In recent news, Gibson's Bakery announced an end to their much derided "Chase and Detain" policy for shoplifting. They have partnered with a Chinese firm specializing in organ transplants to help supplement their new police of "Kill it, Harvest it, and loot it." They now say any shoplifters will be shot, harvested for their organs and then their pockets rifled through in search of any extra cash.
When asked if the new policy was 'insensitive' to minorities or college student, Gibson's representative proudly stated that it sensitive to everyone's needs. People in need get the desperately required organs, their "Shoplift Servicing Agents" get whatever spare change and a 5% cut of any organ sales and the store gets a nifty new pyramid of skulls to display in the front window. When pressed about the shoplifters, the Gibson's Rep merely laughed and says, "They should be proud to be used in such an environmentally friendly action. We're recycling in a new frontier. Besides, it's not as if they were humans. They're just non-viable tissue masses."
[History Today - 2014 Memory Hole] At midnight on June 30th, 1997 Hong Kong reverted from British control back to China. Looking back, did Britain fail the people of Hong Kong?
To answer this question it is important to understand the relative balance of power between China and the United Kingdom. During the 19th century Britain was in its heyday. The Royal Navy could project her power to any seaport in the world. Britain was able to coerce China into signing the treaties that acquired Hong Kong and leased the New Territories for 99 years. By the late 1970s, those days were long gone. Delicate negotiation, rather than gunboat diplomacy, was Britain’s best hope of keeping control of Hong Kong.
Much has been made of Prime Minister Thatcher’s visit to Hong Kong in September 1982. Images of her tripping on the steps at the Great Hall of the People and reports of Deng Xiaoping’s irritation at her proposal of keeping a British presence in Hong Kong, have been well documented and criticised. However before Margaret Thatcher even arrived in Beijing, the British had encountered Deng’s ire over Hong Kong. Deng had made clear his intention to re-acquire Hong Kong and the New Territories to Hong Kong Governor Sir Murray Maclehose in 1979.
Deng hated the treaties that gave control of Hong Kong over to Britain and saw them as invalid. Deng made it clear that the People’s Liberation Army could walk into Hong Kong any time it liked and there was little the British could do about it. Deng felt so sure that he held all the cards; he told the Prime Minister in 1982 that if an agreement was not reached within the next two years, China would take unilateral action.
Margaret Thatcher left Beijing chastened and the whole world knew it. Within ten days of Thatcher’s trip to Beijing, the Hong Kong stock market had lost 25 per cent of its value.
At it's height, British rule brought unparalleled levels of civility and efforts to gain prosperity to all its colonial territories. Now, Britain is intent on importing the worst of what they once fought to control in faraway lands, all in the name of white shame. May the good people of the UK push out the hair shirt crowd. Burn them alive if you must.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 7:49 Comments ||
Earlier "failures" can be seen at this Kroonstad concentration camp cemetery. Lord Kitchener's solutions of circa 1903 still paying dividends.
I believe there were nearly 30 such camps. A large portion of the dead were infants and children.
I'm always reminded of what a character in one Conrad novel said when asked about bad behavior: "[That stuff is done] by the worst kind of (n-word) we've got around here..."
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 8:09 Comments ||
Yeah let's not pretend the British were the good guys. They deliberately prolonged the potato famine, among other great crimes. They invented the concentration camp and used it against the Boers when they couldn't win with their army. The entire reason for the Boer War was to seize control of the diamond mines, which they thought of as unsuitable in the hands of a nation of farmers.
China is at fault here, not Britain. Shit on the media for blaming the wrong target.
Posted by: Herb McCoy ||
06/18/2019 8:28 Comments ||
There wasn't much the British could have done back then.
Well, maybe one thing. Giving Hong Hong true democracy in time could have helped.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
06/18/2019 10:58 Comments ||
Giving Hong Hong true democracy in time could have helped.
Truly. But they were too busy ruling and playing pukka sahib to do the critical things necessary to prepare the locals for self rule. And the locals were too busy making money to demand it.
In the decade or so prior to the turn-over Britain and Australia should have found some chunk of rock on the uninhabited side of Australia and got some of those Hong Kong billionaires and Hong Kong based companies that moved to Vancouver and elsewhere to invest in New Hong Kong. Then in the month before turn-over gotten a massive flotilla together to move anyone and everyone willing to move. Hopefully leaving China with a rock.
To me, it doesn't seem that population dynamics like this would weigh heavily on the MM's minds. Either way, suppose they get what they want. Then what? Forty years later they would lose it. Not worth it.
Personally, I think they have such a warped view of reality that they are tilting at windmills.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.