Which Hong Kong Protest Size Estimate is Right?

August 19, 2019

The New York Times further promotes the protests in Hong Kong by quoting an extravagant crowd size estimate of yesterday's march.

Hong Kong Protesters Defy Police Ban in Show of Strength After Tumult

A sea of Hong Kong protesters marched through the dense city center in the pouring rain on Sunday, defying a police ban, in a vivid display of the movement’s continuing strength after more than two months of demonstrations, days of ugly violence and increasingly vehement warnings from the Chinese government.

People began assembling in the early afternoon in Victoria Park, the starting point of huge peaceful marches in June that were joined by hundreds of thousands of protesters.
…
By midafternoon, the park had filled with tens of thousands of people, and the demonstrators began to spill into nearby roads.
…
Organizers estimated at least 1.7 million people had turned out — nearly one in four of the total population of more than seven million — making it the second-largest march of the movement, after a protest by nearly two million on June 16.

The Hong Kong police released a far lower crowd estimate, saying there were 128,000 protesters in Victoria Park during the peak period.

So what is it? 128,000 or the 13 times bigger 1.7 million? With the mood set in the first paragraphs the Times is clearly promoting the larger estimate.

But that estimate is definitely false. (As was my own early estimate of 15-20,000 based on early pictures of the event.) It is impossible that 1.7 million people took part in the gathering and march. There is no way that the 1.7 million people would physically fit in or near the protest venue.

This is well known. On Saturday the Wall Street Journal (quoted here) wrote:

The police on Thursday approved a Sunday protest at Victoria Park. But they denied a permit for a 2.3-mile march to Chater Road in Hong Kong’s Central district.
…
The problem is that Victoria Park can accommodate only 100,000 or so people, according to police estimates.

Victoria Park has two places where people crowds can assemble.

bigger

The one below the red marker is the field in question. It is 80 x 360 meter, 28.800 square meter. At a high density of 4 people per square meter the field can hold a maximum of 115.000 people. On Sunday there was some overflow onto the upper green field but the density was much lower than 4 persons per square meter. It was raining and nearly everyone carried an umbrella. That is not possible in a high density standing or moving crowd.

bigger

Pictures of large crowds tend to deceive. The density often seem higher than it is. The two below made by Prof Keith Still with a 3D crowd visualizer show 2 people per square meter.

bigger

The South China Morning Post posted video (scroll down) of the crowd and the following march and the average density appears to be even lower than 2.

bigger

The police estimate of 128,000 protesters seems realistic, if not too high. The organizer's estimate of 1.7 million is bollocks.

Media that want to inform their readers can easily verify such numbers. Media that support U.S. meddling in Hong Kong won't.

Posted by b on August 19, 2019 at 17:11 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Off-topic, but important —
What is to be made of this drastic shift in NYT editorial policy?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/18/opinion/trump-foreign-policy.html?fbclid=IwAR1HVQQ4UBqZiu_k3OEPIODSFUWjMZBuAixu7RIOsaeQcq-SaJfjjGABVgI

Posted by: chet380 | Aug 19 2019 17:40 utc | 1

@chet380 (1)
There’s no drastic shift. Always look to see what is left out.

Posted by: bjd | Aug 19 2019 17:54 utc | 2

B thank you for this and the link to the work on crowd sizes.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Aug 19 2019 17:59 utc | 3

Only if Trump supporters

Posted by: john mellar | Aug 19 2019 18:04 utc | 4

Thanks B.! Always great to see anyone reporting news to correct themselves (and other too 😉 )!

Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPr. | Aug 19 2019 18:04 utc | 5

Thankyou b, I had asked for an intelligent assessment and am grateful.
By the sound of it the rioters can be counted in their hundreds or perhaps dozens. Which no doubt explains all the photos of “massively OTT brutal policing” – a few hundred police finding only a few dozen trouble makers.
My guess is that the million and a half extra chinese were all Uyghurs. Probably in prison now.
And a reminder of what this is all about; HK has extradition treaties to US and UK and EU and India, but not to China. Daft.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-china-hong-kong-extradition-pacts/

Posted by: Michael Droy | Aug 19 2019 18:06 utc | 6

Meanwhile… where are the general strikes?
Further mass protests in Hong Kong — Underlying the protests is mounting frustration with the city’s glaring social inequality and the lack of welfare services, affordable housing and job opportunities.
This is the Nth time the WSWS spreads this bullshit.
Let’s see with what evidence the author, mr. Peter Symonds, claims the underlying reasons for the protest are “the city’s glaring social inequality and the lack of welfare services, affordable housing and job opportunities”:

Yesterday’s rally in Victoria Park and subsequent march was called by the Civil Human Rights Front as a protest against the increasing use of police violence against demonstrators. It was titled “Stop the Police and Organised Crime from Plunging Hong Kong into Chaos.” “Organised crime” is a reference to the attacks on protesters by thugs allegedly belonging to triad gangs connected to pro-Beijing figures.

Wait, what? Wasn’t the problem inequality? Then why is the motto of the protests a “Stop the Police and Organised Crime from Plunging Hong Kong into Chaos”? And where the hell the author comes with the alleged relation between the “triad gangs” and “pro-Beijing figures” (see the next quote)? What the hell “pro-Beijing figures” even mean?
But wait, there’s more:

A statement issued by the Front declared: “From frontline activists, to the elderly in nursing homes, to public housing residents, Hong Kongers have faced police brutality in the forms of tear gas, bean bag rounds, and rubber bullets, which they used to disperse and arrest us. We’ve also endured non-discriminate attacks by the triads. Hong Kongers are deeply outraged and abhor the actions of the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police.”

Again, where’s the anti-inequality agenda? All the Front states is that they are being target of anti-riot police action. Those “triads” must be referring to those possibly false flag masked thugs who made a showdown with these clowns at the subway a week ago. The author of the article states it as a fact, without any critical thinking.
When we approach the end of the article, we finally see the list of demands of the protesters. They are:

In calling for the protest, the Front reiterated the demands for the complete withdrawal of the extradition legislation, the resignation of Carrie Lam, an independent investigation into police violence, the retraction of the designation of some protests as “riots,” and the withdrawal of all charges against protesters. More than 700 arrests have been made since early June.
The protesters are also demanding elections based on universal suffrage.

So, where are the demands for an end of inequality in Hong Kong? Where are they? All I see is wanting the democratically elected government to be toppled, a mass purge of the police force (to be substituted, I presume, with new, “westernized” ones who will, of course, hunt down communists) and new elections — to be held on the Western fashion (i.e. based on preselected puppet candidates who will follow the commands of their Hongkonger and American masters). Will these solve Hong Kong’s societal problems? The answer — as we’ve seen in Ukraine — is obviously “no”.
This Peter Symonds, by the way, is the same clown who “called” mass strikes at Hong Kong two weeks ago:
General strike signals entry of working class into Hong Kong protests
Where he states right out of the bat:

The general strike by Hong Kong workers on Monday signals a new stage in the mounting mass protest movement triggered by the government’s extradition law. Tens of thousands of workers from diverse industries—including rail, airport, civil service, engineering, construction, finance and banking—joined the protests disrupting the city’s transport system and limiting operations at the city’s international airport.

But:

The strike was not organised by the trade unions but, like the protests themselves, took place as a result of the initiatives of workers. The Confederation of Trade Unions (CTU), which is aligned with the official opposition in the city’s Legislative Council—the pan-democrat grouping—nominally backed the strike, but did not call out the members of its affiliated unions numbering nearly 200,000.

That doesn’t deter mr. Symonds, who then made the bold claim that:

The entry of the working class into the protests points to the underlying social and economic driving forces. The demands of the protest leaders have to date been limited to the complete withdrawal of the extradition law, the resignation of Chief Executive Carrie Lam, the withdrawal of charges against protesters, an independent inquiry into police violence and free and open elections based on universal suffrage.

Two weeks later, no general strikes, no change in the demands.

Posted by: vk | Aug 19 2019 18:15 utc | 7

You need a very hefty dose of caution trying to estimate densities under umbrellas – how many people are under each umbrella? The density almost certainly varies widely in different parts of the crowd, and it would be impossible to estimate the distribution of densities. Where people are close together, fewer people can have their umbrellas open, therefore several would have to share umbrellas. The umbrella density will then remain the same, constrained by the size of the umbrellas.
Whilst it is patently clear the 1.7 million claim is pure lies, and whilst I would tentatively tend to agree with B that the 128,000 figure might be too high, I think the confidence in the reliability of that second figure has to be rather low. Guesswork, no more (but in any event nowhere near the 1.7 million lies).
I would guess about half the 128,000 might make sense as a minimum, but the maximum might be well over the 128,000 (both are stab-in-the-dark estimates on my part). The police would have much better evidence available from numbers of passengers on public transport, numbers of cars, comparative volumes of people movements on normal days, etc, and so could make more reliable estimates.

Posted by: BM | Aug 19 2019 18:18 utc | 8

Chinese rhetoric toughens is the best way to describe this Global Times editorial, which is announced in the headline: “US can’t influence Beijing’s decision on HK,” and made even clearer in the opening paragraph:
“Political and public opinion elites in the US must understand that although they have the ability to instigate Hong Kong’s radical protesters and make it harder for Hong Kong to restore order, they absolutely cannot influence Beijing’s decisions on Hong Kong’s situation.”
Although the words aren’t written overtly, the tone and other rhetoric used make it clear China regards the Outlaw US Empire as a Paper Tiger.
In another article, China sends a distinct message to Japan and Korea that to overcome the their infighting and the US Trade War the best solution is for the three nations to form a North Asian free trade area, that would presumably eventually include Russia and DPRK. Clearly, China sees an opportunity for it, given the author’s conclusion:
“A trilateral FTA will further open the Chinese economy to Japanese and South Korean enterprises. This will be an important aspect of the reorganization of the Asian supply chain amid the trade wars. In this process, the US’ role is being weakened by its trade protectionism, while China is serving as an important export destination.
“China is a staunch supporter of free trade. We believe Beijing is willing to promote negotiations of the trilateral FTA with Tokyo and Seoul. The question remaining is how Japan and South Korea will respond to China’s sincerity.”
Articles produced for domestic consumption don’t do anything to alter the overall situation and increasing deficit of influence the Outlaw US Empire has globally. The temper tantrum it’s throwing in HK won’t get it anywhere but further marginalized.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 19 2019 18:20 utc | 9

RT reported this weekend that permission for two U.S. Navy ships to make port call at Hong Kong was denied. No remarks noted from the U.S.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 19 2019 18:39 utc | 10

@ Posted by: BM | Aug 19 2019 18:18 utc | 8
Since the protests happened during “heavy rain” (MSM’s own words), you have to assume there’s only one person per umbrella. Even if the protests are impecably well-organized, there’s simply no way you can plan for just one in two people to bring an umbrella and then pair one person with an umbrella with one person without one.
Yes, you can assume there are people using raincoat. But raincoats are not as popular for people who don’t use motorcycles. It’s also common for (middle and upper-middle class) Asian women to use both in heavy rain: umbrella plus raincoat (plus rainboots). That way, they protect their makeup, hair and shoes.
When people think of China (specially European people), they imagine, those very broad streets, big squares (Tiananmen), the Forbidden City etc. etc. They picture those massive multimillion protests that were once common in Beijing. But, by doing that, they lose the notion of how Hong Kong is small: Victoria Park only occupies one small block of the city, in an area of just 47 acres (counting total area, including the forested one, tennis courts, football pitch etc). Hong Kong is literally packed. For comparison, Brazil’s Ibirapuera Park has 390 acres of total area.

Posted by: vk | Aug 19 2019 18:57 utc | 11

The colour coded regime change playbook continues:
https://preview.redd.it/88fbzm18fsd31.jpg?width=1008&auto=webp&s=4083844ad96e81e45e57d152c9503c3133f8029f
A photogenic young women at the recent unauthorised Moscow regime change protest, peacefully reading the Russian constitution with a wall of riot police in the background. Presumably it is supposed to indicate a spontaneous protest by a brave woman against tyranny.
Wind forward to this weekend
https://sun9-8.userapi.com/c857628/v857628373/2f8bc/aKYnYBSwECI.jpg
Lo and behold – a photogenic young Chinese woman seated in front of a row of riot police. How very spontaneous.
One wonders why the Russian girl is wearing what appears to be a stab-proof vest or possibly body armour. One also wonders why she carries a walkie-talkie and what happened to the body armour.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECMhBpyXkAAolWn?format=jpg&name=medium
On the China front, it appears that Nathan Law has scooted off to the US to attend Yale supposedly for a Masters, but who knows, maybe some intense regime-change training for his planned ‘our man Yats/Guaido’ role?
It also looks like the umbrella was chosen as the symbol for the HK operation as a means of masking low numbers.

Posted by: Yonatan | Aug 19 2019 19:26 utc | 12

Even 50000 is a tad high for all of them to be on the NED payroll right?

Posted by: Adam’s. J | Aug 19 2019 19:40 utc | 13

Posted by: vk | Aug 19 2019 18:15 utc | 7
FWIW, I check out the WSWS daily and am generally sympathetic to their perspective. But, as you point out, their understandable biases can be egregious– they always need to be read with at least a grain of salt.
You can practically feel the “body English” as WSWS roots hard for the HK protests to be a legitimate and welcome expression of worker solidarity and resistance to China’s authoritarian, imperialistic domination.
It evokes the classic US fairy tale “The Little Engine That Could”. [Wikipedia link] WSWS merely shifts the classic first-person refrain “I think I can” into a third-person “We think they can”. Thus does wishful thinking cloud clear-eyed analysis.

Posted by: Ort | Aug 19 2019 20:00 utc | 14

Folks, it is not a protest, it is a free concert.
Note the stage clearly visible slightly below center-middle of this image.
Stage = concert
Stage ≠ protest
Funny how people confuse the two.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 20:24 utc | 15

Are Caucasians the only ones allowed to protest against the government? It’s okay for the French to protest their government but not the citizens of Hong Kong? Is it so hard to imagine that the people of Hong Kong don’t want to be ruled by mainland China? As much as the NYT might try and exaggerate these protests. B tries just as hard to delegitimize it. I don’t see why it is such a stretch to see that the people of Hong Kong want to preserve their current way of living.

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 20:29 utc | 16

With experience as a left wing, anti-war, peace and justice protester, it is absolutely no surprise that the NYT is lying about a crowd size. I was volunteering as a citizen journalist at the anti-torture websites at the Ft. Benning army base where the US army trained Latin American police and military in the fine arts of torturing other human beings. I saw a colleague and some other corporate reporters talking to the Columbus chief of police, so I wandered over to take some pics and listen in. I heard the Chief of Police give an estimated crowd size of 15,000. I’d have said maybe 20,000, but that was in the ballpark. The next day, the AP wire reports gave the crowd size as 7500. That was a striking number, as anyone estimating a crowd that size would say 7000 or 8000, but would be very unlikely to give a number like 7500. Of course, it just happened to be the number I heard the chief of police give divided by a factor of 2. I’d assume the NYT went with the AP number. But I did notice a few other outlets apparently didn’t trust the AP to properly propagandize the number by dividing by 2, so they did it themselves, and reported the number at less than 4000. Like I said, standing on the side of the stage and taking pics of the crowd, I’d have said 20,000.
Of course, the NYT always under-reports the size of protests that oppose the government and its lethal policies. Even though, its now obviously a new era where the NYT is now apparently multipling numbers by 13. Or maybe the CIA multiplied by 6 and the NYT then did its typical multiply by 2.

Posted by: Presente | Aug 19 2019 20:33 utc | 17

No, anon @16, you can have all of the fake protest/concerts that George Soros and the US State Department are willing to put on for you.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 20:47 utc | 18

@18 William Gruff
Okay, you can just believe everything B tells you without question. Perhaps you should move to mainland China since there is no reason anyone would want to protest being ruled by the central government there right?

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 21:01 utc | 19

anon @19
I’ve lived in mainland China, with Qingdao being the place I’ve stayed the longest. I spent a semester teaching in Hong Kong too.
I have also attended staged protest/entertainment events as well as participated in organizing real protests, so I have no difficulty telling the difference between the two.
You imply that you are in Hong Kong. Did you go to the Victoria Park protest/entertainment event? Were you involved in organizing it? How much did the stage cost? How about the light show and sound system? How about the wages for the technicians running the soundboard and the lights? How much did it cost to rent the portable toilets? How difficult was it to contract a security company for the event?
Of course, you don’t know anything about any of that because if you went at all you just showed up.
When people just show up and there are stages and jumbotron screens and such, then it isn’t a protest, no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise. It is an entertainment event put on by professional event planners. The people who show up are not protesters, they are sheep herded into a pen so that the people who paid for the event can show off how much control they have over those sheep.
There is one thing that I am curious about though. Have the crews controlling the herd done the “jumping thing” with the crowd yet? Get the crowd jumping in sync and chanting something like “Everyone who’s not jumping is from Beijing!”? Just wondering when they are going to unleash that little crowd psychology mind control trick on Hong Kong’s sheep.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 21:33 utc | 20

This way they silenced the protests in the former GDR. A demonstration of thousands of people against the annexation of the GDR to the RFA in the Alexander Platz, former East Berlin, is violently dissolved by the police of the RFA, who even steps on a flag of the GDR. October 3, 1990.

https://twitter.com/berlinconfidenc/status/1163169339723440128

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 19 2019 21:34 utc | 21

@anon – bunch of entitled kiddies being egged on by the west?? the ones with money moved offshore before 97… the ones left behind, have literally been left behind.. i bet you are rooting for the local street people where you live too.. i am… opps – that isn’t chinas fault.. i am missing my dumbocracy…

Posted by: james | Aug 19 2019 21:34 utc | 22

@20 William Gruff
You seem to be of the opinion that just because the NYT is promoting it, that it is somehow an illegitimate protest. The protesters there have a legitimate grievance and you are dismissing it those grievances simply because you don’t like the fact that the NYT is promoting it. You are just as wrong as the the NYT is.

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 21:37 utc | 23

If the HK staged “protests” would be for self-determination, they would have a pass, but, really they are not…as they are not each and every of the other alleged “self-determination” processes, say, Kosovo, Catalonia….
A US think tank: NATO would need the ‘Catalan naval forces’

An Atlantic Council report warns that the ports of Barcelona and Tarragona are strategic for the Alliance to control the Mediterranean.

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 19 2019 21:47 utc | 24

Wrong, anon @23, the “protest” is illegitimate because the ~~protesters~~ audience doesn’t control it. The people who paid for and organized the entertainment event (ultimately the US State Department) control it.
Are you so gullible as to imagine the US State Department cares in the slightest what your grievances are?

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 21:50 utc | 25

Si no quieres pan, toma dos tortas
L¨Estelada ( Catalonian independentist flag ) in Hong Kong, carried by the riotters…
https://twitter.com/BetonaComin/status/1161949702398648324

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 19 2019 21:55 utc | 26

@25 William Gruff
Just because you don’t like the US government, it doesn’t automatically make the Chinese central government a good guy. You seem incapable of differentiating the messengers from the message. The people of Hong Kong have a legitimate gripe. Just because the US government decided to stick their nose in, it doesn’t make the grip any less valid. Would you prefer that the extradition bill get passed? I’m sure you would because you have this insane trust in the Chinese central government.
You can be opposed to US intervention AS WELL as supportive of the protestors in Hong Kong but it doesn’t seem that you have the mental capacity to do that. Just stick to your black and white world. It’s easier on the brain.

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 21:56 utc | 27

This coordinaton amongst “independentists” around the world comes from long data and common origins, this was happening in HK during last 1st October….
https://www.elnacional.cat/es/politica/hong-kong-celebra-1octubre-esteladas_310548_102.html

Posted by: Sasha | Aug 19 2019 22:02 utc | 28

In view of b’s sober analysis of the HK Sunday protest crowd size, I decided to watch all of the English language International TV News broadcasts on SBS 1 to play “spot the bs.”
CGTN (China.gov) reported the crowd size at “more than 100 thousand.”
NHK News (US-occupied Japan) reported the crowd size as “hundreds of thousands” adding the rider “estimated by some observers as up to 1.7 million.”
DW News (US-occupied Germany) didn’t mention the HK protest.
F24 (France.gov) reported an “emerging scandal” involving “evidence” that about 1000 China.gov provocateurs were spotted among the crowd of peaceful protesters, and avoided ANY estimate of total crowd size.
AL JAZEERA didn’t mention the HK protest.
BBC (UK.gov) didn’t mention the HK protest.
Earlier this evening ABC.net.au’s World Today (Zio-occupied Oz.gov) used the NYT figure of 1.7 million HK protesters, emphasising the proportion of HK’s total population which 1.7 million represents…
…
Conclusion: One could be forgiven for speculating that some Western News ‘outlets’ are getting hesitant about repeating unconfirmed NYT stories.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 19 2019 22:06 utc | 29

You’re trying to change the subject, anon @27.
The gripes of the people of Hong Kong are not being heard. The only message that anyone in the world hears is what the people who paid for and organized the event at Victoria Park (US State Department) want them to hear. The people of Hong Kong are not controlling the event, so they don’t get to control the message.
This is such a simple and fundamental point that it surprises me so many people cannot grasp it.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 22:06 utc | 30

@30 William Gruff
No I am not changing the subject. The demands of the Hong Kong protesters are there for everyone to see. It’s written on the signs. They want the extradition bill gone. They want the Beijing stooge of a mayor gone. They want to preserve whats left of their democracy. And you are against all that because the US government is bad.

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 22:14 utc | 31

anon @31 sez “They want the Beijing stooge of a mayor gone. They want to preserve whats left of their democracy”
Nonsense. Your post is a contradiction. Trying to stage a coup against Hong Kong’s elected mayor rather than voting her out in the next election will destroy what’s left of HK’s democracy.
Contradictory gripes are by definition illegitimate. Your gripes are childish nonsense. That doesn’t mean that people in Hong Kong don’t have real legitimate gripes. Inadequate affordable housing, stagnant incomes, and capitalist corruption are certainly gripes worth protesting about, but nobody is hearing those real gripes because that is not what the US State Department wants heard.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 22:30 utc | 32

@32 William Gruff
Oh please, they can advocate for the mayor being out just like the French are protesting for their President to be out. It’s the exact same thing. Just because you say that one is legitimate and the other isn’t doesn’t make it so. You can’t just cherry pick which protests are legitimate. They have every right to be angry at the extradition bill. They have every right to protest it. If there were on the other side of the border, they would be steamrolled by Chinese tanks right now. (I’m sure you would love that.) That’s the thing about freedom of speech. People can protest whatever they want even if it drives Communists like you up the wall.
You might as well say anyone protesting Trump is staging a coup. Or the French protesters are staging a coup too.

Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 22:34 utc | 33

anon @33 sez “steamrolled by Chinese tanks”
Why didn’t you admit up front that you are brainwashed?
Anyway, stop trying to compare your childish, contradictory nonsense demands that the US State Department provides for you with the demands of France’s gilets juanes.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 22:47 utc | 34

whistling… and i’m sure the r/e prices in new yawk, or san fran are so much more palatable… i suppose folks are very concerned about assange, meng wanghou or snowden or anyone being extradited to gulag amerikka too – that’s why we hear about that in the news 24/7 out of gulag america.. do you know how to say ”pile of shite”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Hong_Kong_extradition_bill

Posted by: james | Aug 19 2019 23:00 utc | 35

@8, BM:
When two people are under one umbrella you can usually tell–their shoulders would protrude over the edge unless one is an infant held in arms.
My own opinion is that the police estimate is credible. I know Victoria Park well. It is often used for concerts, flea market events, and other similar social activities. In the past when such events were held there have always been crowd estimates, which were usually borne out by gate receipts or sale revenues. HK police has a good handle on sizing up the crowd.

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Aug 19 2019 23:03 utc | 36

Official spox of the US State Department for MoA @35 chimes in.
Yes, “The rents are too damn high!”
But that’s not the message that the ~~protests~~ entertainment events like the one at Victoria Park are hoisting into the limelight, is it?
Furthermore, the extradition bill has been scrapped, so the murderer that the HK children love so much is now safe. If preventing murderers from facing justice was what the protests were about, then they had achieved their aim weeks ago. It’s a dead horse that is being beaten there.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 23:05 utc | 37

” The demands of the Hong Kong protesters are there for everyone to see. It’s written on the signs….”
So it is: in English.
Don’t you find that curious? An alleged million Chinese people gather together protesting against a Chinese government, and their signs are in English? Don’t you find it curious that many of the protesters wave the Stars and Stripes and the Union flag?
The demands are there for everyone watching TV news outside of China to see.
We saw similar things in Iran in 2009 where, for some unfathomable reason, the farsi speaking people were addressing the farsi reading government in English. And then in Kiev….

Posted by: bevin | Aug 19 2019 23:05 utc | 38

China has made an important move to elevate Shenzhen as the flagship in the Greater Bay Area:
http://en.people.cn/n3/2019/0819/c90000-9607020.html
The takeaway from this decision is that China has apparently given up hope on HK playing an important role in the forward development of The Greater Bay Area. I myself believe this rings the death knell of HK’s future economy. It’s gonna be slippery slope downwards from here on out.

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Aug 19 2019 23:13 utc | 39

Posted by: bevin | Aug 19 2019 23:05 utc | 39
You can easily find photos of protest signs written in both english and Chinese or does your simple mind can only see one language?

Posted by: O | Aug 19 2019 23:23 utc | 40

@13, Adams.J:
NED doesn’t have a budget big enough to payoff more than a few hundred. There are suckers in HK, sucked through churches; sucked through schools; sucked through social circles, etc. etc.
In truth, majority of people in HK know not what they are doing. It’s not like HKers are astute politically and have minds of their own. They are morons when come to politics, and sub-moronic when come to geopolitics. Their resentment of mainland Chinese having more money and better economic futures than themselves royally blinds then into hatred and reflexive anger. For outside instigators to stir them up, some money is necessary to incentivize the frontline raiders. The blind crowd behind would follow like zombies. A few tens of million HK$ is all it would take. Sigh!!!!

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Aug 19 2019 23:29 utc | 41

Official spox of the US State Department for MoA @38 chimes in again (it’s his job)
You are wrong Official spox, of course, but that’s part of your job so I’m sure it doesn’t really bother you much.
The event audiences have many and diverse gripes, but that is not what the ~~protests~~ entertainment events are about. The events are about what your employer says they are about, which the poor anon up-thread very candidly admitted.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 23:31 utc | 42

Anon @ 16:
In case you haven’t yet noticed, Hong Kong has been under Chinese control since July 1997. That means it is already being ruled by mainland China, but under a system of government inherited from its British colonial period.
The people of Hong Kong already do preserve their current way of living under a system of government that was never democratic to begin with even before 1997. The position that Carrie Lam currently holds, Chief Executive, is the successor position to the pre-1997 position of Governor of Hong Kong, whose holders were usually professional British diplomats or colonial administrators.
Carrie Lam was elected to her position by a 1,200-member electoral committee consisting of individuals and special interest / lobby groups. It’s not Western-style representative democracy as I’d recognise it in Australia but it compares to what HK had before 1997 and is perhaps even comparable to what prevails in the US these days.
Anyway, do please continue to comment as I’m sure William Gruff is in need of light entertainment and humour on this comments thread.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 19 2019 23:33 utc | 43

Oriental Voice @ 40:
You only have to visit Youtube and look at videos posted by young Western expats living in Shenzhen who show off their apartments and take viewers around shops and public transport facilities in the city, explaining how much food, their rent and the cheap public transport cost, and totting up their monthly budgets, while all around them the city streets are clean and the modern stores are clean and stocked with plenty, to realise that Shenzhen must have bypassed HK a considerable time ago.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 19 2019 23:43 utc | 44

@ Posted by: anon | Aug 19 2019 22:14 utc | 31
And what all of this has to do with rent prices and rising inequality? As we now empirically know from concrete examples of the First World (and I’m not even getting into the Third World, which are all monumental failures of humanity in every aspect), liberal democracies rise, not lower, rent prices and inequality. If Hongkongers want lower rents and higher wages, they should ask for it — the CCP and the Legco don’t read minds.
Let’s be real: if the protesters had 1.7 million (almost one fourth of HK’s population), that would mean they would practically have the entire working class at their side. If you have the working class on your side, you do general strikes — which would bring Carrie Lam down in less than a week for sure –, not cute demonstrations at a park on Sunday afternoon.
Unless, of course, they don’t have 1.7 million they say the do. Unless the Hongkonger working classes are not on their side.
Hong Kong is not a country or a province: they are a city with barely any natural resources. They never were and never will be a country. There’s no such a thing as Hongkonger culture or ethnicity. They are Chinese. They are not entitled for special treatment, let alone a special political system: socialist China’s democracy model (you don’t need to have the Montesquieu model to be a democracy; Western democracy alone has two main governance systems: federal and constitutional monarchy) is a vertical and centralized one; that’s the democracy Hong Kong will get.

Posted by: vk | Aug 19 2019 23:46 utc | 45

Posted by: Jen | Aug 19 2019 23:33 utc | 45
It is under the doctrine of “one country, two systems” this is why the the extradition bill sparked the riots because Hong Kongers saw it a another piece at eroding this doctrine for all intents and purposes was not due to end at least to 2047. A portion of Hong Kongers like their autonomy from Beijing.

Posted by: O | Aug 19 2019 23:47 utc | 46

Official spox of the US State Department for MoA @46 says the sweetest things! I’m blushing!
To Oriental Voice @43, I would like to point out that the American Empire is very experienced at this game, and the people of Hong Kong are not. It is like a skilled swindler cheating little children out of their candy.
That said, the fact that the color revolution crew have to lie so extravagantly about the attendance to their performances shows that many in Hong Kong are not falling for the empire’s sales pitch. I have to give the people of Hong Kong credit for that.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 23:58 utc | 47

Posted by: vk | Aug 19 2019 23:46 utc | 48
“There’s no such a thing as Hongkonger culture or ethnicity.’
Wow! what utter bullshit! Every major city has its own “flavor” you short sighted dumbass., It is why people travel to different ones. And in those cities there are distinct characteristics of not only the ethnic makeup but of a general attitude of the city.

Posted by: O | Aug 20 2019 0:04 utc | 48

@34 William Gruff
You are the one that is brainwashed. You are incapable of independent thought. Your only argument this entire time is the “United States.” That’s all you can say because that is what you were told by B. The guy who said that he estimated these protests were almost over and there was only 10-20,000 protesters at the last protest. Turns out he was off by 100 thousand. If tomorrow, he declares the protests are legitimate then so would you. You are a sheep so you do what sheeps do. You follow.
It isn’t surprising though, throughout history, authoritarians rely on people like you to back them up and do what you’re told to do. Using your freedom of speech here to try and surpress the freedom of speech of other people. Hypocrite.

Posted by: anon | Aug 20 2019 0:43 utc | 49

O @ 49:
The extradition bill also covered extradition to Taiwan and Macau, and other states and territories with which Hong Kong currently has no extradition treaty, in case you hadn’t noticed.
In other words, the fact that the HK government proposed this extradition bill demonstrates that Beijing observes and respects the “one party, two systems” principle, and the proposed extradition bill upholds it.
If anything, it is Taiwan that does not accept this principle of “one party, two systems” since Taipei has already said it would not accept the extradition of the Hong Kong man wanted for murdering his pregnant girlfriend and abandoning her body in a suitcase at a train station if the extradition bill had had its second reading in the Legislative Council and been allowed to pass and become law.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 20 2019 1:04 utc | 50

William Gruff–
Excellent performance!! Bravo!! It’s almost as witty as some of George Carlin’s best. One of the best comparisons to Hong Kong are the seemingly weekly protests in Caracas that BigLie Media ignores so they don’t officially exist unless you follow the right people on Twitter or other social media. But yeah, as you note, almost all such events broadcast by BigLie Media are precisely those sorts of photo ops pioneered during Reagan’s 1980 election campaign. You’d figure after 40 years that more would catch on and ridicule the affairs and their abettors as you did. Just wanted to let you know your efforts are appreciated by at least one barfly!

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 1:08 utc | 51

The two figures measure (or claim to measure) two different things. The police estimate was peak attendance WITHIN the park. The organizer estimate was total turnout for the whole event, including people who might not be able to reach the park at any point during the event. The event lasted for hours with protesters constantly moving in and out of the park, so the total turnout has to be a multiple of the capacity of the park, with the multiple higher than 1. Is the multiplier a 10? Not likely. Is it close to 1? Not likely either.

Posted by: Stan | Aug 20 2019 1:27 utc | 52

In other words, the fact that the HK government proposed this extradition bill demonstrates that Beijing observes and respects the “one party, two systems” principle, and the proposed extradition bill upholds it.
Posted by: Jen | Aug 20 2019 1:04 utc | 54
The fact of the protest even existing negates your statement, unless you are like Gruff thinking that these “simpleton” Hong Kongers are too stupid to know what is good for them.

Posted by: O | Aug 20 2019 1:50 utc | 53

Whatever the real number is it has China shaking in its boots.
Having lived in HK a number of years I can say during some holidays or times there are up to a million on the street and another million walking through the corridors within in and bridging the building, or it least it seemed that way which is why I sought safe haven on an outlying island
HK and China could end this all by announcing a massive public housing building project. Under the British this is partly what kept people at bay, that and plenty of jobs and wage inflation
I personally think the only ones concerned about extradition are the oligarchs and foreign (uS, British, Canadian)business men who feared being taken like Huaweis CFO. The rest pile on to express their anger at living costs and QoL. There is real anger at the grass roots level even if the protest leaders are muzzling the real reasons since their oligarch and business supporters (and us) dont want any changes on that front

Posted by: Pft | Aug 20 2019 1:58 utc | 54

Congrats to poster O! Your use of ad hominem and insults to other posters is sure to trigger b’s radar and set you soon on a course to Getlostville..

Posted by: Lozion | Aug 20 2019 2:02 utc | 55

@ Lozion who wrote
”
Congrats to poster O! Your use of ad hominem and insults to other posters is sure to trigger b’s radar and set you soon on a course to Getlostville..
”
This poster has been writing insults to other commenters (myself included) all there time at the MoA bar and b seems to have a different level of allowance for this than what you and I have experienced before here.
That they continue to not format their links as requested speaks volumes to their respect for others as well.
They seem to think and profess that an inheritance based culture with global private finance owners at the top is far more preferable than a merit based system that China is developing and using. Folk believing themselves exceptional would not like living in a meritocracy and would suffer from their anti-humanism.
Thanks to William Gruff for feeding the trolls when necessary, I haven’t the extra energy and mostly pass over commenters like O

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 20 2019 2:30 utc | 56

Jen @54:
You are quite right. Fact of the matter is, the proposal to revise the extradition bill is precisely to INCLUDE Taiwan so as to turn the murderer of a woman killed in Taiwan over to Taiwan authority as requested. The murderer used the killed woman’s credit card in Hong Kong, was caught and thus charged for mail fraud. He admitted to killing the woman in the hearing process, but the HK judge could not hand down a harsher sentence than 24 month for mail fraud, because the murder act was carried out in Taiwan and not in HK. Lo and behold, when Taiwan saw that there was this HK mass protest against China, in the name of extradition law revision to include them, ideological politics took over and Taiwan instead funded and abetted the riots against the revision. It is known that all the helmets worn by the rioters, all the logistics of violence and weapons used, and much of the money to payoff the rioters are actually paid for or funded by Taiwan government. That monster sitting in the office of ‘president’ in Taiwan has absolutely no soul.
I was in Hong Kong at the beginning of this incident. After the first day of marches (and violence at night under the veil of darkness, with protesters digging up bricks on sidewalks and sharpened iron rods from torn-up road block fences, to attack the police guarding the buildings), Taiwan issued a statement demanding HK to just hand over the murderer and forget about the law revision. None of these details were ever reported in western MSM. We are living in cynical times.

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Aug 20 2019 2:35 utc | 57

They seem to think and profess that an inheritance based culture with global private finance owners at the top is far more preferable than a merit based system that China is developing and using. Folk believing themselves exceptional would not like living in a meritocracy and would suffer from their anti-humanism.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 20 2019 2:30 utc | 60
Why are you making things up you lame ass? I never said I supported that. You need to get your head checked again.

Posted by: O | Aug 20 2019 2:58 utc | 58

assO
You dismiss this as ‘propaganda’
Beijing Review: National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in Hong Kong
(Legal origin of NED: U.S. Congress resolution H.R. 2915)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKXvLtX7tvs&feature=youtu.be
[Rolf]
So you calling b a ‘CCP propagandist’ too ?
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/09/the-ned-hong-kong-riots.html

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 3:17 utc | 59

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 3:17 utc | 64
Honestly you are too stupid to respond to anymore that it’s not even fun, but since you put up this gargantuan slow motion soft ball:
“Beijing Review:” Really, okay just like the NYT they have no skin in the game whatsoever, furthermore I have acknowledged that portions of the protest have been hijacked by government forces on both sides doe not negate authentic grievances expressed by the masses.
Second
“So you calling b a ‘CCP propagandist’ too ?” Don’t put words in my mouth, B is free to give his perspective on any story any way he feels like it. Every journalist, offers their own perspective and framing, there is no such thing as pure objectivity. I just don’t happen to agree on this one. Get over it. Echo chambers are for scared punk assses who don’t want thier views challenged at the very least questioned.

Posted by: O | Aug 20 2019 3:28 utc | 60

assO
This is fact…
NED is up to its eyeballs in the HK caper.
YOu dismissed it as ‘propaganda’
YOu’r the one who’s peddling propaganda big time,
Im still waiting for your proof of
‘CCP using agent provocateur ‘

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 3:44 utc | 61

assO 67
It’s better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 3:58 utc | 62

All doubt was removed long ago thusly i fail to understand the continual engagement?

Posted by: J-Dogg | Aug 20 2019 4:06 utc | 63

J-Dogg | Aug 20 2019 4:06 utc | 69
I’d rather not ‘engage’an assO,
too many sp, too little time.
BUt,
its getting a tad too fetid lately,
gotta assit b to do some house cleaning.

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 4:18 utc | 64

@ O #63 who wrote
”
Why are you making things up you lame ass? I never said I supported that. You need to get your head checked again.
”
Your comment at #35 with the improperly formed link to something about the China system of meritocracy says iI don’t make things up and your continued ad hominem and insults says the rest about your MoA bar bully BS

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 20 2019 4:26 utc | 65

assO71
honey ,
I never click on any of your links,
so dont bother ,
hehehe

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 4:27 utc | 66

assO75
This is your proof of China’s FF ?

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 4:38 utc | 67

Denk
Fair enough, yo. Its shift is almost over, flame away.

Posted by: J-Dogg | Aug 20 2019 5:54 utc | 68

Relying on our information here https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/08/18/opnieuw-massaal-protest-in-hongkong-zullen-demonstranten-die-m/ they mention 1,7 M participants indeed but in the text they specify that on the square itself no more than 100,000 people can gather and as the people kept coming the streets around filled. The number of 1,7 M doesn’t refer to the people on the square alone.
How many gathered in the streets around remains an open question.

Posted by: GV | Aug 20 2019 6:42 utc | 69

Facebook and Twitter no longer even attempt to hide their global pro–U.S. Empire censorship:
Facebook and Twitter Say China Is Spreading Disinformation in Hong Kong (The New York Times, August 19, 2019)

SAN FRANCISCO — China has adopted Russia’s playbook for spreading disinformation on Facebook and Twitter, deploying those tactics in its increasingly heated information war over the protests that have convulsed Hong Kong.
…
Facebook said it eliminated seven pages, three Facebook Groups and five accounts involved in the disinformation campaign about Hong Kong protesters. Twitter deleted 936 accounts and said it would ban state-backed media from promoting tweets after China Daily and other state-backed publications placed ads on its service that suggested the protesters were sponsored by Western interests and were becoming violent.
“These accounts were deliberately and specifically attempting to sow political discord in Hong Kong, including undermining the legitimacy and political positions of the protest movement on the ground,” Twitter said in a statement. “Based on our intensive investigations, we have reliable evidence to support that this is a coordinated state-backed operation.”
…
Although most of the disinformation was spread by the 936 accounts that Twitter eventually took down, the company said it also uncovered a broader group of 200,000 accounts. Those sprang up once Twitter began banning some of the earlier accounts; the majority of them were stopped before they were able to spread more messages, the company said.
Among the messages that the China-linked accounts posted was a tweet suggesting protesters were “taking benefits from the bad guys.” Another claimed the protesters had “ulterior motives.”
Twitter said it would give state-sponsored media a month to leave its advertising platform before its ban on promoted tweets from state-backed media goes into effect. The ban expands on the company’s efforts to combat Russian disinformation. In 2017, Twitter banned RT and Sputnik, international news outlets supported by the Kremlin, from advertising on its service.

Posted by: S | Aug 20 2019 7:46 utc | 70

…
That said, the fact that the color revolution crew have to lie so extravagantly about the attendance to their performances shows that many in Hong Kong are not falling for the empire’s sales pitch. I have to give the people of Hong Kong credit for that.
Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 19 2019 23:58 utc | 50
ABC.net.au’s afternoon headline snippet today mentioned that HK’s business big wigs are becoming concerned by the negative impact which the protests are having on HK’s economy and have called for them to stop.
However, ABC is becoming famous for repeating bs from Oz.gov-approved sources and not naming them. But there is probably a grain of truth in the report – unless there’s evidence that protests are usually good for business…

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 20 2019 8:15 utc | 71

Add to Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 19 2019 22:06 utc | 29
(HK protest numbers)
SBS.Oz News this evening latched onto the NYT 1.7 million.
All of the Oz MSM have signed up for Scum Mo’s Zio-Oz.gov demand that Julian Assange be demonised as a “threat to Oz’s security” (by exposing Western M-IC war crimes and deflecting attention from the m/billions of $$$ of bribes pocketed by so-called politicians).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 20 2019 9:01 utc | 72

it’s funny, that in under three decades, china has gone from using tanks and troops(albeit on a much larger and much more organized crowd/right in the capital), to using rubber bullets and tear gas, while letting autonomy reign (on a much smaller crowd/far away) by its elected rulers as promised. the countries around asia are looking and simply have nothing to says about the protests – asides from the usual opinion pieces denouncing everything china, which is to be expected, which many repeat. lol. all the countries in asia are generally silent about this protest. and that is official approval. except for ROC.
hong kong culture today is snobbish and sarcastic as usual. yet, just because they have gripes that they they bore upon themselves with decisions made in previous decades, means beijing today must “fix” it for them, and when they do and it doesn’t turn out right, HK can say beijing has autocratically fixed it for them. what beijing is doing is politically correct, to attempt to stay neutral while the problem sorts itself out locally. this is not to whitewash china, but beijing has made the sound decision that the protesters didn’t want and that was it didn’t need to use violence to fight violence.
also, the freedom to protest means one should have good reasons. though there are some, yet there are many protests in china itself about high rent prices/property values. the need to protest just to show off freedom is freedom at its worst forms and should be illegal(think yelling fire in a movie theater when there are none). the problems of hong kong are not China’s to solve. shenzhen/guangdong already surpassed hong kong when it built the new ports. so in a way the fence built to close off china that HK loved, has now made HK a prison for itself……. which is ironic for such freedom lovers.

Posted by: jason | Aug 20 2019 9:09 utc | 73

One of the insidious affects of ‘color revolutions’ is that they undermine the legitimacy of protests everywhere. This is similar to the way that exploitation of some NGOs to suit the political agendas of the West undermines the percieved legitimacy of all NGOs, however well intentioned, and to the way that use of some international peace workers (such as peace corps workers, journalists, academics, etc.) for spying and agitation purposes undermines the legitimacy and safety of all such workers, however well intentioned, as we see in Iran, etc..
Nor should this be considered unintended consequences. We should begin to see that the ‘powers that be’ in the West are killing multiple birds with each stone they throw. The same strategies that attack global multi-polarity also undermine various forms that people power can take. There is a kind of diabolical elegance to it. The ultimate goal seems to be global dominion by western elites.

Posted by: paul | Aug 20 2019 9:24 utc | 74

#80
Guess who stands to lose the most if the extradition bill goes through? Yup, those “HK’s business big wigs” who definitely don’t have their hands clean on the mainland and other assorted megarich mainlander elites wanted for corruption and tax evasion. It’s hard to imagine these wonderful people ain’t in cahoots with the CIA and it’s subsidiaries.

Posted by: JW | Aug 20 2019 10:52 utc | 75

@78:, nope. Even if the side streets are choc-a-block with umbrella-wielding marchers, they won’t add up to 1.7 million “peaceful protesters“, including those gormless gremlins.
Anyone who has lived in Hong Kong or visits regularly will know that its streets are mostly very narrow; the network around Victoria Park/Causeway – from Sogo to Times Square, and adjoining such as Lockhart, Yee Wo – physically are unable to hold that capacity.
Suppose if the main body of marchers on Hennessy towards Admiralty is in constant motion, shoulder to shoulder, on the 3km + route, and constantly reinforced by newcomers, the numbers are unlikely to add up to six-digits.
Besides, on that day, many bus routes were reduced or cut, as well as MTR services.
The two million marchers the first day of protests is suspect. Someone on Quora (non-Chinese user) worked out that two million marchers would occupy a 18 kms route, at least. Victoria Park to Central/Sheung Wan isn’t that long.
But mainstream corporate media prefers to sex up the numbers, to better demonize its chosen targets – such as June 4, which began with hundreds of thousands killed; then tens of thousands, possibly thousands; now it’s grudgingly hundreds, possibly thousands.

Posted by: LittleWhiteCabbage | Aug 20 2019 11:09 utc | 76

@ Posted by: GV | Aug 20 2019 6:42 utc | 69
Exceopt for the fact that there’s absolutely no mention — even in the pro-HK media — of protesters gathering outside Victoria Park. What is mentioned is that they marched outside the park to the streets against the HK police’s instructions.
If the mass extrapolated the park, then the pro-HK media would certainly be divulging it left and right, with hundreds of aerial pictures of the surroundings of the park packed with people.
Unless you want to get philosophical and posit that every person on the streets that day were spiritually protesting, “with the protesters in heart”, etc. etc. — but that would be an idealist, not a realist, interpretation of the facts.

Posted by: vk | Aug 20 2019 11:54 utc | 77

@ Posted by: O | Aug 20 2019 0:04 utc | 48
So here we have “O”, postmodernist extraordinaire.
Here’s an idea that I think you’ll love it: let’s go back to feudalism, where every city was walled and “free” (independent). That way, they can all keep their “flavor”…
And Hong Kong has similar extradition deals with other countries. Extradition laws are bread and butter of international law of liberal democracy, so I don’t get where you’re getting that this is an erosion of 1C2S.

Posted by: vk | Aug 20 2019 12:01 utc | 78

I am pretty convinced that agreements between Russia and Turkey exiat regarding Idlib beyond the DMZ and these jets could be bravado for domestic consumption.
But we musn’t forget that Turkey is under pressure from all sides – Syria, Iraq, Russia, US, East Med, and would be regional allies and foes alike are quite happy to watch Turkey, US and Kurds pitted against each other, eapecially if it means that Turkey burns.
Under such conditions Erdogan could make serious errors of judgement and there are few around him now that would dare say anything.

Posted by: AtaBrit | Aug 20 2019 12:06 utc | 79

Thanks to b as usual for this piece.
There is another excellent article about these Hong Kong “protests” by Zeese and Flowers over on Consortium News.
On the BBC World Service this morning the news program facilitator (or whatever they are called) spoke with a BBC reporter in China about the HK protests, mentioning those that took place in HK’s airport and that there was violence during them. Mind you, that violence remained un-ascribed, allowing for the impression that any violence perpetrated was likely done by the HK police rather than, as it was, by the “protestors.” Then the London based BBC person mentioned that the protest leaders were demanding that Lam and her government “negotiate” with them, but she only suggested speaking with them, not “negotiating.” This Beeb person went out of her way to suggest that there was something amiss with Lam not wanting to “negotiate” with the protestors.
Now does *anyone* in their right mind think that either the US or UK government leaders would “negotiate” with protestors who had just a few days prior blocked say Heathrow or Kennedy airports, preventing all passengers from accessing their flights, who had severely beaten up journalists and prevented paramedics from attending to their victims? Never mind that were such occasions to happen in either the US or UK the forces of law and order would hardly be wearing velvet gloves in dealing with such “protests.”
The MSM on both sides of the Atlantic, and the US and UK governments are, to say the very least, disingenuous and duplicitous in their condemnations of HK – China.

Posted by: AnneR | Aug 20 2019 13:56 utc | 80

I would point out that the organizers included the numbers of people who swelled/overflowed OUTSIDE of Victoria Park.
In this, and rallies past, Victoria Park serves more like the central rallying point – it is true that Victoria Park couldn’t hold the 1.7 million number, but it’s just as true that the number includes more than just the people in the park limits.
The police number specifically stated that it was for the number in Victoria Park only, so this is a case where both numbers can be right, but the organizers’ numbers tell the whole story (even if there’s a probability of some inflation), while the police only looked at a section of it.

Posted by: dhj | Aug 20 2019 15:12 utc | 81

ABOUT WSWS – Starting back in 1967 in San Diego, California, U.S., I attended Anti-Vietnam-War demonstrations. For the first 6 months, there were a total of EIGHT of us – yes, 8 (no more no less). Meanwhile, Los Angeles, just 120 miles / 200 km north, had 100,000; and San Francisco, also in California, had 250,000 – 1,000,000 demonstrators regularly.
Among the EIGHT of us were THREE (yes 3) Trotskyites, from THREE separate organizations: IS (International Socialist), Spartacus League, and what became WSWS. At first, I tried follow their “leadership” – seeing as they WERE the most political of the 8 of us. But, it was clear that their opposition to each other was more important than was trying to organize the masses of San Diegans. This was difficult to understand (they were all “Trots” so why the animosity?).
But then their REAL ESSENCE came out: They ALL “supported” the Vietnamese Revolution EXCEPT that they opposed the Vietnamese Revolution’s LEADERSHIP. Over the last 50+ years, I’ve seen endless examples of Trots: “Supporting revolution” everywhere EXCEPT where it is NOT LED by Trots – and seeing as Trots NEVER lead popular movements; they actually oppose ALL revolutionary movements (including that of the Syrian vast majority, led by Assad). They also “support” Socialism everywhere EXCEPT where it is NOT LED by Trots – and seeing as Trots NEVER organize successful revolutions that lead to real socialism; ALL Trots oppose all real socialism EVERYWHERE and at all times.
In other words, when you read stuff over at WSWS you must analyze what they say by understanding their (above-stated) agenda. Look out! They are 100% sabateurs of all revolutionary movements and, more generally, of all popular movements.

Posted by: Pablo Novi | Aug 20 2019 15:52 utc | 82

Global Times editorial takes aim at Mike Pence:
“Senior US officials have recently linked the Sino-US economic and trade negotiations with the affairs of Hong Kong. Pence’s remarks on Monday were the most stark and outrageous.
“Hong Kong affairs are China’s internal affairs. The US has no basis to interfere in Hong Kong affairs under international law, nor does it have the ability to influence how China solve Hong Kong problem independently.” [My Emphasis]
In other words, shut the hell up. China certainly won’t stand for Pence’s or any other Outlaw US Empire apparatchik’s crap and concludes accordingly:
“Pence’s remarks meant that the US was jumping to the fore over Hong Kong when economic pressure did not work. Adding fuel to the fire, the US also confirmed it would sell 66 F-16V fighter jets to the island of Taiwan. Washington is taking more actions on the issue of human rights. It is foreseeable that the US side will put all of its cards on the table.
“However, the US is making strategic mistakes. The US wants to revive its domestic economy, but choosing a conflict in such an important direction is bound to lead to a serious distraction of resources and attention. China will stand firm, not fail, and history will conclude: America has chosen the wrong adversary at the wrong time.” {My Emphasis]
Yes, the bolded text ought to be repeated over and over. The utter folly of trying to destabilize Hong Kong and then somehow China proper using Color Revolution tactics has finally gone full circle with the perpetrators believing their own propaganda. Now there’s no recovering the diplomatic conditions that existed pre Trade War, and that extends beyond China. In 1949 an answer was demanded to Who Lost China. The record’s quite clear that support for Kuomintang is what Lost China; thus, one must examine the reasons why Chaing and his gangsters had USG support. For similar reasons China is being lost again, but I doubt USG officials will even understand why.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 16:07 utc | 83

sob in chief, aka the prez of the unitedstates…
*CCP has better not resort to violence against the
protestors, we dun wanna see another TAM in HK’
Translation…
*We managed to screw China big time with that
TAM ‘massacre’ hoax,
what if we can incite a real bloodbath
in HK this time, with hundreds of ‘journos’ camera at the ready,
broadcasting it live to the world’ ?

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 16:09 utc | 84

Pablo Novi @82 – Don’t know if you read The Grayzone, but it has an excellent article (put up today) by Ben Norton which discusses the ISO, its Trotskyite roots, its offshoot the DSA, and their combined anti-anti-imperialist, anti-communist/socialist governments (i.e. in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua). Well worth the read, IMO.
The financing of these groups would seem to come from – surprise – the NED and something called the Tides Foundation and their agenda is, also unsurprising, for “regime” change.
Haymarket Books, Jacobin and Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman seem to be involved too.

Posted by: AnneR | Aug 20 2019 16:38 utc | 85

Pro-China/Anti-USA protests are televised and reported upon, but only by non-BigLie Media, like the one linked to Telesur.
A 2016 poll showing majority of HK residents prefer to remain attached to Mainland is reported on Twitter by investigative journalist Ben Norton. The subsequent thread shows the extent and impact of Twitter’s new censorship actions–every tweet refuting Outlaw US Empire propaganda talking points was removed allowing the lies to stand alone–an impressive example proving the Empire cannot win the information war any longer.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 16:42 utc | 86

A martian reading the west MSM for a week would
get the unmistakable impression that the [[[five liars]]]
are great humanists,….cuz [[[they]]] bleat about HR
24×7.
The Martians would also be forgiven if they somehow
figure that the [[[five liars]]] are ‘Panda huggers’,
cuz,,,..[[[they]]] bleat about HR in CHINA, 24×7.
Yet,
In case you forget,
This’s How the [[[five liars]]] celebrate the CIA/MI6 orchestrated genocide of Chinese Indonesia in 1965…

Marshall Green, US ambassador

The US is generally sympathetic with and admiring of what the army is doing.”

Robert J Martens, political officer in the US embassy

‘It was a big help to the army,’. ‘They probably killed a lot of people and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that’s not all bad. There’s a time when you have to strike hard at a decisive moment.

Time

‘The West’s Best News in Asia

US News and World Report

‘Indonesia: Hope . . . where there was once none’.

New York Times columnist James Reston

‘A gleam of light in Asia

Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt,

‘With 500,000 to a million communist sympathisers knocked off,’ ‘I think it’s safe to assume a reorientation has taken place.’

What might that ‘reorientation‘ be to warrant rubbing off three millions souls and getting the whole [[[family]]] in ecstasy ?
James Reston

‘ The savage transformation of Indonesia from a pro-Chinese policy under Sukarno to a defiantly anti-Communist policy under General Suharto is, of course, the most important of these developments’

Sir Andrew Gilchrist, the British ambassador in Jakarta,

“I have never concealed from you my belief that a little shooting in Indonesia would be an essential preliminary to effective change,”

foreign secretary Michael Stewart

* it’s great potential opportunities to British exporters” that were on offer from a new regime, so Britain should “try to secure a slice of the cake”.

Posted by: denk | Aug 20 2019 16:58 utc | 87

“So you are of the view that Trump is part of attempt to create a controlled demolition of the US Empire?”
The ‘controlled demolition of the US Empire’ is an elaborate euphemism for re-nationalism, I suppose. To unfold in three concentric waves.
Step 1. Trade restructuring – close the NAFTA loophole, redirect production to the NA Trade bloc (and friendlier reciprocating markets – Laos, Vietnam, India, etc). Closer to home, Mexico will be a huge beneficiary. Redirected supply lines are no arid macroeconomic development. They mean the radical bestowal of prosperity in some countries and the revocation of prosperity in others. I liken the USMCA impending wage increase in Mexico to Fordism in turn-of-the century America. The $5 a day program minted the US middle class and averted the central crisis of capitalism, overproduction. Anybody can build factories, staff them with rural peasantry and create a tsunami of global deflation. Productive capacity’s a cheap trick. What bestows today’s prosperity? DEMAND. Trump is asserting the previously unasserted crown jewel of the global economy: a highly developed demand market that has long-since traversed the middle income trap, no small feat.
The Eurasian Century will not arrive soon enough to displace US demand, not for the CCP anyway. Hillary was to cement the terminus of the Managed Decline Arc. Woops. Xi misread Trump. It may sound trite, but Trump’s not a politician. His resume ‘moves backwards’. He’s not a political class grifter who’s gathering chits in career one to build a global foundation in career 2. This is the career trajectory the Chinese have been normalized towards. Their 11th hour adjustments in the first agreement would have been snatched by any craven US politician and heralded as a victory. Trump defied all expectations by walking away. There’s no doubt this rattled the Chinese. Let’s also not forget Trump picked this fight as he did NAFTA renegotiation. These were settled modes of business in line with globalist and corporatist agendas. The Eurasian Century (and belated domestic Chinese demand, the offsetting sponge the world needed in 1999 and should have insisted upon had Clinton not been bought off to WTO entry. This treachery, in the end, served no one except the political classes of both nations.) The ferocity of the present China-US struggle is a direct result of its criminal belatedness. WW3 is a possible outcome. Neither nation was well-served by this procrastination. (Google the 1996 United States campaign finance controversy).
Step 2. A significant resurgence of US domestic productivity collapses the Triffin Paradox which mandates structural trade deficits from the reserve currency nation. Main Street retakes the streets from Wall Street money-changers who were only too happy to abet the trade deficit (and make the $ the US’ preeminent export) by shipping manufacturing overseas (it wasn’t ‘their’ jobs after all) , hollowing out the soul of the country and creating a nation of opium-eaters. The US Chamber of Commerce (multinational mouthpiece) detests Trump. This will ultimately lead to a relinquishing of USD reserve currency status. It was going to happen anyway under the globalist regime, just more wrenchingly ala the Argentine Paradox.
Step 3. What is after all the US military’s paycheck? The petrodollar. A full spectrum military answerable to a nationalized currency would hyper-inflate away overnight. The Empire military footprint is unsustainable with a trade-rebalanced and re-nationalized USD and absent the infinite flow of defended oil (hence the Oil Standard usurping the Gold Standard in 1973 – the peak household income year in the US incidentally). So a receding MIC is implicit in the Trump agenda, though too controversial to trumpet at this early juncture –back end of term 2 maybe? Natural attrition will be tagged with this outcome. We see Soros and Koch already joining forces to herald a new era of peace. Strange bedfellows.
In the broadest terms, the Trump theme is a tectonic and hyper-ambitious re-seating of Main Street as the driver of the American economy. This pits him against every vested interest on the planet. It’s the ultimate counter-cycle to one-worldism. The globalists were done with America and ready to toss the population to a fentanyl fog.
I prefer skirting Trump is a moron trope. Suffice to say SOMEBODY assembled the Navarro-Lighthizer-Ross-Mnuchin trade team -the only nucleus that matters for Step 1 above. want to sell into this market? There will be a kiosk fee. You want to call that a war? Well, that sounds a bit histrionic. But maybe it also conveys your fear. Leveraging US demand for geopolitical and trade advantage after decades of post-WW2 market building in devastated nations. This policy had overstayed its efficacy from an ‘America First’ standpoint.

Posted by: FSD | Aug 20 2019 17:02 utc | 88

FSD @88–
And what commercial goods will the Outlaw US Empire endeavor to export when its industrial base is essentially non-existent and its financialized banks unwilling/incapable of loaning the funds to resurrect that industrial base? The next casualty of Trump’s Trade Wars will be big-box retailers as their inventory consists almost entirely of imports. The bubble-inflated financial markets will then follow. Trump’s economic mismanagement isn’t entirely his doing since he’s just following Neoliberal Junk Economics.
Only one question really matters: Will Sanders be able to build a big enough Movement to oust the poisonous Neoliberal Orthodoxy and return the USA to the mixed economy of welfare state assisted industrial capitalism in order to construct the resiliency Nature will demand of every political-economy as we move deeper into the 21st Century and confront our rapidly escalating Climate Crisis?

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 17:26 utc | 89

So let me understand the Orange Clowns economic program: Trump stands at the sea shore and orders the tides to turn back. Manufacturing magically reappears in murica. Unicorns spout rainbows out of their… Sigh! What a way to go.

Posted by: what did I just read | Aug 20 2019 22:00 utc | 90

Actually South Park had it right. The is the Under pant gnome gambit.
Step 1- Steal Underpants. (Trade war)
Step 2- blah blah magic ?????
Step 3- Profit!! (Win bigley)
In the real world, step 2 cant happen. As long as the dollar buys butt loads more overseas, manufacturing will not return to murica. This is basic capitalism. And as long as the dollar is the default global reserve currency, it’s value will never shrink enough to change the status quo. The Empire needs a strong dollar as a weapon to use against its perceived adversaries, so reserve status will not end as long as the Empire aspires to be an Empire. In short, America has no future. Slow or fast, the end is coming.

Posted by: what did I just read | Aug 20 2019 22:17 utc | 91

@86 I linked to the evidence of Twitter’s gross censorship. Here Yasha Levine provides evidence Twitter’s influenced by the CIA via its Freedom House NGO and makes other points on the thread as to how “You can judge a person’s American Empire shill rating by their reaction to this news:” about Facebook and Twitter’s government requested censorship. Why is it that RT gets censored while BBC isn’t.
In other news, CNBC reports:
“The average American household will be down $1,000 per year thanks to the newest round of tariffs on Chinese goods, according to J.P. Morgan.”
That’s why the made in Hong Kong for US TV protests are so important–they’re part of the BigLie that China’s at fault for the increased cost of living.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 22:27 utc | 92

One of the complaints voiced by the pseudo protesters was the desire for democracy, which I showed to be false through an explanation of Hong Kong’s political system, which is quite democratic and boasts of several progressive mechanisms that don’t exist within the Outlaw US Empire. So, if democracy already existed, what was this “democracy” that was being demanded? Since we know the operation was run by the Outlaw US Empire for its own domestic consumption, the “democracy” being demanded was that of the Neoliberal variety based on Hayek’s conception of a “free market” that leads to the sort of Oligarchic domination now present within the USA. As Hudson observes in J is for Junk Economics:
“The real question is thus whether governments will be democratic or oligarchic. Will they subsidize the economy and undertake public infrastructure investment, or will they tax the population at large to subsidize the FIRE sector and other special interests?”
In calling for a return of their colonial standing with the UK or a new position as an outpost of the Outlaw US Empire, the protesters were demanding to be ruled by aggressive Neoliberal means that would make their social condition worse–We want to be as bad off as American and the UK publics was the genuine message in a desperate effort to trick those publics into believing their way’s the best way. That’s why the NY Times put so much verbiage into support dutifully echoed by BigLie Media.
It’s essentially over now. A large percentage of Hong Kongese know they were played, and both the Hong Kong and Mainland governments knew they were being played and said so. Both are to be commended for their management of the ordeal by ensuring that no police riots broke out to provide the false legitimation sought by the pseudo protesters.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 20 2019 23:57 utc | 93

Hongkonger capitalist elite on the ropes, getting desperate:
Lam to establish platform for talks with protesters
Well, opening this lines helps China tactically in two ways:
1) it “forces” (induces) the protesters — who have been so far using the tactic of “leaderlessness” in order make its head more protected from police decapitation operation — to create a leadership. Even if merely nominal, the protesters will now have to make their demands public. This will help the government in the continuing propaganda warfare against the color revolutionaries;
2) it induces the protesters — most of which are not conscious color revolutionaries (i.e. on the American payroll) — to do more peaceful protests than to resort to “marginal violence”. Like a treat to a dog, the government is throwing a bone to the protesters to sign that they will get more the more peaceful they behave.
However, there’s also an underlying cause for this gesture: the Hongkonger capitalist elite is getting worried it will lose the 1C2S. The color revolution won’t spread to the Mainland. The protesters cannot achieve a military victory. The only way the pressure can go out is to the Hongkonger capitalists. Carrie Lam, as a representative of this elite, is very concerned how the conjuncture is evolving.
Probably, the first message she will send to the protester “leaders” will be: “help me help you”.
Meanwhile, Mike Pence echoes Lam’s desperation in America by stating: keep the 1C2S, or no trade deal. This will backfire badly for the West, and — in conjunction with Twitter and Facebook’s awful PR move of banning hundreds of Chinese accounts because the Mulan movie — erode further its precious “soft power”, which, let’s be honest, is the only thing left for the West right now.

Posted by: vk | Aug 21 2019 0:27 utc | 94

Posted by: anon | Aug 20 2019 0:43 utc | 49
As opposed to your anonymous attacks. And I too, appreciate WG here. The people you say he is a mouth piece for also use those like you. Just sayin’, I still read you both (or are you that other anon?).
Tom in AZ

Posted by: Tom in AZ | Aug 21 2019 0:31 utc | 95

OT–OT–OT–
Apparently Upton Sinclair was the first to write about the usurpation of Western education by what would become the forces of Neoliberalism in his 1923 book Goose Step: A Study of American Education, which describes the rise of the Chicago School which was founded by John D. Rockefeller and called the University of Standard Oil by Sinclair. Combined with Bernays, we can see that our current road to serfdom was deliberately chosen @100 years ago to enrich what’s now known as the 1%. Yet another bit of knowledge gleaned from Hudson’s J is for Junk Economics!

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 21 2019 0:45 utc | 96

Randomly found your blog… I think you’re right if you are just estimating the crowd in the soccer courts and the lawn green in Victoria Park. BUT I was there on Sunday and it was very much packed with people on three roads running parallel from FORTRESS HILL to CENTRAL, CHATER GARDEN. A distance of about 4.3 km, with people coming and going from 1:30pm to 7pm. No one would be able to estimate the crowd size, but definitely not only 138,000 people.

Posted by: assistanttolamcarrie | Aug 21 2019 1:27 utc | 97

Well, it appears that b has duplicated one of the Labors of Hercules here — thanks! Smells a lot better now, LOL!

Posted by: PhilK | Aug 21 2019 2:30 utc | 98

AnneR 85
Thanks for the link. The WWSW are critical of Socialist Workers Jacobin etc, Democratic Socialists. I find it confusing myself the divisions.
I did a quick search for ISO on their website and several articles came up about the ISO. I was unable to find anything with search Socialist Workers, but trust me they are critical of what they call “pseudo-left”. While I do read their analysis, I always read elsewhere too. In their history section there are articles on how the left was infiltrated.
Here are some article I found on just the ISO, the last link the most recent in July 2019.
Who Funded the ISO
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/04/15/fund-a15.html
Factional provocation, middle-class hysteria, and the collapse of the International Socialist Organization
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/04/02/inte-a02.html
The Political Origins and Consequences of the 1982–86 Split in the International Committee of the Fourth International
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/03/icfi-a03.html
Socialism 2019: The ex-International Socialist Organization embraces the Democratic Party
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/07/19/soci-j19.html

Posted by: Deb | Aug 21 2019 3:17 utc | 99

@ Posted by: vk | Aug 20 2019 11:54 utc | 77
You’re missing my point entirely!
The media acknowledged there were no more than 100,000 people on the square which makes this article a waste of time. I left the question on how many people were in the street open because I don’t know and I don’t make guesses or baseless claims.
And please look up what philosophy is all about.

Posted by: GV | Aug 21 2019 3:34 utc | 100

Back to Main