Hong-Kong Protests

Jura said:

since you quoted me, well, restricting the right of someone active to stand for election is controversial; I link what Glob. Times had to say:
Disqualifying Joshua Wong is a law-based righteous, reasonable decision

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Why is it controversial? Please elaborate!

This is typical MSM trying to smear Hong Kong democratic processes.

In all the democracies around the world, people are barred from standing for all sorts of reasons! Having a criminal records being one of them for example!

In Joshua's case, he has openly called for Hong Kong independence, an illegal act under the law of Hong Kong and China!

Also, once elected, all elected members have to swear allegiance to the Chinese government and promised to uphold Chinese law!

This is no difference to other countries. In the UK for example, all elected MPs have to swore allegiance to the crown. If they don't, they would not be able to participate in the affairs of the land!

In Hong Kong, this has already happened, and the members involved have not been able to take their place in the elected council, thus wasting people's time!

It is clear that Joshua, from his past actions, that he would not be able to swear his allegiances to China, and promised to uphold chinese laws! And as such, under the law of Hong Kong, he is illegible to stand for election.

Absolutely nothing wrong or illegal about this!

vincent said:

Can someone with a criminal record run for public office in Czech?

Click to expand...

I think so:
inside

it's like 'A certificate of no criminal record is not required.' (I know it sounds clumsy, but I'm tired right now)
but I guess a candidate can't be incarcerated at the elections time
LOL!

before I go to bed,

Gatekeeper said:

Why is it controversial? Please elaborate!

...

Click to expand...

it's controversial because "someone active"

(Today at 8:48 PM

Jura said:

since you quoted me, well, restricting the right of someone active to stand for election is controversial; I link what Glob. Times had to say:
Disqualifying Joshua Wong is a law-based righteous, reasonable decision

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

)

is going to stay active irrespective if for now restricted in the right to stand for election,

and "someone active" is anyway going to find a substitute person to run in the coming elections

People need to realize that the protests are not about HK freedoms and democracy, but about disrupting mainland China. The demands were meant to be untenable so that the propaganda can continue.

Yesterday at 10:05 PM

Jura said:

before I go to bed,
it's controversial because "someone active"

(Today at 8:48 PM
)

is going to stay active irrespective if for now restricted in the right to stand for election,

and "someone active" is anyway going to find a substitute person to run in the coming elections

Click to expand...

... and

"After Wong was barred from running in Southern district, 17 other pro-democracy candidates in the area issued a statement calling for voters to support them.

“If we can take most of the seats in Southern district council, we will use all possible means to allow Joshua Wong to participate in the work of the council,” they wrote."

inside
Banning Joshua Wong from Hong Kong district council elections shows he is thorn in Beijing’s side who must be isolated despite risk of global backlash, analysts say

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

but perhaps the best sentence in there is, quote, Although the ban would provide further grounds for the US to launch sanctions against Hong Kong, Lau believed Beijing wished to send out a resolute message: “China has its bottom lines in safeguarding its national sovereignty, with no fear of threats of sanctions.” end of quote

only now I checked what would be a likely support of
and I'm guessing, based on , just several percents,
so barring one of the candidates looks like a free ad for that movement LOL

Jura said:

only now I checked what would be a likely support of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and I'm guessing, based on

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, just several percents,
so barring one of the candidates looks like a free ad for that movement LOL

Click to expand...

Now you see why I said

supersnoop said:

I find this hilarious. The western media hails Joshua Wong as some kind of political hero ("he went to jail!")

Click to expand...

and

The fawning over this guy just seems like another FLG to me.

Click to expand...

It's almost a joke. I wasn't even commenting on the eligibility factor.

supersnoop said:

Now you see why I said

and


It's almost a joke. I wasn't even commenting on the eligibility factor.

Click to expand...

if he's such a weaky, why did they bar him?

Jura said:

if he's such a weaky, why did they bar him?

Click to expand...

Because he is a terrorist sympathiser with the full weight of the American media machine behind him.

With the amount of free campaigning by western MSM and politicians as well as western social media he can expect to get, you can get just about anyone elected where there aren’t effective safeguards to prevent blatant foreign meddling in elections, as is the case in HK right now.

Barring him has nothing to do with how effective a candidate he might be, and entirely about how much damage a foreign agent like him can do in any position of power.

Jura said:

if he's such a weaky, why did they bar him?

Click to expand...

I think, from the perspective of the government, 2 possibilities:
1. Classic overreaction
2. These guys are pests, if you are not familiar


Everyone keeps talking about "rule of law", one of the rules is to respect the taking of the oath to the office. This is true of any country. Why allow someone to hold an office if they only intend to cause trouble?

Again, my interpretation.