You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Reviewing the news from today, I totally understand the protesters' anger, and thoroughly sympathesize with them every step of the way. On the other hand, other than the graffiti letters of "黨鐵" (the Party's railway), I found the destructive vandalism they have done on MTR facilities today to be unwise. The vandalism does not help further the cause, and it risks losing supporters, esp on the international front.
Reviewing the news from today, I totally understand the protesters' anger, and thoroughly sympathesize with them every step of the way. On the other hand, other than the graffiti letters of "黨鐵" (the Party's railway), I found the destructive vandalism they have done on MTR facilities today to be unwise. The vandalism does not help further the cause, and it risks losing supporters, esp on the international front.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Budong
MTR is a corporation 75% owned by the HKSAR
Thanks to those who bought up the MTR, didn't know they were targeting MTR cause they are owned by HKSAR.
If your partial justification (aside form locking doors during disruptions for whatever reasons) is because they to they are trying to indirectly targeting gov't owned properties.... So... Vandalism is ok then?
Facebook link below with people destroying MTR stations.
Honestly can't see these people dressed in black being cops. They were not fighting the police. It's 100% vandalism and should be arrested.
You can dislike HKSAR, or china, or any property owned by HKSAR, go barricade the HQ of MTR at Kownloon Bay and plea your case, don't disrupt people who wants to take the freaking MTR to go to work / airport.
This is the true face of these rioters. Take off their masks they instantly become whimpering cowards. Just like any wannabe tough guy.
In case you didn't realize it yet, this "Point Media" that you are referencing is a pro-China thing that just suddenly cropped up out of nowhere. Furthermore, recently when the protesters went to the airport where they caught a Mainland Gung On (public security police), this "Point Media" took the words from Richard Scotford, a Caucasian reporter, and twisted it out of context so that it sounded like Scotford was condemning the protesters when Scotford is really quite pro-protesters.
I've said on different occassions quite a few times before -- I am totally fine with people having different viewpoints or political preferences. However, any arguments should always be rooted in factually truthful stuff. When you are quoting or otherwise referencing a source whose credibility is obviously questionable, it detracts from your argument, paints you as a non-credible source, and renders your remarks worthless.
In case you didn't realize it yet, this "Point Media" that you are referencing is a pro-China thing that just suddenly cropped up out of nowhere. Furthermore, recently when the protesters went to the airport where they caught a Mainland Gung On (public security police), this "Point Media" took the words from Richard Scotford, a Caucasian reporter, and twisted it out of context so that it sounded like Scotford was condemning the protesters when Scotford is really quite pro-protesters.
I've said on different occassions quite a few times before -- I am totally fine with people having different viewpoints or political preferences. However, any arguments should always be rooted in factually truthful stuff. When you are quoting or otherwise referencing a source whose credibility is obviously questionable, it detracts from your argument, paints you as a non-credible source, and renders your remarks worthless.
Be that as it may, of your opinion on the media source, it doesn't detract from the reality that you see in this footage does it?
I'm just stating the obvious objective facts of what you can clearly see in this video.
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,668
Thanked 10,388 Times in 3,914 Posts
Failed 1,390 Times in 625 Posts
Taiwanese news showed protesters beating two senior commuters, trying to go thru the turnstyles at the MTR, the news said the protesters claimed the commuters were taking photos of them with their phones... Can't find an article, but I'm assuming it happened yesterday, anyone see this?
Be that as it may, of your opinion on the media source, it doesn't detract from the reality that you see in this footage does it?
I'm just stating the obvious objective facts of what you can clearly see in this video.
It is not my opinion that this "Point Media" is a pro-China "news" source -- it is a fact that it is pro-China.
I hope you've heard / seen this age old saying:
I don't think there is very much to glean from the video you've posted, other than that it is a from a biased media that is possibly a front for the Communist Chinese fake news propaganda machine. So a young protester got arrested. The Chinese caption that reads "can't breath once you take the face mask off" is nothing more than a deragatory phrase intended to mock the protesters. I fail to see how the arrested protester is a wimpering coward or tough guy wanna be.
Taiwanese news showed protesters beating two senior commuters, trying to go thru the turnstyles at the MTR, the news said the protesters claimed the commuters were taking photos of them with their phones... Can't find an article, but I'm assuming it happened yesterday, anyone see this?
I think you're talking about this footage occurs on the 2:19 mark:
- In at least 2 videos that I saw today, petrol bombs were thrown by people dressing up protesters (clad in black and full protester protective gear). However, an interesting detail on the petrol bomb thrower is they were also wearing a red or blue blinking beacon. Such a detail is seen on the HK police officers quite commonly throughout the protests so far, be it a uniformed officer, a riot police, or on the disguised police who had previously arrested protesters and beated on them. Generally speaking, this type of blinking beacon is not worn by protesters because they do not want to stand out, or have means of getting themselves noticed or otherwise identified. There have already been previous accusations of police going undercover, stiring up sentiments and shxt, and even vandalizing to rile up the protesters. The police have always denied this, but given how often the police have lied to the public -- they are basically lying everyday at their daily afternoon press conference now -- I would not believe a word they say, or take what they say at face value anymore. I think there is strong evidence to suggest that the incendiary bombs might be thrown by undercover officers trying to rile up the protesters, so that the police can justify rolling in on hard crackdown, or to provide the HKSAR CEO to declare a state of emergency.
- In the Prince Edward station incident, the blue-sided elderly dude had struck / hit a reporter in the midst of the on-going quibble. This was the trigger point that pissed off the protesters, and the clashing escalated from there.
- A recurring theme that I noticed today, and had disgused me to no ends is how the police have repeatedly denied first aiders / paramedics access to treat the injured. It doesn't matter whether the medical personnel is a volunteer first aider, St John Ambulance staff, or an actual full fledge paramedic. All of them have been denied access to treat the injured, or at least make them wait for an unacceptably long time -- any extra and unnecessary delays are unacceptable when it comes to medical assistance. This really disgused me. I'd like to see how those crooked cops would feel themselves if they or their loved ones are denied medical access even though it is available.
- The police association spokesperson has only just made a public request a day or two ago, asking people to not bully kids from police families. And then today, all kinds of different cops are beating on young protesters, including some as young as 12. If this is not hypocritical or disgusting, I don't know what is.
This is the key piece of info people are unaware of/ignoring. This senior was physically attacking reporter(s) and that set people off. The comments from the video show protesters getting mad and saying "if you want to hit someone, hit me. Not the press." And that's how things got out of hand. The way this story has been told is key because leaving out certain details sways the opinion of what actually happened. Believe what you want but I would recommend thorough research into the incident.
On another note, I saw a quote on FB that wasn't related to the HK situation but quite valid:
If the situation were so hopeless, the propaganda would be unnecessary.
I didn't see any videos of "protesters beating on seniors". I saw a video of protesters arguing with some older HKers, and then it got physical when an old guy started attacking press members with a fucking hammer, and then got broken up when protesters stepped in.
You want so bad to hate protesters... Sometimes I think you pull through here and there, but man you are trying hard. I don't know why.. There are clear "right and wrong" sides here, regardless of tactics being used by individuals on the "right" side.
Be that as it may, of your opinion on the media source, it doesn't detract from the reality that you see in this footage does it?
I'm just stating the obvious objective facts of what you can clearly see in this video.
But you wrote the BS of "true face of rioters", "Whimpy coward" all from ONE cropped clip from a very pro-china channel (the first clue already is the CCP style font face).
Protestors and triads alike, they act wimpy and scared when they are faced with reporters because they fear public humiliation more than anything else.
-Lam said she would quit if she had the choice to do so. But can't
-China is playing the long-game. No plan to send PLA
-Complains how this whole thing has ruined her daily life, and how she can't even go to the hair salon or go shopping (FFS).
-She has little options/control on whats going to happen, as it is being dictated by the national party. This confirms she's just a puppet as most people have already known all along.
And.... cue the wumaos and pro-china people saying:
1. Reuters is a foreign spy agency trying to ruin China and Hong Kong
2. Fake news
3. China is going to send PLA and kill all the protestors
I don't think there is very much to glean from the video you've posted, other than that it is a from a biased media that is possibly a front for the Communist Chinese fake news propaganda machine. So a young protester got arrested. The Chinese caption that reads "can't breath once you take the face mask off" is nothing more than a deragatory phrase intended to mock the protesters. I fail to see how the arrested protester is a wimpering coward or tough guy wanna be.
Here you go enough said. Hard to dispute this evidence, regardless of your opinion of the media source, but at least in this video, they got it right.
If this isn't from tough guy protestor ( 7seconds and particularly 24-30 seconds gesturing and challenging commuters ) to coward ( 1 min 22-25 seconds) then your just willfully blind regardless of what opinions you have of the media source.
Just to tie off the " thats not him" argument the camo pattern on the back of the shirt is the same along with the top outfit.
Here you go enough said. Hard to dispute this evidence, regardless of your opinion of the media source, but at least in this video, they got it right.
If this isn't from tough guy protestor ( 7seconds and particularly 24-30 seconds gesturing and challenging commuters ) to coward ( 1 min 22-25 seconds) then your just willfully blind regardless of what opinions you have of the media source.
Just to tie off the " thats not him" argument the camo pattern on the back of the shirt is the same along with the top outfit. https://youtu.be/Lq_iY6p7K-o
you are so perplexed and focused on this particular protestor lol. There's no doubt there are sour grapes within the crowd of protestors who will act like this, but your original comment is the common narrative of pro-china groups who use these singular events and then justify "These are what ALL the protestors are like".
And again, what is the ultimate point of stitching all these videos to proof something that is quite obvious? You can't expect 100% of the protestors to be good boy/girls who just stand around and chant.... If you visit the pro-dem groups on facebook/telegram, most are condoning these actions at the airport/stations.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
