1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Trump presidency

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by datalol-jack, 21 Nov 2016.

  1. Jono8

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 May 2007

    Posts: 31,848

    Location: Surrey

    This.

    He has had his opportunity for free speech and twitter has had theirs.

    Although even that is irrelevant , because free speech does NOT mean a private company has to allow you to say what you want on their servers.

    Its no surprise that he is one of the money that doesn't understand what "free speech" even is.
     
  2. Murphy

    Mobster

    Joined: 16 Sep 2018

    Posts: 4,792

    Didn't we have to do that? I thought there was some agreement with a 100 year timeframe or something like that, IDK though as I'm to lazy to go searching. :)
     
  3. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: 19 May 2004

    Posts: 19,523

    Location: Nordfriesland, Germany

    Yeah, it was a 99 year lease. Mind you, most of the world expected the UK to keep it, but that was back when the British commitment to truth and the Rule of Law was still intact.
     
  4. Stretch

    Capodecina

    Joined: 14 Feb 2004

    Posts: 12,241

    Location: Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge

    The lease was only on Kowloon. Hong Kong island was a permanent UK overseas possession.

    Some argue it would have been dificault to maintain the islands without Kowloon, but the truth was we gave it back to buy favour with the Chinese. We didn’t get much in return.
     
  5. mid_gen

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 20 Dec 2004

    Posts: 9,948

    Not even that, Hong Kong and Kowloon were ours in perpetuity, it was the New Territories (roughly north of Mong Kok) that were on the 99 year lease.

    The New Territories are where most freshwater for Hong Kong comes from, so there was a case that being dependent on China wasn't practical, but that doesn't bear out in reality, as HK was and still is dependent on the mainland for electricity.

    So yeah, we gave it all back to curry favour with China (and avoid any unpleasant future disagreements over it).

    We signed the agreement that put a 50 year time limit on democracy, we agreed that after that time it would cease to be an independent state.

    The time for indignation was back in the 90s. It's not like China has become a totalitarian regime since then, we knew who we were dealing with.
     
  6. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: 19 May 2004

    Posts: 19,523

    Location: Nordfriesland, Germany

    Seriously? Wow, I did not realise this. We seriously sold Hong Kong down the river. Awful.
     
  7. Sankari

    Caporegime

    Joined: 29 Dec 2007

    Posts: 25,508

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Somebody call the cops, I just witnessed a murder!

    [​IMG]

    :D
     
  8. JRS

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Jun 2004

    Posts: 15,567

    Location: Burton-on-Trent

  9. Sankari

    Caporegime

    Joined: 29 Dec 2007

    Posts: 25,508

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    That's true, but over time the growth and development of the New Territories resulted in such a close integration of these regions with Kowloon and Hong Kong that by the time the lease was up, there was no way to return them without dividing Hong Kong into two countries. This was considered untenable by both sides, so China scored a massive bargain under which she received land which had never been leased in the first place.
     
  10. Sankari

    Caporegime

    Joined: 29 Dec 2007

    Posts: 25,508

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Meanwhile, Marty 'Mad Dog' Lederman (former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the DoJ's Office of Legal Counsel) has some thoughts on Trump's attempt to break the 1st amendment:

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Jono8

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 May 2007

    Posts: 31,848

    Location: Surrey


    It really is too easy to make stupid people look stupid.
     
  12. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: 17 Jan 2016

    Posts: 4,117

    All they have to do is make discrimination against political opinion a protected class.
     
  13. wesimmo

    Suspended

    Joined: 19 Mar 2012

    Posts: 4,590

    Are you saying that pointing out Eric Trump is wrong, while citing evidence, should be banned using the same mechanism and justification for not being able to be racist?
     
  14. mjt

    Capodecina

    Joined: 31 Aug 2007

    Posts: 18,279

    Drain the swamp my ass. What a bunch of crooks.

     
  15. Kyo

    Soldato

    Joined: 11 Oct 2003

    Posts: 5,640

    Most people in the world don't realise the distinction so when they talk about HK they normally mean HK and NT as a whole. But to say we didn't get much in return isn't true because we had 100 years of rule and we colonize the land that didn't belong to us to begin with. (Spoils of war) Don't get me wrong the UK built it to what it is today but geographically its always going to be challenge to not return it to Chinese control.

    I am torn as well. I grew up there despite being British. But realistically it was inevitable to say it isn't part of China (particularly now with the troubles there). As mid pointed out the reality is it depends on the mainland heavily for essentials whether they like it or not.
     
    Last edited: 28 May 2020
  16. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: 17 Jan 2016

    Posts: 4,117

    I'm meaning when people can write vulgar things and depending on what side of the political fence they are on either gets away with it or gets banned.

    On Yt if you have a different opinion to the WHO then your video/opinion is censored.

    I'd rather have full free speech than one side being discriminated against. In my humble opinion, all regular Internet people should want to be treated fairly and evenly no matter if its a government or a private company.
     
  17. wesimmo

    Suspended

    Joined: 19 Mar 2012

    Posts: 4,590

  18. chroniclard

    Capodecina

    Joined: 23 Apr 2014

    Posts: 16,365

    Location: Hertfordshire

    People should be banned fairly for being vulgar. Trump gets away with it.
     
  19. Kyo

    Soldato

    Joined: 11 Oct 2003

    Posts: 5,640

  20. Apex

    Capodecina

    Joined: 12 Feb 2006

    Posts: 11,111

    Location: Surrey

    Correct me if I'm wrong but trump's latest EO is designed to make social media platforms More accountable for the content others write on them, such as let's say, slander, lies and death threats tweeted by a president? If he could write an EO worth anything (from what I'm hearing this one is just weak talk with nothing behind it) isn't trump making it more likely that sites like twitter will have to make comment and censor his tweets? And this comes after twitter have made comment on his tweet which he wants them to do less, not more.

    What a dumb ass trump is