Topic: HONGKONG DEMO - page 9. (Read 23571 times)
Hong Kong wants to declare itself as an independent state? I support them, but is not going to happen. China will declare war on them.
Keep the faith brothers, and keep your backs covered.
@IsabelWJourno: PLA trucks drove pass the East Gate of HKU on Bonham Rd. Can't confirm if it's to do with #OccupyCentral pic.twitter.com/Hx7L87xdJM
Everyone has the right to freedom.
Government was established to serve the people, not vice versa.
Government was established to serve the people, not vice versa.
Hell yeah. Here here. Support the Hong Kong folks
Anonymous視頻全文：
Greetings world. We are Anonymous. It has come to our attention that recent tactics used against peaceful protestors here in the United States have found their way to Hong Kong.
To the protestors in Hong Kong, we have heard your plea for help. Take heart and take to your streets. You are not alone in this fight. Anonymous members all over the world stand with you, and will help in your fight for democracy.
To the Hong Kong police and any others that are called to the protests, we are watching you very closely and have already begun to wage war on you for your inhumane actions against your own citizens. If you continue to abuse, harass or harm protestors, we will continue to deface and take every web-based asset of your government off line.
That is not a threat. It is a promise. Attacking protestors will result in releasing personal information of all of your government officials. We will seize all your databases and e-mail pools and dump them on the Internet.
This is your first and only warning. The time has come for Democracy for the citizens of Hong Kong. The line has been drawn in the sand. The police are to protect, not trample on, the freedoms and democracy of their citizens. Until justice prevails hack and protest will replace it. The cause of security and democracy will be grounds for the assault on your virtual infrastructure.
Take this opportunity to stand down while we give it to you, or it will get a lot worse. Operation Hong Kong engaged.
We Are Anonymous. We Are Legion. We do Not Forgive. We do Not Forget. Government of Hong Kong, expect us.
Greetings world. We are Anonymous. It has come to our attention that recent tactics used against peaceful protestors here in the United States have found their way to Hong Kong.
To the protestors in Hong Kong, we have heard your plea for help. Take heart and take to your streets. You are not alone in this fight. Anonymous members all over the world stand with you, and will help in your fight for democracy.
To the Hong Kong police and any others that are called to the protests, we are watching you very closely and have already begun to wage war on you for your inhumane actions against your own citizens. If you continue to abuse, harass or harm protestors, we will continue to deface and take every web-based asset of your government off line.
That is not a threat. It is a promise. Attacking protestors will result in releasing personal information of all of your government officials. We will seize all your databases and e-mail pools and dump them on the Internet.
This is your first and only warning. The time has come for Democracy for the citizens of Hong Kong. The line has been drawn in the sand. The police are to protect, not trample on, the freedoms and democracy of their citizens. Until justice prevails hack and protest will replace it. The cause of security and democracy will be grounds for the assault on your virtual infrastructure.
Take this opportunity to stand down while we give it to you, or it will get a lot worse. Operation Hong Kong engaged.
We Are Anonymous. We Are Legion. We do Not Forgive. We do Not Forget. Government of Hong Kong, expect us.
Timeline:
16 January 2013 – Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong, Benny Tai Yiu-ting wrote an article 公民抗命的最大殺傷力武器 (Civil disobedience's deadliest weapon) in Hong Kong Economic Journal suggesting an occupation of Central.[12]
24 March 2013 – Qiao Xiaoyang, chairman of the Law Committee under the National People's Congress Standing Committee stated that chief executive candidates must be persons who love the country and love Hong Kong, who do not insist on confronting the central government.[33]
27 March 2013 – Organisers of the "Occupy Central" movement, Benny Tai, Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and Chinese University's Sociology professor Chan Kin-man officially announced at a news conference that they will start promoting the protest in 2014 if the government's proposals for universal suffrage fail to meet international standards.[74]
9 June 2013 – First Deliberation Day.[75]
9 March 2014 – Second Deliberation Day.
6 May 2014 – Third Deliberation Day.
4 June 2014 – The 1989 Tiananmen Square protest Memorial draws a 180,000 crowd in light of the massacre's 25th anniversary.[76]
22 June 2014 – Civil referendum.
29 June 2014 – The civil referendum ends with 787,767 valid e-votes, or about 22% of registered Hong Kong's registered voters.[77]
1 July 2014 – The annual 1 July marches on the 17th anniversary of the return of Hong Kong to Chinese rule draws 100,000 protesters (500,000 according to organizer), and over 500 arrests.[78][79]
18 July to 17 August 2014 - Alliance for Peace and Democracy (APD) "Anti-Occupy Central" petition campaign collected over 1,500,000 signatures.
17 August 2014 - APD "Anti-Occupy Central" march was attended by 193,000, according to organisers.[53]
2014 Hong Kong protests
Main article: 2014 Hong Kong protests
28 September 2014 - Benny Tai announces that Occupy Central is launched.[80] The police uses pepper spray, tear gas and batons to disperse protesters near Tamar Park.[81]
29 September 2014 - Thousands of protesters occupy part of Causeway Bay and part of Mong Kok.[82] Riot police have retreated from various areas.[83] Many banks on Hong Kong Island are closed. Schools in Wan Chai District and Central and Western District are suspended.[84]
30 September 2014 - Schools in Wan Chai District and Central and Western District remain suspended.[85]
16 January 2013 – Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong, Benny Tai Yiu-ting wrote an article 公民抗命的最大殺傷力武器 (Civil disobedience's deadliest weapon) in Hong Kong Economic Journal suggesting an occupation of Central.[12]
24 March 2013 – Qiao Xiaoyang, chairman of the Law Committee under the National People's Congress Standing Committee stated that chief executive candidates must be persons who love the country and love Hong Kong, who do not insist on confronting the central government.[33]
27 March 2013 – Organisers of the "Occupy Central" movement, Benny Tai, Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and Chinese University's Sociology professor Chan Kin-man officially announced at a news conference that they will start promoting the protest in 2014 if the government's proposals for universal suffrage fail to meet international standards.[74]
9 June 2013 – First Deliberation Day.[75]
9 March 2014 – Second Deliberation Day.
6 May 2014 – Third Deliberation Day.
4 June 2014 – The 1989 Tiananmen Square protest Memorial draws a 180,000 crowd in light of the massacre's 25th anniversary.[76]
22 June 2014 – Civil referendum.
29 June 2014 – The civil referendum ends with 787,767 valid e-votes, or about 22% of registered Hong Kong's registered voters.[77]
1 July 2014 – The annual 1 July marches on the 17th anniversary of the return of Hong Kong to Chinese rule draws 100,000 protesters (500,000 according to organizer), and over 500 arrests.[78][79]
18 July to 17 August 2014 - Alliance for Peace and Democracy (APD) "Anti-Occupy Central" petition campaign collected over 1,500,000 signatures.
17 August 2014 - APD "Anti-Occupy Central" march was attended by 193,000, according to organisers.[53]
2014 Hong Kong protests
Main article: 2014 Hong Kong protests
28 September 2014 - Benny Tai announces that Occupy Central is launched.[80] The police uses pepper spray, tear gas and batons to disperse protesters near Tamar Park.[81]
29 September 2014 - Thousands of protesters occupy part of Causeway Bay and part of Mong Kok.[82] Riot police have retreated from various areas.[83] Many banks on Hong Kong Island are closed. Schools in Wan Chai District and Central and Western District are suspended.[84]
30 September 2014 - Schools in Wan Chai District and Central and Western District remain suspended.[85]
International reaction:
The demonstration grew so unprecedentedly huge that Hong Kong received wide news coverage and headlines on major international news outfits—including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN, BBC News and Reuters—for days. The demonstration has been widely referred to as the "Umbrella Revolution".[68]
The self-organised Facebook group Global Solidarity with Hong Kong was established on 13 September 2014, providing a platform for Hong Kong citizens who live in different corner of the world to organise protests in their own cities. Various protests sprang up across different cities with solidarity to support the on-going demonstration and to condemn the Hong Kong Police's excessive use of force in Hong Kong.
Australia
In Australia, 250 students wore black shirts and gathered peacefully outside of Chinese Consulate in Perth on 29 September 2014, condemning the excessive use of violence in dispersing peaceful demonstrators and supporting Hong Kong's pursuit of full democracy.[69]
Canada
In Vancouver, British Columbia, a large group wearing yellow gathered in front of the local Chinese Consulate to support the movement in Hong Kong. This began on September 28, and is expected to continue.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird wrote on Twitter, "Aspirations of people of Hong Kong are clear. Canada supports continued freedom of speech and prosperity under the rule of law." His press secretary added, "Canada’s position is clear. We are supportive of democratic development in Hong Kong and believe that the ongoing adherence to the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ policy has contributed to and remains essential for Hong Kong’s stability and prosperity [...] Canada reiterates its support for the implementation of universal suffrage for the election of the Chief Executive in 2017 and all members of the Legislative Council in 2020, in accordance with the Basic Law and the democratic aspirations of the Hong Kong people."[70]
The New Democratic Party, the Official Opposition, also expressed solidarity with protesters, stating "New Democrats believe that freedom of expression and association, including the right to peaceful protest, are fundamental rights. We stand in solidarity with all people who aspire for democracy, peace and the protection of human rights." They also called on Chinese authorities to "exercise restraint."[70]
New Zealand
On 1 October 2014, ~300 people protested along Auckland's main street in support of the Occupy Central. Protests were also staged in Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin and Palmerston North[71].
Taiwan
Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou urged mainland authorities to listen to the voices of the people of Hong Kong and deal with the matter in a peaceful and cautious manner. He also urged Hong Kong residents to use peaceful and rational means to express their views. Ma expressed his understanding and support for Hong Kong residents' demand for universal suffrage, and said the realization of universal suffrage will be a win-win scenario for both Hong Kong and mainland China.[72]
United Kingdom
A statement from the Foreign Office called for the rights of those demonstrating to be protected. The Foreign Office said that it was important Hong Kong preserved the right to demonstrate within the law, adding that it is monitoring events "carefully". Britons have been advised to avoid public demonstrations in Hong Kong, and to monitor local media and transport companies for information.
United States
On 29 September 2014, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in a press briefing that the United States government supports the "universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law” and "the aspirations of the Hong Kong people.” They believe that "the basic legitimacy of the chief executive in Hong Kong will be greatly enhanced if the Basic Law's ultimate aim of selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage is fulfilled,” [73]
The demonstration grew so unprecedentedly huge that Hong Kong received wide news coverage and headlines on major international news outfits—including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN, BBC News and Reuters—for days. The demonstration has been widely referred to as the "Umbrella Revolution".[68]
The self-organised Facebook group Global Solidarity with Hong Kong was established on 13 September 2014, providing a platform for Hong Kong citizens who live in different corner of the world to organise protests in their own cities. Various protests sprang up across different cities with solidarity to support the on-going demonstration and to condemn the Hong Kong Police's excessive use of force in Hong Kong.
Australia
In Australia, 250 students wore black shirts and gathered peacefully outside of Chinese Consulate in Perth on 29 September 2014, condemning the excessive use of violence in dispersing peaceful demonstrators and supporting Hong Kong's pursuit of full democracy.[69]
Canada
In Vancouver, British Columbia, a large group wearing yellow gathered in front of the local Chinese Consulate to support the movement in Hong Kong. This began on September 28, and is expected to continue.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird wrote on Twitter, "Aspirations of people of Hong Kong are clear. Canada supports continued freedom of speech and prosperity under the rule of law." His press secretary added, "Canada’s position is clear. We are supportive of democratic development in Hong Kong and believe that the ongoing adherence to the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ policy has contributed to and remains essential for Hong Kong’s stability and prosperity [...] Canada reiterates its support for the implementation of universal suffrage for the election of the Chief Executive in 2017 and all members of the Legislative Council in 2020, in accordance with the Basic Law and the democratic aspirations of the Hong Kong people."[70]
The New Democratic Party, the Official Opposition, also expressed solidarity with protesters, stating "New Democrats believe that freedom of expression and association, including the right to peaceful protest, are fundamental rights. We stand in solidarity with all people who aspire for democracy, peace and the protection of human rights." They also called on Chinese authorities to "exercise restraint."[70]
New Zealand
On 1 October 2014, ~300 people protested along Auckland's main street in support of the Occupy Central. Protests were also staged in Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin and Palmerston North[71].
Taiwan
Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou urged mainland authorities to listen to the voices of the people of Hong Kong and deal with the matter in a peaceful and cautious manner. He also urged Hong Kong residents to use peaceful and rational means to express their views. Ma expressed his understanding and support for Hong Kong residents' demand for universal suffrage, and said the realization of universal suffrage will be a win-win scenario for both Hong Kong and mainland China.[72]
United Kingdom
A statement from the Foreign Office called for the rights of those demonstrating to be protected. The Foreign Office said that it was important Hong Kong preserved the right to demonstrate within the law, adding that it is monitoring events "carefully". Britons have been advised to avoid public demonstrations in Hong Kong, and to monitor local media and transport companies for information.
United States
On 29 September 2014, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in a press briefing that the United States government supports the "universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law” and "the aspirations of the Hong Kong people.” They believe that "the basic legitimacy of the chief executive in Hong Kong will be greatly enhanced if the Basic Law's ultimate aim of selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage is fulfilled,” [73]
Official launch:
On 28 September 2014 at 1.40am Hong Kong time, Benny Tai announced the official start of the Occupy Central with Love and Peace civil disobedience campaign on the stage of the student protests outside Hong Kong's Central Government Complex.[63]
On Sunday night, 28 September 2014, the scenes in Central and Admiralty became more dramatic, as the police employed tear gas, pepper spray, and batons in their attempts to disperse the protesters. The use of tear gas was a significant move in Hong Kong, as it had not been used in the SAR since 2005.[64] This did not deter the crowds, as thousands more began to occupy Causeway Bay and Mongkok instead. On Monday, the government withdrew the riot police and there were massive traffic disruptions as buses and vehicles were diverted.[65] The police requested that the protesters free up the roads to allow commuters to get to work. However, the protesters reiterated their requests to speak with a government official, in order to begin negotiations for democratic reforms.[66] The tear gas used has been identified by Campaign Against Arms Trade as being manufactured by Chemring Group.[67]
On 28 September 2014 at 1.40am Hong Kong time, Benny Tai announced the official start of the Occupy Central with Love and Peace civil disobedience campaign on the stage of the student protests outside Hong Kong's Central Government Complex.[63]
On Sunday night, 28 September 2014, the scenes in Central and Admiralty became more dramatic, as the police employed tear gas, pepper spray, and batons in their attempts to disperse the protesters. The use of tear gas was a significant move in Hong Kong, as it had not been used in the SAR since 2005.[64] This did not deter the crowds, as thousands more began to occupy Causeway Bay and Mongkok instead. On Monday, the government withdrew the riot police and there were massive traffic disruptions as buses and vehicles were diverted.[65] The police requested that the protesters free up the roads to allow commuters to get to work. However, the protesters reiterated their requests to speak with a government official, in order to begin negotiations for democratic reforms.[66] The tear gas used has been identified by Campaign Against Arms Trade as being manufactured by Chemring Group.[67]
Done, hope the protesters get some of the things they want and stay safe
Basically they're protesting against proposed changes to the elections procedure. And it's very funny because these changes are proposed to make elections more transparent and democratic. So they're protesting against own freedom. 
If you don't know, Chief Executive elections are performed in three steps:
1) Candidates are submitting their requests to participate in elections;
2) Chinese government chooses a few candidates;
3) Hong-Kong Election Committee chooses between these candidates.
This order is declared in the Basic Law of the Hong-Kong Special Administrative Region. People's Assembly of China (chinese parliament) passed the bill allowing to remove the Chinese government from election process and perform next elections directly using Single Transferable Voting system... It will be the first such experience because direct Chief Executive elections have never held at any point of history of Hong-Kong. It would seem that it's time for the party, but idiots aka "politically active students" are unable to understand their happiness. Grin
Anybody who "helps" or "supports" them is an idiot too. It's really just as simple as that.
EDIT: Recover acidentally removed message.
Reaction:
SAR government
Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying warned that the Occupy Central movement is bound to be neither peaceful nor legal and that actions will be taken to maintain law and order.[31]
Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok warned that the radical elements of Occupy Central may cause serious disturbances like the violent incident during the meeting for funding the northeast New Territories new town in Legislative Council; he reminded the participants to consider their own personal safety and legal liability.[14]
Commissioner of Police Andy Tsang Wai-hung said that any attempt to block major thoroughfares in Central will not be tolerated and warned people to think twice about joining the Occupy Central protest, adding "any collective act to hold up traffic unlawfully" would not be tolerated.[32]
PRC government
Official's response
Wang Guangya, director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, when asked if he believed the Occupy Central plan was beneficial to the city, said "I think Hong Kong compatriots don't want to see Hong Kong being messed up. Hong Kong needs development."[33]
Qiao Xiaoyang, chairman of the National People's Congress Law Committee, was quoted as accusing the "opposition camp" of "fuelling" the Occupy Central plan. Qiao said the plan was only "partly truthful", "complex" and a "risk-everything" proposition.[33]
In October 2013 the party-controlled Global Times objected to Occupy organizers meeting with Democratic Progressive Party figures such as Shih Ming-teh in Taiwan, saying that the DPP, the main opposition party to Taiwan's governing KMT, was "pro-independence." In a piece titled "HK opposition at risk of becoming enemy of the State," Occupy organizers were warned that "collaborating with the pro-independence forces in Taiwan will put Hong Kong's future at the risk of violence," and advised that "if they collaborated... massive chaos might be created, which will compel the central government to impose tough measures to maintain Hong Kong's stability."[34] A few days later the paper said that Occupy Central was a "potentially violent concept" and asked "Why are Benny Tai Yiu-ting, who initiated the Occupy Central campaign and his supporters so bold as to challenge the central government with a bloody proposal over the issue of chief executive election procedures?"[35]
Censorship
Occupy Central protests has been censored in mainland China news media. On nationalist newspaper, Occupy Central is described as an "illicit campaign" which will "jeopardise the global image of Hong Kong" and "erode the authority of the rule of law". The demonstrators are described as "radical opposition forces" and a small minority of extremists who are not capable of mobilising the mass towards revolution.[36] In all state mouthpiece, the general opinion in editorials and commentary is trivialising the scale, significance and the unlikelihood of Occupy Central's success, reassurance of the Communist party's complete power over Hong Kong's affairs and painting a picture of majority of Hong Kong people welcome the 2017 political framework.
On Sunday 28 September, the state-controlled news channel Dragon TV broadcast the images of few thousand people jubilantly waving Chinese flags, participating in a celebration of the upcoming 65th anniversary of China National Day in Tamar Park whilst the coverage on student protest was missing. Interviewees overwhelmingly welcomed China's framework and decision for Hong Kong's 2017 election.
On 28 September, Popular photo-sharing app Instagram was blocked in Mainland China after the photos and videos of the use of tear gas went viral online. Phrases like "Tear Gas", "Hong Kong Students" and "Occupy Central" are censored on the largest search engine in China Baidu, Sina Weibo (China Twitter).[37] Experts reported that he received "hundreds of complaints from people on Twitter saying their Weibo accounts had been either blocked or deleted, most because they talked about the Hong Kong issue."[38] Mobile messaging service providers KakaoTalk also reported disruptions of their service,[39] which protestors circumvented via the peer-to-peer app FireChat.[40][41]
Pro-democracy camp
Civic Party lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki said he saw the ideas as "the last resort" to pressure Beijing and the SAR administration to introduce universal suffrage. "If Beijing breaks its promise of universal suffrage," he added, "we will have no option but to launch such a civil disobedience movement."[42]
Albert Ho Chun-yan of Democratic Party claimed he would resign from his legislator post to grant Hong Kong people the opportunity to vote in a de facto referendum to pave way for the Occupy Central movement, just as the pan-democrats launched the by-election in 2010 for universal suffrage in 2012.[43][unreliable source?]
The pan-democrats' reactions were not uniformly supportive. Wong Yuk-man has expressed fears that the movement would deteriorate,[44] while Wong Yeung-tat was strongly opposed to the movement.[45]
Pro-Beijing camp
Cheung Kwok-kwan, vice-chairman of the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, questioned whether Hong Kong could "afford the negative impact of people staging a rally to occupy and even paralyze Central for a universal suffrage model". He noted that it was "a mainstream idea" in the SAR not to resort to radical means to fight for democracy.[42] Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, a National People's Congress Standing Committee member, feared the occupation would adversely affect Hong Kong's image.[46] National People's Congress Deputy and Executive Councilor Fanny Law Fan Chiu-fan urged the opposition camp to show respect for each other through a rational and pragmatic debate over the issue. She added that there was no need to resort to "extreme action" and claimed that it was not too late to begin consultations next year.[46]
In mid-July, after the civic referendum, the Alliance for Peace and Democracy (APD) initiated a petition against the occupation from 18 July to 17 August.[47] There were criticisms that no identity checks were carried out and that there were no steps to prevent numerous multiple signatories.[47] According to the Wall Street Journal and South China Morning Post, employees faced pressure to sign petition forms that were being circulated by department heads in some companies, including Town Gas, a major public utility.[48][49] The APD claimed in excess of a million signatures were obtained.[50] The organisers said they obtained signatures from many supporters including children, secondary school and university students, the elderly, office staff, celebrities and maids.[47] Official endorsements include chief executive CY Leung and other top Hong Kong officials.[50][51] The APD organised a "march for peace" on 17 August intended to undermine the Occupy movement.[50] It was attended by tens of thousands of marchers. There were widespread claims that organisations had paid people to attend the rally or had given other inducements; the media reported pro-establishment organisations (namely the Federation of Trade Unions) had put on cross-border transport to bring in marchers[52] and that some 20,000 people may have been bussed in from across the border.[53] An editorial in The Standard noted "it's obvious that Beijing spared no effort in maximizing the turnout... Beijing has demonstrated its ability to swiftly mobilize the masses over a relatively short period".[53]
Business and professional groups
Eight major local business groups signed a statement condemning the Occupy Central movement and its founders meeting with Taiwanese independence activists in October 2013. Signatories included Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Chinese General Chamber of Commerce, Federation of Hong Kong Industries, Chinese Manufacturers' Association of Hong Kong and Real Estate Developers Association of Hong Kong . The Law Society of Hong Kong quickly followed.[54]
In June 2014, Executives and brokers including tycoons Li Ka-shing and Peter Woo, and also the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce and the Hong Kong Bahrain Business Association were joined by the Canadian, Indian and Italian chambers of commerce in Hong Kong published an advertisement on newspapers that said the demonstrations may "cripple" businesses.[55]
In late June 2014, Hong Kong's four biggest accounting firms issued a statement condemning the Occupy Central movement arguing that the blockade could have an "adverse and far-reaching impact" on the local legal system, social order and economic development. Employees of the firms who called themselves a "group of Big Four employees who love Hong Kong" took out an advertisement saying their employers' statement "does not represent our stance."[56]
On 29 September 2014, Hong Kong Bar Association released a press statement, strongly denouncing “the excessive and disproportionate use of force by the Hong Kong Police” [57] and the misjudgement of Police’s escalated use of force antagonised and frustrated public feelings.
Declaring that despite the disagreement over political views and allegedly criminal offences, the “repeated, systematic, indiscriminate and excessive use of CS gas” [57] on the unarmed, peaceful and well-conducted demonstrators can not be justified even in names of maintaining public order or prevention of public disorder, such use of force does not abide by law and out of common decency on unarmed civilians.
Others
Leo F. Goodstadt, who served as adviser to Chris Patten, the last British-appointed governor of Hong Kong, and chief adviser for the Central Policy Unit of the colonial government, said that it would be normal for protesters to "paralyze Central" because "it is part of their right to protest" and Hong Kong residents already possessed the right to criticise the government through protests since the colonial era. In response to concerns that the Occupy Central campaign would hurt Hong Kong's status as an international financial center, Goodstadt cited the frequent mass protests in New York and London, two leading international financial centres, as having a minimal effect on the business environment there.[58]
Cardinal Joseph Zen has given his conditional support to the campaign, but stated that he would not participate in the movement for an indefinite period.[59] The incumbent bishop Cardinal John Tong Hon expressed that he did not encourage followers to join the movement, suggesting that both parties should debate universal suffrage through dialogue.[60]
Reverend Ng Chung-man of the Evangelical Free Church of China publicly denounced the Occupy Central plan in his church's newsletter. Ng wrote that while "some Christians are advocating...occupying Central to force the governments to give in to their demands...civil disobedience is acceptable biblically only...when people's rights to religion and to live are under threat". He exhorted believers to pray for those in authority, in an act of "active subordination" to "relatively just governments".[61]
On 27 September, Human rights watchdog Amnesty International swiftly responded to the use of pepper spray in dispersing the peaceful demonstrators on the night before, declaring Hong Kong Police's immediate resolve to use violence and riot police dispersing the crowds violated Hong Kong citizens’ freedom of speech and freedom of assembly of demonstration as constituted in Article 27 of Hong Kong Basic Law, which bound by International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[62] Amnesty International urged the authorities to fulfil their obligation abide by International and domestic law, to release people who had been detained solely on exercising their human rights, and to ensure a peaceful environment for demonstrators.
SAR government
Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying warned that the Occupy Central movement is bound to be neither peaceful nor legal and that actions will be taken to maintain law and order.[31]
Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok warned that the radical elements of Occupy Central may cause serious disturbances like the violent incident during the meeting for funding the northeast New Territories new town in Legislative Council; he reminded the participants to consider their own personal safety and legal liability.[14]
Commissioner of Police Andy Tsang Wai-hung said that any attempt to block major thoroughfares in Central will not be tolerated and warned people to think twice about joining the Occupy Central protest, adding "any collective act to hold up traffic unlawfully" would not be tolerated.[32]
PRC government
Official's response
Wang Guangya, director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, when asked if he believed the Occupy Central plan was beneficial to the city, said "I think Hong Kong compatriots don't want to see Hong Kong being messed up. Hong Kong needs development."[33]
Qiao Xiaoyang, chairman of the National People's Congress Law Committee, was quoted as accusing the "opposition camp" of "fuelling" the Occupy Central plan. Qiao said the plan was only "partly truthful", "complex" and a "risk-everything" proposition.[33]
In October 2013 the party-controlled Global Times objected to Occupy organizers meeting with Democratic Progressive Party figures such as Shih Ming-teh in Taiwan, saying that the DPP, the main opposition party to Taiwan's governing KMT, was "pro-independence." In a piece titled "HK opposition at risk of becoming enemy of the State," Occupy organizers were warned that "collaborating with the pro-independence forces in Taiwan will put Hong Kong's future at the risk of violence," and advised that "if they collaborated... massive chaos might be created, which will compel the central government to impose tough measures to maintain Hong Kong's stability."[34] A few days later the paper said that Occupy Central was a "potentially violent concept" and asked "Why are Benny Tai Yiu-ting, who initiated the Occupy Central campaign and his supporters so bold as to challenge the central government with a bloody proposal over the issue of chief executive election procedures?"[35]
Censorship
Occupy Central protests has been censored in mainland China news media. On nationalist newspaper, Occupy Central is described as an "illicit campaign" which will "jeopardise the global image of Hong Kong" and "erode the authority of the rule of law". The demonstrators are described as "radical opposition forces" and a small minority of extremists who are not capable of mobilising the mass towards revolution.[36] In all state mouthpiece, the general opinion in editorials and commentary is trivialising the scale, significance and the unlikelihood of Occupy Central's success, reassurance of the Communist party's complete power over Hong Kong's affairs and painting a picture of majority of Hong Kong people welcome the 2017 political framework.
On Sunday 28 September, the state-controlled news channel Dragon TV broadcast the images of few thousand people jubilantly waving Chinese flags, participating in a celebration of the upcoming 65th anniversary of China National Day in Tamar Park whilst the coverage on student protest was missing. Interviewees overwhelmingly welcomed China's framework and decision for Hong Kong's 2017 election.
On 28 September, Popular photo-sharing app Instagram was blocked in Mainland China after the photos and videos of the use of tear gas went viral online. Phrases like "Tear Gas", "Hong Kong Students" and "Occupy Central" are censored on the largest search engine in China Baidu, Sina Weibo (China Twitter).[37] Experts reported that he received "hundreds of complaints from people on Twitter saying their Weibo accounts had been either blocked or deleted, most because they talked about the Hong Kong issue."[38] Mobile messaging service providers KakaoTalk also reported disruptions of their service,[39] which protestors circumvented via the peer-to-peer app FireChat.[40][41]
Pro-democracy camp
Civic Party lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki said he saw the ideas as "the last resort" to pressure Beijing and the SAR administration to introduce universal suffrage. "If Beijing breaks its promise of universal suffrage," he added, "we will have no option but to launch such a civil disobedience movement."[42]
Albert Ho Chun-yan of Democratic Party claimed he would resign from his legislator post to grant Hong Kong people the opportunity to vote in a de facto referendum to pave way for the Occupy Central movement, just as the pan-democrats launched the by-election in 2010 for universal suffrage in 2012.[43][unreliable source?]
The pan-democrats' reactions were not uniformly supportive. Wong Yuk-man has expressed fears that the movement would deteriorate,[44] while Wong Yeung-tat was strongly opposed to the movement.[45]
Pro-Beijing camp
Cheung Kwok-kwan, vice-chairman of the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, questioned whether Hong Kong could "afford the negative impact of people staging a rally to occupy and even paralyze Central for a universal suffrage model". He noted that it was "a mainstream idea" in the SAR not to resort to radical means to fight for democracy.[42] Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, a National People's Congress Standing Committee member, feared the occupation would adversely affect Hong Kong's image.[46] National People's Congress Deputy and Executive Councilor Fanny Law Fan Chiu-fan urged the opposition camp to show respect for each other through a rational and pragmatic debate over the issue. She added that there was no need to resort to "extreme action" and claimed that it was not too late to begin consultations next year.[46]
In mid-July, after the civic referendum, the Alliance for Peace and Democracy (APD) initiated a petition against the occupation from 18 July to 17 August.[47] There were criticisms that no identity checks were carried out and that there were no steps to prevent numerous multiple signatories.[47] According to the Wall Street Journal and South China Morning Post, employees faced pressure to sign petition forms that were being circulated by department heads in some companies, including Town Gas, a major public utility.[48][49] The APD claimed in excess of a million signatures were obtained.[50] The organisers said they obtained signatures from many supporters including children, secondary school and university students, the elderly, office staff, celebrities and maids.[47] Official endorsements include chief executive CY Leung and other top Hong Kong officials.[50][51] The APD organised a "march for peace" on 17 August intended to undermine the Occupy movement.[50] It was attended by tens of thousands of marchers. There were widespread claims that organisations had paid people to attend the rally or had given other inducements; the media reported pro-establishment organisations (namely the Federation of Trade Unions) had put on cross-border transport to bring in marchers[52] and that some 20,000 people may have been bussed in from across the border.[53] An editorial in The Standard noted "it's obvious that Beijing spared no effort in maximizing the turnout... Beijing has demonstrated its ability to swiftly mobilize the masses over a relatively short period".[53]
Business and professional groups
Eight major local business groups signed a statement condemning the Occupy Central movement and its founders meeting with Taiwanese independence activists in October 2013. Signatories included Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Chinese General Chamber of Commerce, Federation of Hong Kong Industries, Chinese Manufacturers' Association of Hong Kong and Real Estate Developers Association of Hong Kong . The Law Society of Hong Kong quickly followed.[54]
In June 2014, Executives and brokers including tycoons Li Ka-shing and Peter Woo, and also the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce and the Hong Kong Bahrain Business Association were joined by the Canadian, Indian and Italian chambers of commerce in Hong Kong published an advertisement on newspapers that said the demonstrations may "cripple" businesses.[55]
In late June 2014, Hong Kong's four biggest accounting firms issued a statement condemning the Occupy Central movement arguing that the blockade could have an "adverse and far-reaching impact" on the local legal system, social order and economic development. Employees of the firms who called themselves a "group of Big Four employees who love Hong Kong" took out an advertisement saying their employers' statement "does not represent our stance."[56]
On 29 September 2014, Hong Kong Bar Association released a press statement, strongly denouncing “the excessive and disproportionate use of force by the Hong Kong Police” [57] and the misjudgement of Police’s escalated use of force antagonised and frustrated public feelings.
Declaring that despite the disagreement over political views and allegedly criminal offences, the “repeated, systematic, indiscriminate and excessive use of CS gas” [57] on the unarmed, peaceful and well-conducted demonstrators can not be justified even in names of maintaining public order or prevention of public disorder, such use of force does not abide by law and out of common decency on unarmed civilians.
Others
Leo F. Goodstadt, who served as adviser to Chris Patten, the last British-appointed governor of Hong Kong, and chief adviser for the Central Policy Unit of the colonial government, said that it would be normal for protesters to "paralyze Central" because "it is part of their right to protest" and Hong Kong residents already possessed the right to criticise the government through protests since the colonial era. In response to concerns that the Occupy Central campaign would hurt Hong Kong's status as an international financial center, Goodstadt cited the frequent mass protests in New York and London, two leading international financial centres, as having a minimal effect on the business environment there.[58]
Cardinal Joseph Zen has given his conditional support to the campaign, but stated that he would not participate in the movement for an indefinite period.[59] The incumbent bishop Cardinal John Tong Hon expressed that he did not encourage followers to join the movement, suggesting that both parties should debate universal suffrage through dialogue.[60]
Reverend Ng Chung-man of the Evangelical Free Church of China publicly denounced the Occupy Central plan in his church's newsletter. Ng wrote that while "some Christians are advocating...occupying Central to force the governments to give in to their demands...civil disobedience is acceptable biblically only...when people's rights to religion and to live are under threat". He exhorted believers to pray for those in authority, in an act of "active subordination" to "relatively just governments".[61]
On 27 September, Human rights watchdog Amnesty International swiftly responded to the use of pepper spray in dispersing the peaceful demonstrators on the night before, declaring Hong Kong Police's immediate resolve to use violence and riot police dispersing the crowds violated Hong Kong citizens’ freedom of speech and freedom of assembly of demonstration as constituted in Article 27 of Hong Kong Basic Law, which bound by International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[62] Amnesty International urged the authorities to fulfil their obligation abide by International and domestic law, to release people who had been detained solely on exercising their human rights, and to ensure a peaceful environment for demonstrators.
Legalit
The OCLP has pointed out the participants in Occupy Central could be guilty of "obstructing, inconveniencing or endangering a person or vehicle in a public place" under the Summary Offenses Ordinance. Also under the Public Order Ordinance, Occupy Central could be considered as unlawful assembly, i.e., "when three or more people assemble... to cause any person reasonably to fear that the persons so assembled will commit a breach of the peace or will by such conduct provoke other persons to commit a breach of the peace, they are an unlawful assembly." The Hong Kong Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok stated that the government will "take robust action to uphold the rule of law and maintain safety and order."[14]
The OCLP has pointed out the participants in Occupy Central could be guilty of "obstructing, inconveniencing or endangering a person or vehicle in a public place" under the Summary Offenses Ordinance. Also under the Public Order Ordinance, Occupy Central could be considered as unlawful assembly, i.e., "when three or more people assemble... to cause any person reasonably to fear that the persons so assembled will commit a breach of the peace or will by such conduct provoke other persons to commit a breach of the peace, they are an unlawful assembly." The Hong Kong Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok stated that the government will "take robust action to uphold the rule of law and maintain safety and order."[14]
Civic referendum
The Occupy Central movement commissioned the University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme (HKUPOP) to run a poll on three proposals – all of which involve allowing citizens to directly nominate candidates – to present to the Beijing government. It ran from 20 to 29 June 2014.[26] A total of 792,808 people, equivalent to a fifth of the registered electorate, took part in the poll by either voting online or going to designated polling stations,.[27] The two referendum questions were "For CE Election 2017, I support OCLP to submit this proposal to the Government: 1. Alliance for True Democracy Proposal, 2. People Power Proposal, 3. Students Proposal, or Abstention" and "If the government proposal cannot satisfy international standards allowing genuine choices by electors, LegCo should veto it, my stance is: LegCo should veto, LegCo should not veto, or abstain" respectively.
The proposal tabled by the Alliance for True Democracy, a group comprising 26 of the 27 pan-democratic lawmakers, won the unofficial "referendum" by securing 331,427 votes, or 42.1 per cent of the 787,767 valid ballots. A joint blueprint put forward by Scholarism and the Hong Kong Federation of Students came second with 302,567 votes (38.4 per cent), followed by a People Power's proposal, which clinched 81,588 votes (10.4 per cent).[28][29] All three call for the public to be allowed to nominate candidates for the 2017 chief executive election, an idea repeatedly dismissed by Beijing as inconsistent with the Basic Law. However, the Alliance's "three track" proposal would allow the public, the nominating committee, as well as political parties, to put forward candidates. Under their plan, candidates can be nominated by 35,000 registered voters or by a party which secured at least five per cent of the vote in the last Legco election. It did not specify on the formation of the nominating committee, only stating that it should be "as democratic as it can be". The two other proposals would only allow the public and a nominating committee to put forward candidates.[29] 691,972 voters (87.8 per cent) agreed that the Legislative Council should veto any reform proposal put forward by the government if it failed to meet international standards, compared with 7.5 per cent who disagreed.[29]
The unofficial "referendum" infuriated Beijing and prompted a flurry of vitriolic editorials, preparatory police exercises and cyber-attacks. As the poll opened, it was quickly hit by what one US-based cyber-security firm called the "most sophisticated onslaught ever seen". "[The attackers] continue to use different strategies over time," Matthew Prince, the chief executive of CloudFlare, a firm that helped defend against the attack, told the South China Morning Post. "It is pretty unique and sophisticated." The firm could not identify the origin of the attack.[26] Mainland officials and newspapers have called the poll "illegal" while many have condemned the Occupy Central, claiming it is motivated by foreign "anti-China forces" and will damage Hong Kong's standing as a financial capital.[26] On Tuesday, Zhang Junsheng, a former deputy director of Xinhua News Agency in Hong Kong, called the poll "meaningless". The state-run Global Times mocked the referendum as an "illegal farce" and "a joke". The territory's chief executive, Leung Chun-Ying, said: "Nobody should place Hong Kong people in confrontation with mainland Chinese citizens." Mainland censors have meanwhile scrubbed social media sites clean of references to Occupy Central.[26]
Before the referendum, the State Council issued a white paper claiming "comprehensive jurisdiction" over the territory.[30] "The high degree of autonomy of the HKSAR [Hong Kong Special Administrative Region] is not full autonomy, nor a decentralised power," it said. "It is the power to run local affairs as authorised by the central leadership." Michael DeGolyer, director of the transition project at Hong Kong Baptist University, said: "It's very clear from surveys that the vast majority of the people voting in this referendum are doing it as a reaction to this white paper – particularly because they see it as threatening the rule of law ... That's not negotiating on the one country two systems principle, that's demolishing it."[26]
The Occupy Central movement commissioned the University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme (HKUPOP) to run a poll on three proposals – all of which involve allowing citizens to directly nominate candidates – to present to the Beijing government. It ran from 20 to 29 June 2014.[26] A total of 792,808 people, equivalent to a fifth of the registered electorate, took part in the poll by either voting online or going to designated polling stations,.[27] The two referendum questions were "For CE Election 2017, I support OCLP to submit this proposal to the Government: 1. Alliance for True Democracy Proposal, 2. People Power Proposal, 3. Students Proposal, or Abstention" and "If the government proposal cannot satisfy international standards allowing genuine choices by electors, LegCo should veto it, my stance is: LegCo should veto, LegCo should not veto, or abstain" respectively.
The proposal tabled by the Alliance for True Democracy, a group comprising 26 of the 27 pan-democratic lawmakers, won the unofficial "referendum" by securing 331,427 votes, or 42.1 per cent of the 787,767 valid ballots. A joint blueprint put forward by Scholarism and the Hong Kong Federation of Students came second with 302,567 votes (38.4 per cent), followed by a People Power's proposal, which clinched 81,588 votes (10.4 per cent).[28][29] All three call for the public to be allowed to nominate candidates for the 2017 chief executive election, an idea repeatedly dismissed by Beijing as inconsistent with the Basic Law. However, the Alliance's "three track" proposal would allow the public, the nominating committee, as well as political parties, to put forward candidates. Under their plan, candidates can be nominated by 35,000 registered voters or by a party which secured at least five per cent of the vote in the last Legco election. It did not specify on the formation of the nominating committee, only stating that it should be "as democratic as it can be". The two other proposals would only allow the public and a nominating committee to put forward candidates.[29] 691,972 voters (87.8 per cent) agreed that the Legislative Council should veto any reform proposal put forward by the government if it failed to meet international standards, compared with 7.5 per cent who disagreed.[29]
The unofficial "referendum" infuriated Beijing and prompted a flurry of vitriolic editorials, preparatory police exercises and cyber-attacks. As the poll opened, it was quickly hit by what one US-based cyber-security firm called the "most sophisticated onslaught ever seen". "[The attackers] continue to use different strategies over time," Matthew Prince, the chief executive of CloudFlare, a firm that helped defend against the attack, told the South China Morning Post. "It is pretty unique and sophisticated." The firm could not identify the origin of the attack.[26] Mainland officials and newspapers have called the poll "illegal" while many have condemned the Occupy Central, claiming it is motivated by foreign "anti-China forces" and will damage Hong Kong's standing as a financial capital.[26] On Tuesday, Zhang Junsheng, a former deputy director of Xinhua News Agency in Hong Kong, called the poll "meaningless". The state-run Global Times mocked the referendum as an "illegal farce" and "a joke". The territory's chief executive, Leung Chun-Ying, said: "Nobody should place Hong Kong people in confrontation with mainland Chinese citizens." Mainland censors have meanwhile scrubbed social media sites clean of references to Occupy Central.[26]
Before the referendum, the State Council issued a white paper claiming "comprehensive jurisdiction" over the territory.[30] "The high degree of autonomy of the HKSAR [Hong Kong Special Administrative Region] is not full autonomy, nor a decentralised power," it said. "It is the power to run local affairs as authorised by the central leadership." Michael DeGolyer, director of the transition project at Hong Kong Baptist University, said: "It's very clear from surveys that the vast majority of the people voting in this referendum are doing it as a reaction to this white paper – particularly because they see it as threatening the rule of law ... That's not negotiating on the one country two systems principle, that's demolishing it."[26]
Deliberation
See also: 2014 Hong Kong electoral reform
The three sessions of deliberation day were held on 9 June 2013, 9 March 2014, and 6 May 2014 respectively.
On 5 February 2014, the Democratic Party swore to take part in the Occupy Central campaign at Statue Square despite the risk of being jailed. Some more radical democrats, mostly People Power disrupted the oath-taking ceremony. The 20-member group of pan-democratic lawmakers condemned the radicals at a joint press conference afterwards.[20]
On the third deliberation day, the Occupy Central participants voted on electoral reform proposals put forward by different organisations for the civil referendum. A total of 2,508 votes were cast in the poll, all three selected proposals contain the concept of civil nomination, which the mainland China officials had said did not comply with the Basic Law. The proposal by student groups Scholarism and Hong Kong Federation of Students which allows for public nomination, received 1,124 votes – 45 percent of the vote. People Power's proposal came in second with 685 votes, while that from the three-track proposal by Alliance for True Democracy consisting of 27 pan-democracy lawmakers got 445 votes. The proposal from Hong Kong 2020 received 43 votes, while the civil recommendation proposed by 18 academics got 74 votes.[21]
The three proposals chosen by the members of Occupy Central deliberation panel were considered to be more radical. The League of Social Democrats and People Power lawmakers, despite being part of the Alliance for True Democracy, urged their supporters to vote against the alliance's proposals.[22] More moderate pan-democrats that avoided the notion of civic nomination were effectively squeezed out.[23][24] Civic Party lawmaker Ronny Tong Ka-wah, who saw his moderate plan rejected in a poll believed "the Occupy Central movement has been hijacked by radicals". He believed that the poll results would make it harder to find a reform package Beijing would agree to and that wins over the five or so pan-democrats it will need for a two-thirds majority in LegCo. He also believed Occupy's plan to block streets in Central would be likely to go ahead.[22] This, and the decision of People Power and the League of Social Democrats to go back on pledges to support the alliance's proposals, and of People Power to make its own proposal that included civil nomination, pointed to a split in pan democrat ranks.[23][25]
See also: 2014 Hong Kong electoral reform
The three sessions of deliberation day were held on 9 June 2013, 9 March 2014, and 6 May 2014 respectively.
On 5 February 2014, the Democratic Party swore to take part in the Occupy Central campaign at Statue Square despite the risk of being jailed. Some more radical democrats, mostly People Power disrupted the oath-taking ceremony. The 20-member group of pan-democratic lawmakers condemned the radicals at a joint press conference afterwards.[20]
On the third deliberation day, the Occupy Central participants voted on electoral reform proposals put forward by different organisations for the civil referendum. A total of 2,508 votes were cast in the poll, all three selected proposals contain the concept of civil nomination, which the mainland China officials had said did not comply with the Basic Law. The proposal by student groups Scholarism and Hong Kong Federation of Students which allows for public nomination, received 1,124 votes – 45 percent of the vote. People Power's proposal came in second with 685 votes, while that from the three-track proposal by Alliance for True Democracy consisting of 27 pan-democracy lawmakers got 445 votes. The proposal from Hong Kong 2020 received 43 votes, while the civil recommendation proposed by 18 academics got 74 votes.[21]
The three proposals chosen by the members of Occupy Central deliberation panel were considered to be more radical. The League of Social Democrats and People Power lawmakers, despite being part of the Alliance for True Democracy, urged their supporters to vote against the alliance's proposals.[22] More moderate pan-democrats that avoided the notion of civic nomination were effectively squeezed out.[23][24] Civic Party lawmaker Ronny Tong Ka-wah, who saw his moderate plan rejected in a poll believed "the Occupy Central movement has been hijacked by radicals". He believed that the poll results would make it harder to find a reform package Beijing would agree to and that wins over the five or so pan-democrats it will need for a two-thirds majority in LegCo. He also believed Occupy's plan to block streets in Central would be likely to go ahead.[22] This, and the decision of People Power and the League of Social Democrats to go back on pledges to support the alliance's proposals, and of People Power to make its own proposal that included civil nomination, pointed to a split in pan democrat ranks.[23][25]
Protestors:
Occupy Central initially organised and promoted by Occupy Central with Love and Peace, HKFS and Scholarism. Participants are usually groups of concerned citizens and students who are engaging in discussion of political reforms, democratic progress and social issues. On 27 - 28 September, the excessive use of violence in dispersion of demonstrators by Hong Kong Police has antagonised and frustrated general public feelings, and yet student’s spirits appeared to inspire more citizens rally under the same banner. By Monday morning, 29 September, Admiralty and Central, the artery of Hong Kong’s financial centre is paralysed by tens of thousands of protesters, by the same evening, the movement spread out to other major thoroughfares of Hong Kong including Mong Kok, Causeway Bay.[15]
Organisation
Although the demonstrators were gathered by HKFS and Scholarism, the unprecedented scale of demonstrators and multiple congregation locations soon changed the Occupy Central movement into a non-centralised, self-managed horizontal structure. News, distribution of resources and tactics exchange is viral on Facebook, Twitter and Whatsapp, largely urged the protests remained calm, not to be incited or provoked and gave out instruction on handling tear gas and pepper spray.
Despite several nationalist newspaper described protesters as radical activists and extremists,[16] global news media generally have an affirmative altitude of protester’s discipline and organisation. The Independent said Occupy Central “could be the most polite demonstration ever”.[17] Protesters volunteered in distributing food and water, picking up rubbish and cigarette butts, recycling and sorting plastic bottles and used raincoats. According to BBC news, "many agree that the world hasn't seen organised and tidy protests quite like this before.”[18] In size of such protest, no damage of civilian properties, looting or vandalism has hitherto filed.
Apart from the surprising self-discipline and well-conducted civil behaviours, apology notes can be seen on the barricades for causing inconvenience. A widely reported apology note is found on the windshield of a vandalised police van, written “Sorry I don’t who did this but we are not anarchists - We want democracy.”[19]
Occupy Central initially organised and promoted by Occupy Central with Love and Peace, HKFS and Scholarism. Participants are usually groups of concerned citizens and students who are engaging in discussion of political reforms, democratic progress and social issues. On 27 - 28 September, the excessive use of violence in dispersion of demonstrators by Hong Kong Police has antagonised and frustrated general public feelings, and yet student’s spirits appeared to inspire more citizens rally under the same banner. By Monday morning, 29 September, Admiralty and Central, the artery of Hong Kong’s financial centre is paralysed by tens of thousands of protesters, by the same evening, the movement spread out to other major thoroughfares of Hong Kong including Mong Kok, Causeway Bay.[15]
Organisation
Although the demonstrators were gathered by HKFS and Scholarism, the unprecedented scale of demonstrators and multiple congregation locations soon changed the Occupy Central movement into a non-centralised, self-managed horizontal structure. News, distribution of resources and tactics exchange is viral on Facebook, Twitter and Whatsapp, largely urged the protests remained calm, not to be incited or provoked and gave out instruction on handling tear gas and pepper spray.
Despite several nationalist newspaper described protesters as radical activists and extremists,[16] global news media generally have an affirmative altitude of protester’s discipline and organisation. The Independent said Occupy Central “could be the most polite demonstration ever”.[17] Protesters volunteered in distributing food and water, picking up rubbish and cigarette butts, recycling and sorting plastic bottles and used raincoats. According to BBC news, "many agree that the world hasn't seen organised and tidy protests quite like this before.”[18] In size of such protest, no damage of civilian properties, looting or vandalism has hitherto filed.
Apart from the surprising self-discipline and well-conducted civil behaviours, apology notes can be seen on the barricades for causing inconvenience. A widely reported apology note is found on the windshield of a vandalised police van, written “Sorry I don’t who did this but we are not anarchists - We want democracy.”[19]
It's not even about them calling themselves a "State of...", the western media/politics officially named them a 'State'.
ISIS = Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
ISIS = Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
And the same media/politics call Bitcoin "the preferred currency of drug dealers". Does them saying so make it true? Honestly, if you get your information from sources like the western media, you're going to be so full of shit that informed people won't bother wasting their time on you, a hopeless case.
Anyway - I'm sorry to derail from the topic, Hong Kong protests.
You specifically asked Lethn where did he get the information from (ISIS being a state), so I kindly pointed out that this information is presented EVERYWHERE in the media, it's encoded in the fucking name: ISIS.
Objectives:
On 16 January 2013, Benny Tai, Associate Professor at the University of Hong Kong, published an article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal in which he proposed an act of civil disobedience carried out in the Central, the business and financial centre of Hong Kong, to put pressure on the government if its universal suffrage proposals proved to be "fake" democracy.[12]
The OCLP states that it would campaign for universal suffrage through dialogue, deliberation, civil referendum and civil disobedience (Occupy Central);[13] it also demands that the government proposal should satisfy the "international standards" in relation to universal suffrage, i.e. equal number of vote, equal weight for each vote and no unreasonable restrictions on the right to stand for election, and the final proposal for the electoral reform to be decided by means of democratic process. OCLP claims that any civil disobedience would be non-violent[13] though it cannot guarantee Occupy Central will be peaceful.[14]
On 16 January 2013, Benny Tai, Associate Professor at the University of Hong Kong, published an article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal in which he proposed an act of civil disobedience carried out in the Central, the business and financial centre of Hong Kong, to put pressure on the government if its universal suffrage proposals proved to be "fake" democracy.[12]
The OCLP states that it would campaign for universal suffrage through dialogue, deliberation, civil referendum and civil disobedience (Occupy Central);[13] it also demands that the government proposal should satisfy the "international standards" in relation to universal suffrage, i.e. equal number of vote, equal weight for each vote and no unreasonable restrictions on the right to stand for election, and the final proposal for the electoral reform to be decided by means of democratic process. OCLP claims that any civil disobedience would be non-violent[13] though it cannot guarantee Occupy Central will be peaceful.[14]
Background:
The pro-democracy camp petitioned the Hong Kong government and Beijing for the full implementation of universal suffrage as indicated in the Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45, which delineates the requirements for electing the chief executive.[5] Members also cited[citation needed]language in Annex I in support of universal suffrage:
“ "The chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government.[6]" ”
“ "The method for selecting the chief executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.[6]" ”
In December 2007, the National People's Congress Law Committee officially ruled on the issue of universal suffrage in Hong Kong:[7]
“ that the election of the fifth chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2017 may be implemented by the method of universal suffrage; that after the chief executive is selected by universal suffrage, the election of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may be implemented by the method of electing all the members by universal suffrage... ”
The Asia Times wrote in 2008 that both proposals for the Legislative Council (LegCo) and for the chief executive were "hedged in with so many ifs and buts that there is no guarantee of Hong Kong getting anything at all... "[8]
CY Leung, the incumbent chief executive of Hong Kong, was to submit the local government's recommendation to Beijing on how to proceed with democratisation in the territory following consultations. As of July 2014 a round of consultations ended in early 2014, and another round of consultations was to take place in the second half.[9] Chinese political leaders have since repeatedly declared that the chief executive, which is to be elected by universal suffrage in 2017, "must conform to the standard of loving the country and loving Hong Kong".[10] To that end, the government of Hong Kong, strongly backed by the PRC government, reiterated that CE nominees be screened by a "broadly representative nominating committee", and that there was no provision for civic nominations.[10] The position was reaffirmed in a State Council white paper from June 2014.[11]
The pro-democracy camp petitioned the Hong Kong government and Beijing for the full implementation of universal suffrage as indicated in the Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45, which delineates the requirements for electing the chief executive.[5] Members also cited[citation needed]language in Annex I in support of universal suffrage:
“ "The chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government.[6]" ”
“ "The method for selecting the chief executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.[6]" ”
In December 2007, the National People's Congress Law Committee officially ruled on the issue of universal suffrage in Hong Kong:[7]
“ that the election of the fifth chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2017 may be implemented by the method of universal suffrage; that after the chief executive is selected by universal suffrage, the election of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may be implemented by the method of electing all the members by universal suffrage... ”
The Asia Times wrote in 2008 that both proposals for the Legislative Council (LegCo) and for the chief executive were "hedged in with so many ifs and buts that there is no guarantee of Hong Kong getting anything at all... "[8]
CY Leung, the incumbent chief executive of Hong Kong, was to submit the local government's recommendation to Beijing on how to proceed with democratisation in the territory following consultations. As of July 2014 a round of consultations ended in early 2014, and another round of consultations was to take place in the second half.[9] Chinese political leaders have since repeatedly declared that the chief executive, which is to be elected by universal suffrage in 2017, "must conform to the standard of loving the country and loving Hong Kong".[10] To that end, the government of Hong Kong, strongly backed by the PRC government, reiterated that CE nominees be screened by a "broadly representative nominating committee", and that there was no provision for civic nominations.[10] The position was reaffirmed in a State Council white paper from June 2014.[11]
Occupy Central, (和平佔中 or just 佔中 in media reports) is a civil disobedience campaign initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong, the founder of Occupy Central with Love and Peace (organisation) to pressurise the PRC Government into granting universal suffrage and civil nomination in Hong Kong’s electoral reform in 2017 as promised according to the Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45. The campaign was originally planned to launch on 1 October 2014, National Day of the People's Republic of China to respond Beijing's decision on the framework of Hong Kong electoral reform in 2017.[2]
However, Occupy Central with Love and Peace announced the commencement of Occupy Central earlier on 28 September 2014 in the midst of the heated week-long class boycott[3] organised by Hong Kong Federation of Students(referred as HKFS below) and Scholarism to encourage secondary students’ engagement in political and social affair discussion. The student strikes developed into a wave of strikes in other industries, demonstration of police’s excessive use of force, civil disobedience and occupy movement in an unprecedented scale that led by Hong Kong Federation of Students, Scholarism, Occupy Central and Pan-democratic parties. The method of Hong Kong Police in dispersing demonstrators received wide condemnation and criticism.
Occupy Central gradually developed into a non-centralised, self-generative occupy movement spreading in different area of Hong Kong that largely governed by citizen’s voluntary helps and self-discipline.[4]
resource> wiki
However, Occupy Central with Love and Peace announced the commencement of Occupy Central earlier on 28 September 2014 in the midst of the heated week-long class boycott[3] organised by Hong Kong Federation of Students(referred as HKFS below) and Scholarism to encourage secondary students’ engagement in political and social affair discussion. The student strikes developed into a wave of strikes in other industries, demonstration of police’s excessive use of force, civil disobedience and occupy movement in an unprecedented scale that led by Hong Kong Federation of Students, Scholarism, Occupy Central and Pan-democratic parties. The method of Hong Kong Police in dispersing demonstrators received wide condemnation and criticism.
Occupy Central gradually developed into a non-centralised, self-generative occupy movement spreading in different area of Hong Kong that largely governed by citizen’s voluntary helps and self-discipline.[4]
resource> wiki
It's not even about them calling themselves a "State of...", the western media/politics officially named them a 'State'.
ISIS = Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
ISIS = Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
And the same media/politics call Bitcoin "the preferred currency of drug dealers". Does them saying so make it true? Honestly, if you get your information from sources like the western media, you're going to be so full of shit that informed people won't bother wasting their time on you, a hopeless case.
Anyway - I'm sorry to derail from the topic, Hong Kong protests.
Jump to: