tonbridgebrit

6 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

Britain's lease ran out. The lease was extorted under duress anyway so hardly an advert for democracy. To hear the British talk about democracy for Hong Kong makes me laugh, because it was a UK appointed governorship when Britain had control. A bit late to the party ain't they? Why didn't they give democracy to Hong Kongers when they ran the place?

Hypocrisy reeks doesn't it? Then watch Britain change its tune if Brexit happens and they want a trade deal with China.

I reckon your post is great.
Hong Kong was previously in the British Empire, just like India. Was there democracy in Hong Kong prior to 1997 ?  Off-course not. The British Empire was built on exploitation of those in the Empire, it was certainly nothing to do with spreading freedom and democracy. The demonstraters/rioters waving British flags look absurd.

I really do think that the British government should simply shut up about Hong Kong, stay out of it. Let China solve what is basically a problem for China/Hong Kong. And the British government is saying very little about Hong Kong. The reason for this is, you're right, Briain needs a trade deal with China once Brexit actually takes place.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/08/business/hong-kong-protests-disney/index.html

And Disney are feeling the pain. The riots/demonstrations in Hong Kong are massively reducing the number of tourists and visitors in Hong Kong. Disney has a theme park in Hong Kong.


From the report at CNN, "Disney (DIS) reported strong earnings on Thursday, but flagged mounting losses at its theme park in Hong Kong, where protests have gripped the city for months and walloped its tourism industry."

And " If the current trends continue, operating income at Hong Kong Disneyland could fall by $275 million in Disney's current fiscal year, which ends in September 2020, the company's chief financial officer Christine McCarthy said during an earnings call."

And also, "The local theme park was a drag on international business last quarter, when operating income at Hong Kong Disneyland fell $55 million, offsetting growth at parks in Paris and Shanghai."


Okay, if you are in the Far East, don't bother to turn up in Disney in Hong Kong. Go to the theme park in Shanghai. There's no protests in Shanghai.

And also, the media are getting tired and bored of covering the story. The media, they know that people in Britain and America are bored and fed up of watching the demonstrations/riots on their televisions.

Let's hope that the media will reduce or stop their coverage of the Hong Kong protests. Once that happens, hopefully, the rioters will see sense, and stop their riots, knowing that their riots are useless. There's no 'end game' to the riots, what's the point of carrying on ?

9 hours ago, PatOngo said:

I have a feeling that when the Chinese crackdown finally comes, and I'm sure it will, it won't be pretty!

7 hours ago, animalmagic said:

Perhaps it has already started?  It's certainly not pretty at the moment.

The protests have been going on since June. We're now in November. So, five months of protests. And during this entire time, people have been saying that Beijing is about to launch the crackdown. Well, Beijing has not yet taken the bait.

Perhaps the crackdown has already started ? It's not looking pretty ? I think we should take a look at the bigger picture. Demonstrations take place in Iraq and forty or fifty people die in one day of protests. We've had five months of protests in Hong Kong, and the number of deaths has been almost zero. The unfortunate child who died fell from a high place. He wasn't shot by police. Notice from the article, somebody else died back in June. That man was on scaffolding, unfurling a protest banner, he fell.  Police and riot police did not kill him.


Bearing in mind that the demonstrations/riots have been going on for five months, it's a miracle that so few people have died.

And Beijing won't send in the Chinese soldiers to stop the riots. Beijing won't repeat what they did at Tiananmen Square back in 1989. Beijing won't take the bait. The protesters know that, that's why they are carrying on with their riots.  So, what's going to happen ?
I think these protests/riots will continue. The months will go by, they will continue. How about next year, in June, we will see the one year anniversary of the continuing demonstrations/riots ?


And all this, it is harming Hong Kong's economy. Let's hope tourists from mainland China and the rest of the world, will ignore the riots and turn up in Hong Kong. However, I think that tourists will continue to NOT turn up in Hong Kong. 

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/emmerdale-recasts-asan-njies-role-101749259.html

So, after all this talk, we now know what actually happened. The 39 victims were all Vietnamese. Ten were actually teenagers. Eight female and thirty one male, and they were from six provinces in Vietnam.

Below is a photo of Pham Thi Tra My, 26.




Them Vietnamese are hard-working people. Why on earth have them pay about ten thousand dollars to be smuggled into Britain ? It would be far better to just let them in legally. Women like the above lady are the exact type of people that Britain should have.

6 minutes ago, UncleMhee said:

If you know where you're staying and put that on your TM 6 (entry card) it should be accepted. You may have to show equivalent to Bht 20,000 to enable payment for your stay.

Thanks, there's people who claim that when or if asked about the twenty thousand baht, you have to show baht. I think it's very rare to be asked to show the money.

But about where you are staying. Surely, you can just write any address of any hotel, no need for proof ?

Also, with a British passprt, you can enter on the 30 day stamp twice in one year if you do it by land. But if you fly in, you can get the 30 day stamp as many times as you want, per year ??? As long as you have your flight out of Thailand during your 30 day stay ?

Okay, for somebody with a British passport, flying into Thailand for a three weeks holiday. The flight out of Thailand has already been booked and paid for. In this case, surely, there is no need to show proof of accomadation ???

9 hours ago, animalmagic said:

Sadly there are chapters in the history of every country that are reprehensible; human history is littered with them. 

By the way, opium is not the same as heroin it is a source of heroin.  Opium is the raw product taken from the poppy and then goes through various stages of refinement to become Morphine and then Heroin 1,2,3,and 4.  Heroin 4 is far more damaging and it is difficult for an addict to survive or quit.  Strangely very similar to the difference in the stages of raw sugar products processed all the way to white refined sugar; the latter is much more difficult for the body to process and does more damage than the raw original.

I fully understand the point of your comments on the abductions, NBA and Cathay, but would suggest that is purely an economic/profit point of view.  The individuals, on the whole, involved in the protest would appear to be placing personal liberties as a priority over financial gains; probably anathema and hard to comprehend for any Government.  My use of those examples was to show the level of distrust and disappointment that HK youngsters seem to have reached as they have experienced greater exposure to immigrants and tourists from the Mainland.  One country, two systems; and very different groups of people.

There does not appear to be a good outcome from all of this; but even worse there are no initiatives to stop or solve it.  The Govt says they will discuss things after the violence stops but produces no incentives for it to do so.  The Police are being expected to fight street battles to win a political war; that always ends well!

Tragic to see a once proud and respected police force now become the bete noire of the society it is part of and should protect.

I say, thanks again, for your post.

Britain fighting and winning two Opium Wars and exporting opium to China (by the way, the opium was grown in India, supposedly) was not as bad as the slave trade in the West Indies, but still, it was a dark chapter in Britain's history.

The economic/profit point of view. Yes, a minority in society (and I reckon you are part of this minority) genuinely feel that profit is not the number one priority. But I would say, most people in the US government do feel that profit/benefits is what it's all about. Basically, Washington is banging the anti-China drum, going on and on about negative stories about China, but their real motive is to extract greater benefits from China. Huawei is living proof of this. Washington simply does not want a Chinese company making a big profit in America. So, they want to restrict Huawei, and Washington's excuse is to claim that Huawei is a danger to American security. What Washington actually wants is, is that profits in America will stay in American hands, and not in Chinese (or any other non-American) hands.

What about the Hong Kong police ? During the Colonial Era, Hong Kong's police force was massively corrupt, the corruption was almost laughable. People might as well say, that Hong Kong's police force was just a corrupt (or almost as corrupt) as other police forces in various countries in South East Asia (Cambodia, Vietnam, Burma, etc) . Are the Hong Kong police the same as they were during the Colonial Era, prior to 1997 ????


Okay, let's get to really what's happening. Back in the 1970s and 80s, Hong Kong made a good profit. Basically, companies in Hong Kong purchased cheap goods from mainland China and re-routed (re-exported) the goods to America and Europe. They also bought goods from America and Europe, and re-routed (re-exported) the stuff to mainland China. This was the biggest single reason for Hong Kong's prosperity prior to the 1990s. Today, China is exporting goods to America directly. Ships docked in Shanghai, they're packed with cheap Chinese goods, and they sail to California directly. No need for the middle-men in Hong Kong.

Basically, Hong Kong is losing it's vital status as an export/import point for mainland China. But Hong Kong is still prosperous. Vast numbers of mainland Chinese tourists flood Hong Kong. And mega-rich mainland Chinese purchase real estate in Hong Kong, keeping Hong Kong apartment prices very high.


The youngsters in Hong Kong, facing sky-high apartment prices, noticing that Hong Kong's importance is dissapearing (China can export to America directly, no need to go through Hong Kong) , well, they are frustrated. Hong Kong, economically, is becoming the same as any city in mainland China. That's why the youngsters are angry. Do your job, but you will never own your own home, because the price of the apartment is too high. Spend your whole life paying rent. The youngsters, their religious freedom, freedom to read any newspaper, sexual freedom, none of that is being taken away. But they are still angry.

3 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Here's a bunch of Brits using it 'correctly' in Whitehall today to celebrate our leaving of the EU today.

 

Them Brexiteers, they're British, they're entitled to use the Union Jack. But them people who are Remainers, they're also British, they're also allowed to use the Union Jack.  ????

I'm just trying to say, people who are not British, and if they don't have British ancestry, they look a bit silly if they bring out the Union Jack. The Australians are mainly people with British ancestry living in Australia. So, it's sort of okay, that they've got a Union Jack in the corner of their flag.

1 hour ago, animalmagic said:

The actual 99 year lease was only for the New Territories, HK island was ceded to the British after the 1st Opium War 1830-42, and the Kowloon Peninsula after the 2nd Opium War 1856-60.

 

I never mentioned Independence as I simply referred to self determination; which can be allowed whilst still being an inalienable part of China.

To my understanding the current situation has escalated beyond the Extradition issue which, if you have not seen the news, China ignored the absence of when abducting the Causeway Bay booksellers from HK and Guo Minhai from Thailand a few years ago.  Currently the demonstrators demand 'five demands not one less'.

I do not dispute the freedom of religion or the press enjoyed by HK since 1997 but you may be interested to know that the Hong Kong Free Press, a small independent news organization, has very recently been blocked on public computers at the airport.  Freedom of speech was not encouraged in the recent row with the manager of the Houston Rockets and the NBA.  There are also several ex members of Cathay Pacific who lost their jobs because they spoke out on various social media platforms.

In short, the freedoms you mention may not be quite as free as you think.

Thank you for your post. Interesting.

Yes, you're correct, Hong Kong Island itself was taken by Britain far earlier than 1898. It was taken with no deal whatsover to give it back to China. Yes, Britain won a war against China, the Opium War. A war that  Britain won, and it meant that British companies were fully allowed to export opium (stuff that is similar to herione) to China. The Emperor of China did not want opium in China, and fought a war to stop opium. It's a chapter of British history that is not good, almost as bad as the slave trade.

Those negotiations between the Thatcher government and Beijing in the 1980s, Britain could have stated that Hong Kong Island itself would stay British forever, or indefinitely. But Britain did not say that. Britain agreed to handed over the whole lot (Hong Kong Island, Kowloon, the New Territorries) back to China in 1997. Why ? I'd say it was partly to do with accepting that taking land from China after fighting two Opium Wars was a dark chapter of British history, and the British government knew this. Hence, as a good will gesture, hand back the whole lot, it was after all, actually 'stolen' from China during the 1800s.

Talk about the abduction of the Hong Kong booksellers by Chinese agents. Was Beijing wrong to arrest the booksellers in Hong Kong and take them to China ? Was Beijing wrong to 'abduct' the Chinese man who was in Thailand, because of his books ? Who wants to condemn Thailand for allowing the Chinese agents to carry out the abduction of the Chinese man in Thailand ? So, Thailand allows Chinese agents to abduct a Chinese man in Thailand, we're not going to condemn Thailand for this. But Hong Kong allows Chinese in Hong Kong to be transported to China to face questioning, we condemn Hong Kong ??


About the NBA and Houston Rockets. They said their stuff, and they've now had some of their sales and profits in China taken away from them. Well, what do people expect ? If people say something against Beijing, well, surely, it's Beijing's right to block (or partially block) their goods or sales, in China ?

As for Cathay Pacific, a lot of their profit is made on routes to mainland China. Should Cathay Pacific tolerate staff who condemn mainland China ? Is it Beijing's freedom to partially stop airlines operating in China, if those airlines promote anti-Beijing views ? Them kids took over Hong Kong Airport for two days, causing flights to be cancelled or postponed. If kids in Britain take-over whatever airport in England, the British government would remove them straight away. Whatever their protest, they would still be removed straight away.


And what is happening in Hong Kong now ? There are rioters who are vandalizing banks that are from mainland China. They're also setting fire to shops and eating places that have been set up by mainland Chinese companies. What on earth are they doing ? They're massively reducing the number of mainland Chinese tourists entering Hong Kong. If mainland Chinese tourists boycott Hong Kong even after the riots are all over, well, would that be surprising ? Hong Kong's economy is far more reliant on China than Britain's reliance on Europe. And, Britain is trying to avoid a suicidal Hard Brexit. Is Hong Kong actually looking for a suicidal 'economic drifting away' from China ? 

21 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

There  does seem to  some  death wish  desire on the part of the HK  demonstrators...or at least those  who  are perpetuating agitation. I  have  family  members  by  marriage and  their  associates  in HK who are infuriated  at the disruptions that they see as  culminating  in Beijing stepping in.

Well, Beijing is not going to step in and end these riots. Beijing knows that this will be disastrous if they do step in. But this is creating a continuation of the riots. The riots cannot be stopped, they will carry on. And the continuation of these riots, this is harming Hong Kong's economy. The number of tourists turning up in Hong Kong is far lower than what it should be. Hong Kong's economy is being seriously harmed.  And it's not just the tourism sector that is being harmed.

9 hours ago, animalmagic said:

Apart from the fact that India was returned to the people of India and they were allowed self determination.  HK was returned to China in accordance with China's claim of it being a part of China.  HK people were promised self determination under the one country two systems principle in the form of universal suffrage as part of the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. 

 

Hong Kong. It was during the 1980s when Britain and China did a deal about the Handover in 1997. We have to bear in mind that Britain took Hong Kong on a 99 year lease in 1898, hence, the lease expired in 1997, and so, negotiations over the 1997 Handover.

The Beijing government could have said "look, we're not interested in any talks, the lease expires in 1997, Britain will leave, Beijing (China) will take over, there will be no transition period after 1997, none of the [one country two systems] will be brought in".  Beijing could have said that, and Britain would have been able to do nothing.  Instead, Britan and China negotiated a sensible deal, 50 years of "one country two systems".

Now then, that deal for 50 years guaranteed stuff like freedom of religion and freedom of speech, and other stuff. With freedom of religion and freedom of speech, well, there's been no erosions whatsover, or extremely little. Christian groups can still praise the Lord Jesus (by the way, I'm a Christian man) today in Hong Kong. Freedom of speech, well, the BBC, CNN, all big newspapers in Europe, they're all allowed to enter Hong Kong and cover the story regarding the riots/protests. So surely, we agree that there has been no reduction in freedom of the media ??


So, exactly what freedom has been taken away ? That thing about how people in Hong Kong can be extradited to China to face trial, well, I think that's been, just about sorted out. The demonstrators have got things their way with regards to the extradition bit.
By the way, people in America and Europe forget about how the issue of extradition started. To re-cap, a Hong Kong man and his Hong Kong girlfried went to Taiwan for a holiday. He killed the girlfriend in Taiwan, and then went back to Hong Kong. The present system (and it's been like this always) basically means, even though he killed his girlfriend, the 'system' won't arrest him in Hong Kong and transport him to Taiwan to stand trial for murder. Surely, something is wrong with such a system ? They should change the system, so that, if Hong Kong people commit crime in Taiwan, if they go back to Hong Kong, they should still be arrested and sent to Taiwan for trial. And vice versa, regarding Taiwanese doing crime in Hong Kong and then they head back to Taiwan. Surely, we agree that it would be sensible to change to this ?


Right, so we've sorted out 'extradition, freedom of religion and speech'. What else ? What are the riots/demonstrations about ?
When that 50 year deal starting in 1997 was started, it was not part of the deal for Hong Kong to go on a road that would lead to independence. It was agreed, that in 2047, 50 years after 1997, that the deal would end, and Hong Kong (near enough) will be fully integrated as part of China. 2047, that's when 'one country, two systems' will end. Although Beijing has the option to extend it beyond 2047.


I'm tring to say, what is the point of the continuation of the riots ? The people of Hong Kong, there's been no reduction in religious freedom, freedom of speech, sexual freedom, etc. The extradition bit that started the demonstrations has been sorted out, the demonstraters have got what they wanted. Why continue with the riots ? Being on a road to independence was not part of the 50 year deal that started in 1997.

37 minutes ago, Salerno said:

Because they don't like your bosses? 

 

If you say so ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35890670

If people leave Britain, they turn up at whatever foreign place, okay. So, years later, a few or several generations later, they still reckon they're British, they want to have the Union Jack as part of their flag, okay, that's just about fair enough. But a load of people in Hong Kong, they're not British, they don't have British ancestry, why on earth are they bringing out the Union Jack ? Anybody seeing a load of Pakistanis in Pakistan, or Bangladeshis in Bangladesh, bring out the Union Jack, would think that it is crazy and mental.

So, why should a load of Chinese in Hong Kong be allowed to bring out the Union Jack, and it's regarded as being okay ?

From the article "China denies meddling and has accused foreign governments, including the United States and Britain, of stirring up trouble."   Now, if the US government is stirring up trouble in Hong Kong ( if the US government is secretly supporting and funding the rioters/demonsrtaters) well, that's not surprising. The US has constantly supported and financed revolutions and rebellions across planet earth. The Contras in Nicaragua, the Kurds in Syria, etc, etc.


But, is Britain secretly supporting and financing the rioters/demonstraters in Hong Kong ? I hope not. And I certainly condemn any British government involvement in Hong Kong. It's wrong for Britain to get involved. And bearing in mind that Britain is trying to leave Europe, Britain needs a good trade deal with China, well, it would be disastrous to antagonise Beijing by backing and financing the rioters in Hong Kong.


If the rioters in Hong Kong want to burn down Hong Kong, that's up to them. It's a problem that Hong Kong should solve. It's not a British problem.

Guy Fawkes was British, what on earth has Guy Fawkes got to do with a bunch of Chinese in Hong Kong doing their protests ? Not a lot. Hong Kong is an ex-British Empire place. Hong Kong's link with England is the same as India's link with England. India is also an ex-British Empire place. Do you see Indians in India (or Pakistanis in Pakistan, or Bangladeshis in Bangladesh) getting out the Union Jack and doing their protest ? Off-course not.




In the above photo, we see a load of Chinese with a flag, it's got a Union Jack in the corner. How ridiculous. The flag above, it's almost as ridiculous as Australia's flag. Okay, so Australians are mainly British who are in Ausralia. That's why they have the Union Jack in their flag. But why on earth are a load of Chinese in Hong Kong bringing out the Union Jack ??






And above, is another photo of Chinese in Hong Kong bringing out the Union Jack. The Union Jack, my flag, my banner. It doesn't belong to anybody else.


 

Attention is no longer being put onto the issue of the 39 people who died in that lorry.



https://uk.news.yahoo.com/essex-lorry-deaths-19-old-110556190.html

From the above article from yahoo news.  Bui Thi Nhung was a girl who was 19, and she paid about ten thousand US dollars to be smuggled into Britain. This girl wanted to work in Britain, and send money to Vietnam, to her family.



And above, is a photo of her. What on earth is going on ?  A 19 year-old girl pays ten thousand dollars, big money as far as her family is concerned, to be smuggled into Britain. She should have been allowed to enter into Britain for free, with a work permit. It's wrong when our government refuses to allow girls like Bui Thi Nhung to enter Britain.

20 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

Pinera is a US appointed puppet, who shall deserve to be locked in a jail for all the death that he created, he is a little Pinochet ! 

You reckon he's a bit like Pinochet ?  I think you're correct there. And have you noticed, the media has given mass coverage to the Hong Kong demonstrations, but, but, what about the Chile demonstrations ? Notice how the media in America and Europe are only giving a little bit of coverage to the demonstrations in Chile. Why's that then ????

What does Pattaya actually want ?  A place full of sex tourists, or a place of mass tourism for the Chinese (non-sex tourists) ???  I really do wonder.    ????


Come on people. The Thais are actually trying to get away from this image that their country is a place for attracting sex tourists. They'd much rather earn money from normal tourists. Can anybody blame them ?

How would you like it, if your country was famous across planet earth for having foreign men turning up to have sex with the women ? You wouldn't, would you ?  Off-course not. You'd rather have normal tourists, not sex tourists.  ????

On 10/25/2019 at 8:44 AM, yellowboat said:

Accusations which have yet to be substantiated.  The root cause of the unrest is the Carry Lam government.   She should go retire in Thailand.  

And if Carry Lam is fired, and Beijing sends in a replacement, then what ?

Carry Lam will probably see out her remaining years in England, on a retirement visa. And her replacement ? The rioters who are throwing petrol bombs and bricks at government buildings, I really don't think they will stop because a new person will be carrying out the same policies.

It appears to be that the Hong Kong riots and demonstrations are running out of steam. The media are tired of reporting the stories about the protests. They know that people in America and Europe are bored about the coverage going on for the last four or five months. Let's hope that the riots will stop pretty soon in Hong Kong.

Peaceful protests are okay, but throwing Molotov Cocktails and bricks should be heavily punished.

From the article [ U.S. Vice President Mike Pence accused China on Thursday of curtailing "rights and liberties" in Hong Kong and blasted U.S. company Nike and the National Basketball Association for falling in line with Beijing in a disagreement over free speech. ]


Mike Pence, do please shut up. Who on earth are you ? Trump is President of the US, POTUS, he might actually be one of the worst presidents that America has ever had. And you, Pence, you are the vice president. Trump can claim that lots of Americans voted for him, but you, Mike Pence, you can't claim that. You was selected. I really do hope that Trump does not die in office, or gets removed, because we don't want to see you (a man that was never voted for) become President.


Okay, Pence, you want to go on about free speech and liberties, freedom. Nike and the National Basketball Association are actually saying what they want to say. They're doing their free speech. Nobody is forcing Nike or the NBA to say certain stuff. So, how about you stop making yourself look absurd, how about you just let Nike and the NBA say what they want to say.

1 hour ago, GinBoy2 said:

No country is perfect.

 

But to compare the failings of the US, to China which detains a million Uighers in 're-education camps, routinely arrests political critics, and the list goes on, is a little rich.

 

As for Hong Kong. Well the British who have been pretty absent throughout all this, with their usual ability to collectively forgot could have stopped this.

 

They had decades before the handover to introduce true democracy, which if they had would have made today's nightmare null and void.

 

Instead they clung on to the old imperial dream of masters and subjects

About the British and Hong Kong today, what ?

Hong Kong is an ex-British Empire place, that's the only connection between Hong Kong and Britain. A bit like saying that India is an ex-British Empire place. Britain should not, or must not, get involved in any issues about India. Let India sort out it's own problems. And Britain should simply not get involved in what's going on in Hong Kong. Let the Chinese in China and the Chinese in Hong Kong, let them sort it out.

Introducing democracy to Hong Kong during the Colonial Era ??  Hong Kong was taken over and became part of the British Empire. It became part of the British Empire, so that Britain would benefit. Britain did not take over a quarter of the world in order to spread freedom and democracy. It was done to benefit Britain. And America today, US foreign policy is not about spreading freedom and democracy, it's about grabbing the benefits for the US.


What about Pence and America ? The Philipinnes is near enough, an ex-US colony. It would be absurd for people to criticise the USA for what's going on in the Philipinnes today. And indeed, China is correct if they want to criticise the USA for all the problems that America has been part of. What goes on in Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan and Hong Kong, all this is to do with China, and not about America.

Also, we have to look at what happens most of the time, when the US does get involved.
Iraq, the Contras in Nicaragua, Libya, etc.  The latest is the Kurds in Syria. It seems like that, when America is involved, it's the "Kiss of Death" for those being supported by America.

So yes, the US should look at it's own problems, and not cause problems in other places.

And now the news is breaking out that, they were Vietnamese.

Look, Vietnamese or Chinese, they come into Britain because they are 'economic migrants'. Notice how when a bunch of Chinese are trying to enter England illegally, that's called "trying to escape from the human rights abuse in Tibet and Xinjiang" .   It's a ridiculous thing to say. The Chinese turning up in Britain are Han Chinese, they're not a bunch of Tibetans or Muslims. They work in the local Chinese Take-away or fish and chip shop.


And them Vietnamese trying to get into Britain. Political freedom, sexual freedom, religious freedom, whatever freedom, Vietnam is similar to China. Vietnam does not have democratic elections. Them Vietnamese trying to get out of Vietnam, they're doing it because they want a job that gives them more money. The attitude of the Vietnamese trying to get into Britain, is the same as the Chinese trying to get into Britain.

By the way, I reckon them Vietnamese and Chinese trying to enter Britain, let most of them in.




And above is a photo of one of the dead people. Who on earth wants to say "No, we don't want this woman in Britain" ??  Her name is Pham Thi Tra . A Vietnamese woman.

3 hours ago, cnx101 said:

I’ve had an update from Vietnamese friend who said their all Vietnamese,

from North Vietnam, non are Chinese

Let's accept, whether they're Chinese or Vietnamese, they're people.

3 hours ago, MartinL said:

If it's true that the dead aren't Chinese, then the good news is that the hypocritical Chinese can butt out of this matter and leave it to UK and Vietnam. 

What are you trying to say ?  China is involved because the media said that the 39 dead are Chinese. Why claim that the Chinese are hypocritical ?

Yes, this is a matter for Britain and Vietnam. And below is a photo of Pham Thi Tra My. She was 26 years old. She looks like the type of person working at the local Chinese Take-away.




Do we all agree, women like her should be allowed to come into Britain. Actually, the more of them, the better.