HK's Apple Daily raided by 500 officers over national security law

Post by seattle_spring » Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 4:02 AM UTC

hungryhobo wrote: post #69

jollybean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't cry tears because of the kind of journalism, we cry tears because it was on some level journalism or at minimum freedom of expression and the clampdown means the same it will happen to you if you try that route. Anyone who contradicts Putin and gets any stickiness or popularity ends up dead. You don't have to agree with Putin's antagonists to realize why that is bad.

tell that to twitter or facebook

Post by pooper » Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 4:08 AM UTC

eloff wrote: post #80

xvector wrote: post #74

And China's industry has the world by the balls, so there's not much that can be done from an external perspective to prevent this. That said, I'm not sure many nations would do anything even if China didn't have leverage over them.

The best one can do is what some of the commonwealth countries, led by the UK, are doing by offering Hong Kong citizens an accelerated path to immigration. All you can do when a ship sinks is find a life raft.

Post by maurys » Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 4:11 AM UTC

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #49

dcolkitt wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right to govern extends from the consent of the governed. It's not a question of who "should" own Hong Kong based on some centuries old history. It's a question of who the people of Hong Kong choose to govern them. Had an open referendum been held in 1997, it's almost certainly the case that the citizenry would not have voted to return to the tutelage of the dictatorship in Beijing.

>The right to govern extends from the consent of the governed. First I must say that what's happening to HK is tragic, and I very much empathize with their situation, and am not at all in agreement with how the CCP is handling this. But this is quite the take! I don't know if you're US-based, but by that logic if the Native Americans held a referendum, they would have most certainly not allowed the U.S. government to…

Post by stanislavb » Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 4:17 AM UTC

pooper wrote: post #83

eloff wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best one can do is what some of the commonwealth countries, led by the UK, are doing by offering Hong Kong citizens an accelerated path to immigration. All you can do when a ship sinks is find a life raft.

> All you can do when a ship sinks is find a life raft. And yet somehow the "left" and the "right" unite in opposition any time I say something even remotely alluding to a way out for any Palestinian who wants to get out of the middle east. Left and Right are in quotes because they are pretty much the same people.

Post by aatharuv » Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 4:22 AM UTC

astrange wrote: post #82

magicsmoke wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the case we would see an effort to reverse those wrongs by reverting all the economic benefit that America gained at the expense of Native Americans. All the land and lives taken, and all the wealth and prosperity they could have generated. The total sum if repaid would probably erase a significant part of America from the map. So it was wrong. But clearly not wrong enough to warrant erasing America and its…

> If that's the case we would see an effort to reverse those wrongs by reverting all the economic benefit that America gained at the expense of Native Americans. Note that, like LatinX, Native Americans is something only white people say. They call themselves Indians. Activist/government terms usually end up kind of patronizing for some reason. (And they were called Indians before people from India were called that.)