trade and occupation, to build a life and future for himself, to have an autonomous and thriving existence of his own creation, all these essential dignitarian rights matter even if the majority of the people of Hong Kong didn't think so. His personhood and his status as a human being don't disappear just because the majority of Hong Kongers are vile and selfish enough to throw their support behind violent hooligans.

You and the others in this thread basically think individual human rights don't exist so long as a violent mob don't think they exist. I don't. Human rights are human rights are human rights. They exist in all individuals and they matter even when the violent mob disagrees. If you think the mob can take away your human rights because they say so, then guess what, you don't believe in human rights at all. Unlike me.

[Propheticum]

Yes here's where you resort to making shit up again but here's the thing boyo, the majority of Hong Kong SUPPORTS THE PROTEST.
You're desperate to try and portray the protesters as an extreme minority but the people of Hong Kong have spoken for themselves and you hate that.

You clearly haven't bothered to read my previous posts. I've made it clear time and time again that I've never suggested the Hong Kong Rioters are a tiny minority, the majority of the nation supports their vile and repugnant violence.

But individual human rights matter to me, they are individual and cannot be unilaterally taken away even by the majority. Your dignity and personhood matter even if the majority of the populace doesn't think so. Innocent businessmen and small shopkeepers like K. K. Man, his basic right to engage in a peaceful trade and occupation, to build a life and future for himself, to have an autonomous and thriving existence of his own creation, all these essential dignitarian rights matter even if the majority of the people of Hong Kong didn't think so. His personhood and his status as a human being don't disappear just because the majority of Hong Kongers are vile and selfish enough to throw their support behind violent hooligans.

You and the others in this thread basically think individual human rights don't exist so long as a violent mob doesn't think they exist. I don't. Human rights are human rights are human rights. They exist in all individuals and they matter even when the violent mob disagrees. If you think the mob can take away your human rights because they say so, then guess what, you don't believe in human rights at all. Unlike me.

Jesus Christ man. You don't understand. These " Individual Rights" are literally being encroached by the CCP. What good does preaching for Individual rights because the minority of Hong Kong protestors are violent, when the people their fighting are literally trying to eliminate human rights?

[Neutraligon]

aCtuAlLy, tHe riCh mAdE thIeR mOneY faIrLy, sO yoU'Re thE TheiVes bEcaUse tAxEs arE a Sin

Taxes are theft.
Advocates for taxation are psychopaths.

SOME governments have conducted pogroms yes, that is not however what you said before.
Don't try to move the goalpost.

What goalposts?
We're just pointing out what level of psychopath you actually are.

Calling all supporters of taxes psychopaths is trolling; calling a poster a psychopath is flaming. As such *** 1 day ban for trolling/flaming ***

[The JELLEAIN Republic]

Yes here's where you resort to making shit up again but here's the thing boyo, the majority of Hong Kong SUPPORTS THE PROTEST.
You're desperate to try and portray the protesters as an extreme minority but the people of Hong Kong have spoken for themselves and you hate that.

You clearly haven't bothered to read my previous posts. I've made it clear time and time again that I've never suggested the Hong Kong Rioters are a tiny minority, the majority of the nation supports their vile and repugnant violence.

But individual human rights matter to me, they are individual and cannot be unilaterally taken away even by the majority. Your dignity and personhood matter even if the majority of the populace doesn't think so. Innocent businessmen and small shopkeepers like K. K. Man, his basic right to engage in a peaceful trade and occupation, to build a life and future for himself, to have an autonomous and thriving existence of his own creation, all these essential dignitarian rights matter even if the majority of the people of Hong Kong didn't think so. His personhood and his status as a human being don't disappear just because the majority of Hong Kongers are vile and selfish enough to throw their support behind violent hooligans.

You and the others in this thread basically think individual human rights don't exist so long as a violent mob don't think they exist. I don't. Human rights are human rights are human rights. They exist in all individuals and they matter even when the violent mob disagrees. If you think the mob can take away your human rights because they say so, then guess what, you don't believe in human rights at all. Unlike me.

The rioters attacked the store because of a belief of mainland loyalty.

Those are the dangers of things like this, but only a small fragment of protesters are auctally violent, but the police are violent to all, even the obviously peaceful protests.

Also, it seems clear that you are more pushing talking points in an entrenched “belief” (if we can even call it that) and that you are not genuinely arguing to figure something out with someone else. Just attacking back and forth.

That’s just spreading ....

Propaganda.

[Novus America]

Well in the world you want, which is everyone for themselves that is what you get.
Besides they care more about their survival than your luxury obviously.

Which is the inherent failure of your system. Because you oppose the government helping them to survive, you make a system where it is you vs them in a fight for survival.

That's where the rule of law comes in, the rule of law is needed to protect the property rights of people which is otherwise vulnerable to mob rule and mob violence.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
Repeating “rule of law” like some mantra is not an effective argument. Especially when you advocate against it where it benefits you.

You are against enforcing laws you disagree with.

While also failing to address the point (accusing people of being selfish I a system you created to be entirely selfish is absurd, they are just do what your system intended by being selfish) you do realize the police are not rich right? That they will not always commit violence on behalf of your precious stock portfolio. And then what? What happens when they cannot afford a place to live? When they are so appalled by people starving? And turn against you?
It is likely they will not remain loyal forever in such a system.

Your stock portfolio will not ensure their loyalty.

The fact is you need to lower classes.

Every heard of a guy name Otto Von Bismarck? You might like him at first, he was from a wealthy family and wanted to preserve the existing economic order. He was certainly no liberal.

But the difference is he saw the bigger picture, realized that he could only preserve that order by keeping the people happy, meeting their basic needs, providing them a sense of belonging and purpose and yes this required the wealthy paying some taxes (gasp) to do so! I mean they still stayed quite rich, but they were not allowed to completely neglect the poor.

Because he realized an uprising, rebellion or revolution would be far more costly to the rich than a welfare state!

Besides the moral issues, which we will not agree on because your moral system is so umm unconventional to say the least, you are not being pragmatic!

Is it not better to pay a little more towards meeting the basic needs of the people and keeping them happy, to avoid a crisis like this in the first place?

Is it not better to pay say 1% of the money you make from your stocks to keep the people happy rather than 10% to maintain a massive and oppressive security apparatus? Is it not better to pay the 1% rather than have you stocks crash 50% when a uprising happens?

Seriously you live in Singapore of all places, perhaps the most Bismarckian state in the world today. Your government realizes this truth even if you do not.

[The JELLEAIN Republic]

You clearly haven't bothered to read my previous posts. I've made it clear time and time again that I've never suggested the Hong Kong Rioters are a tiny minority, the majority of the nation supports their vile and repugnant violence.

But individual human rights matter to me, they are individual and cannot be unilaterally taken away even by the majority. Your dignity and personhood matter even if the majority of the populace doesn't think so. Innocent businessmen and small shopkeepers like K. K. Man, his basic right to engage in a peaceful trade and occupation, to build a life and future for himself, to have an autonomous and thriving existence of his own creation, all these essential dignitarian rights matter even if the majority of the people of Hong Kong didn't think so. His personhood and his status as a human being don't disappear just because the majority of Hong Kongers are vile and selfish enough to throw their support behind violent hooligans.

You and the others in this thread basically think individual human rights don't exist so long as a violent mob don't think they exist. I don't. Human rights are human rights are human rights. They exist in all individuals and they matter even when the violent mob disagrees. If you think the mob can take away your human rights because they say so, then guess what, you don't believe in human rights at all. Unlike me.

The rioters attacked the store because of a belief of mainland loyalty.

Those are the dangers of things like this, but only a small fragment of protesters are auctally violent, but the police are violent to all, even the obviously peaceful protests.

Also, it seems clear that you are more pushing talking points in an entrenched “belief” (if we can even call it that) and that you are not genuinely arguing to figure something out with someone else. Just attacking back and forth.

That’s just spreading ....

Propaganda.

The police and government of HK or widely Believed to be controlled by China, and are in fact to a large degree. The China I remind, who has concentration camps, censors In formation like there is no tomorrow, and is super autocratic, super dystopian, more facist that communist (dear leader). Those are not good people. (Not the people of China but the government; the people are filled with propaganda, and are mostly innocent).

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

It appears a new debate opponent appears, in the absence of one, another takes its place.

You clearly haven't bothered to read my previous posts. I've made it clear time and time again that I've never suggested the Hong Kong Rioters are a tiny minority, the majority of the nation supports their vile and repugnant violence.

Yes, but do you ever consider the fact that actual TORTURE is being performed on the arrested? How about sexual abuse towards female protestors/bystanders? How about the police entering buildings and arresting people without warrants of arrest?

You can only see how far the rule of law has gone in Hong Kong. The protestors must respond in kind or their cause will be lost to the sanda of time because of fear of authority.

But individual human rights matter to me, they are individual and cannot be unilaterally taken away even by the majority. Your dignity and personhood matter even if the majority of the populace doesn't think so. Innocent businessmen and small shopkeepers like K. K. Man, his basic right to engage in a peaceful trade and occupation, to build a life and future for himself, to have an autonomous and thriving existence of his own creation, all these essential dignitarian rights matter even if the majority of the people of Hong Kong didn't think so. His personhood and his status as a human being don't disappear just because the majority of Hong Kongers are vile and selfish enough to throw their support behind violent hooligans.

Sure, individual human rights of these shopkeepers matter, but what about the opposite side? Surely the numerous reports of abuse of power aren’t going to be ignored. There are much, much more problems these protestors are facing than the shopkeepers.

Are said shopkeepers sprayed in the face for talking? Are said shopkeepers being thrown in jail for speaking what’s on their mind or standing up for what they believe is right? Is the status of said shopkeeper, be it mental or physical, as a human being being constantly threatened and harmed?

What you call hooligans are undergoing what I described above. If you saw something clearly wrong, would you stay on the sidelines because someone says otherwise or do you choose to be on the side of the wronged?

If your viewpoint with the Hong Kong protests would be applied to notable protest all across the world standing up to power or inspiring change after abuse, you’d be against things like EDSA People Power which successfully overthrew a corrupt dictator, Tiananmen Square which brought to light some of the atrocities commited in China by the CCP, the Prague Uprising which saw the Czech people trying to determine their future, Vietnam War Protests which stopped US involvement in Vietnam, the Arab Spring which inspired change within hierarchies across the Middle East and Africa. Do reconsider your position on things such as these. We wouldn’t live in a world like today if it weren’t for these protests.

You and the others in this thread basically think individual human rights don't exist so long as a violent mob don't think they exist. I don't. Human rights are human rights are human rights. They exist in all individuals and they matter even when the violent mob disagrees. If you think the mob can take away your human rights because they say so, then guess what, you don't believe in human rights at all. Unlike me.

The violent mob you portray the protestors as are fighting for what they perceive to be right which includes a defense of human rights, which the past few months have demonstrated that the police and the leadership structure display no regard nor respect of said rights, which are a central tenet moving forward in this century.

Unlike you, we believe in the right of a group of people to determine what they want, especially if a significant and substantial majority of people around them/relevant to them agree. Unlike you, we support a group that wants change in an overly flawed structure. Unlike you, we stand with a group that talks against a government that is found to be increasingly abusive and control-happy. Unlike you, we support a group suffering more and more as the CCP willfully chooses to ignore the status of Hong Kong and Taiwan. We support a movement exposing the CCP and its inner working to the world, showing blatant disregard for international laws and conventions.

I rest my case for now.

I

[LiberNovusAmericae]

It isn't a lust of violence. They've been provoked into it, so I doubt more violence in the form of a crackdown will help. You just seem to hate peaceful resolutions.

Did you even read the articles at all? One of them involved a shopkeeper, K. K. Man, whose shop has been attacked several times and vandalised and he has no idea how he is going to pay back the repair bills, or if he even can since if he pays the bill the rioters may come back and do it again to him. People like him have a life to live and a family to support, and its chilling how little human empathy people in this thread have for the innocent shopkeepers, retail outlet owners and small businessmen just trying to make a living and make ends meet and whose very life has been turned upside down by selfish vandals who have no care or concern for anyone else but themselves, who think they can inflict property damage en masse and they can hurt people's lives and futures and it doesn't matter. The Hong Kong Rioters should be ashamed of themselves for what they've done to people like K. K. Man - but they aren't. They have no shame.

I've already addressed property damage problems in my previous post. Repeating it changes nothing.

[Bombadil]

I mean this Mesut Özil issue is a case in point, China is using its influence to shut down free speech by default. What nation is so thin-skinned and so against opinions that point out its failings that it bans things in retribution because an individual said something.

..and so every team, every company, every institution will send out a note saying please avoid any controversial statements on China.. and so global suppression of free speech is enabled.

[Gormwood]

I mean this Mesut Özil issue is a case in point, China is using its influence to shut down free speech by default. What nation is so thin-skinned and so against opinions that point out its failings that it bans things in retribution because an individual said something.

..and so every team, every company, every institution will send out a note saying please avoid any controversial statements on China.. and so global suppression of free speech is enabled.

The same nation that banned a cartoon character because people compared their precious premier to it.

[Bombadil]

“As a Chinese football fan, I’m very disappointed. Why can’t you just focus on playing football? As a public figure, you should know what you can say, what you can do and be aware of the consequences.”

Yes, toe the China line people, if you know what's good for you.

And everyone steps in line.

Why the world is silent

[Phoenicaea]

^while it not good, can t say it to be end of the line. people will keep saying things, even while they re not welcomed in business and sea crowds.

we have to get used, distance enough away from medias: press tv web firms. not fall in regime’s treat of being desperate, for sensible people is there.

[Purgatio]

“As a Chinese football fan, I’m very disappointed. Why can’t you just focus on playing football? As a public figure, you should know what you can say, what you can do and be aware of the consequences.”

Yes, toe the China line people, if you know what's good for you.

And everyone steps in line.

Why the world is silent

Or maybe people are silent about the whole Uyghur situation because most people are smart enough to understand that counter-terrorism policies aren't something to criticize?

[Samudera Darussalam]

“As a Chinese football fan, I’m very disappointed. Why can’t you just focus on playing football? As a public figure, you should know what you can say, what you can do and be aware of the consequences.”

Yes, toe the China line people, if you know what's good for you.

And everyone steps in line.

Why the world is silent

Or maybe people are silent about the whole Uyghur situation because most people are smart enough to understand that counter-terrorism policies aren't something to criticize?

Just as it's more likely because of economic ties, and the assumptions that the West want to dirties the image of China in the world due to China's status as a rising power.
Counter-terrorism policies or not, when they have breached human rights are worthy to be criticized, just like what people are saying about what the Turks have been doing to 'solve' the threats of terrorism from Kurdish areas.
The CCP seems to be.....really enthusiastic about these 'counter-terrorism policies' as to widen them to areas outside of Xinjiang, the areas populated with Hui Muslims, an entirely different ethnic group mostly living in a totally different regions.
To be fair, while fear or worry of Saudi influence - which is not favourable given the nature of Wahhabism - forcing mosques to change their domes to reflect Chinese architecture or forbidding the use of Arabic based on that fear/worry, or just to better align with Han Chinese culture is just excessive.

[Infected Mushroom]

Beijing continues to back Carrie Lam.

https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/ ... 191216.htm

I am very very touched and moved.

The opinions as expressed by the Chinese government regarding her leadership over the crisis are mine as well. It’s like reading my own words and thoughts except as expressed by a real government it’s incredible...

[Purgatio]

Beijing continues to back Carrie Lam.

https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/ ... 191216.htm

I am very very touched and moved.

The opinions as expressed by the Chinese government regarding her leadership over the crisis are mine as well. It’s like reading my own words and thoughts except as expressed by a real government it’s incredible...

She deserves the praise from Xi Jinping and the rest of the Chinese government, a lesser and more cowardly person in her position would have caved into the political blackmail from the rioters, god knows its the road of least resistance, letting the violent run the asylum and being 'popular' instead of doing what is right and maintaining order. Whatever gripes I may have with her, particularly failing to ask the PLA garrison to intervene sooner in the crisis, her unwaveringness and willingness to cling on and not give in or bend over to the rioters earns her my respect. That's how a leader behaves.

[Purgatio]

Or maybe people are silent about the whole Uyghur situation because most people are smart enough to understand that counter-terrorism policies aren't something to criticize?

Just as it's more likely because of economic ties, and the assumptions that the West want to dirties the image of China in the world due to China's status as a rising power.
Counter-terrorism policies or not, when they have breached human rights are worthy to be criticized, just like what people are saying about what the Turks have been doing to 'solve' the threats of terrorism from Kurdish areas.
The CCP seems to be.....really enthusiastic about these 'counter-terrorism policies' as to widen them to areas outside of Xinjiang, the areas populated with Hui Muslims, an entirely different ethnic group mostly living in a totally different regions.
To be fair, while fear or worry of Saudi influence - which is not favourable given the nature of Wahhabism - forcing mosques to change their domes to reflect Chinese architecture or forbidding the use of Arabic based on that fear/worry, or just to better align with Han Chinese culture is just excessive.

Sounds to me like China is just trying to root out Islamic terrorism from the communities and neighbourhoods in which they are likely to germinate and spread, ideologically. Many innocent Chinese have died because of radical Islamists, and its a logical protective strategy to focus limited investigatory resources on groups like the Uyghur and Hui.

[Infected Mushroom]

Beijing continues to back Carrie Lam.

https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/ ... 191216.htm

I am very very touched and moved.

The opinions as expressed by the Chinese government regarding her leadership over the crisis are mine as well. It’s like reading my own words and thoughts except as expressed by a real government it’s incredible...

She deserves the praise from Xi Jinping and the rest of the Chinese government, a lesser and more cowardly person in her position would have caved into the political blackmail from the rioters, god knows its the road of least resistance, letting the violent run the asylum and being 'popular' instead of doing what is right and maintaining order. Whatever gripes I may have with her, particularly failing to ask the PLA garrison to intervene sooner in the crisis, her unwaveringness and willingness to cling on and not give in or bend over to the rioters earns her my respect. That's how a leader behaves.

Indeed. She made the difficult but correct decision. She chose to be loyal to the government.

[Phoenicaea]

^i don t agree with _Mushroom’s view, goes without saying. nevertheless i suppose thrown arguments not so decisive.

besides, thing broadly anti-regimes say is this: in ruling we suppose, you will have right in your saying, without persecution. no saying will be outlaw.

[Heloin]

She deserves the praise from Xi Jinping and the rest of the Chinese government, a lesser and more cowardly person in her position would have caved into the political blackmail from the rioters, god knows its the road of least resistance, letting the violent run the asylum and being 'popular' instead of doing what is right and maintaining order. Whatever gripes I may have with her, particularly failing to ask the PLA garrison to intervene sooner in the crisis, her unwaveringness and willingness to cling on and not give in or bend over to the rioters earns her my respect. That's how a leader behaves.

Indeed. She made the difficult but correct decision. She chose to be loyal to the government.

Anyone who thinks Carrie Lam is still “in charge” by her own will does not understand the situation in Hong Kong.