Hong Kong's handover to mainland China is perhaps the most important event in the history of the territory. It was when British rule of the territory ended and becomes a special administrative region.

These are some images before and during the handover

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic17.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic18.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic19.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic20.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic21.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic22.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic23.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic24.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic25.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic26.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic27.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic28.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic29.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic30.jpeg

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic31.jpeg

起來!　不願作奴隸得人們！

hehe

起來!　不願作奴隸得人們！

hehe
哈，說得好。

做個勇敢．．．　中國人！

There's Garrison in HK when happened in midnight on July 1, 1997. Bunch of soldiers are running on road and crowded is just enjoy to watch it.

I was in Statue Square during the handover. The one thing I remembered is seeing the cops remove the RHKP logo in their caps and changing it to the HKP logo.

I was in Statue Square during the handover. The one thing I remembered is seeing the cops remove the RHKP logo in their caps and changing it to the HKP logo.

What is RHKP? HKP?

RHKP royal hong kong police

HKP = RHKP minus "royal" since HK was no longer UK territory

HKP
http://www.hkua.org.hk/Links/logo_Police.gif

RHKP
http://flagspot.net/images/h/hk)rhkp.gif

Alot of "Royal" have been taken off in several HK establishments such as the HK Jockey Club for example. The Royal HK Yacht Club is an exemption. The portraits of Queen Elizabeth has also been taken out in public offices, banknotes and stamps.

Alot of "Royal" have been taken off in several HK establishments such as the HK Jockey Club for example. The Royal HK Yacht Club is an exemption. The portraits of Queen Elizabeth has also been taken out in public offices, banknotes and stamps.
I understand taking out "royal" for public offices, banknotes and stamps, but why more private establishments like the HK Jockey Club?

I understand taking out "royal" for public offices, banknotes and stamps, but why more private establishments like the HK Jockey Club?

Actually, HK Jocky Club cannot be regarded as private establishment, it's closely related to HK government too.

Chris Pattern seemed to be really upset while Jiang looked really excited. Blair was disgusted lol!

Patten was great.

Chris Pattern seemed to be really upset while Jiang looked really excited. Blair was disgusted lol!


Both Pattern and Blair should be feeling upset, the British empire just lost another piece of land ( money tree ). We already in the 21 century, it's about time to rid of those King, Queen, or other so call Royal family's title. They belong to the medieval time.

It would be nice if HK was still ruled under British....gotta love those Brits!

a video of the handover ceremony
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3877286912163768412&q=hong+kong+1997

Actually, HK Jocky Club cannot be regarded as private establishment, it's closely related to HK government too.

I'm still confused if the HKJC is private or public. But it contributes to HK's economy and services. Honestly I think the reason why they removed the Royal is because they don't wanna be associated with The British.

But how about the term Victoria? Like Victoria harbour, Victoria Peak or Victoria Park?

I don't think it's necessary to remove those colonial names, such as Victoria, Elizaberth or something by the fact that we have been using those names for so many years, it might take pretty long time to adapt ourselves to the new names if the SAR government insists to change them.

Fortunately, our government didn't make such a stupid decision to remove those names.

It would be nice if HK was still ruled under British....gotta love those Brits!
Are you being sarcasitic or sincere? Are you even a HKer?

Not MUCH at all in attention or remarkable that just saw a TV program to recalling that day :D

It would be nice if HK was still ruled under British....gotta love those Brits!

:applause: :cheers1: ;)

sfgadv02, do you know HK should always be a part of China? Do you know the HK Island and Kowloon Peninsula, were ceded by the British from the Opium War, and the New Territories was leased from the DXXn weak Qing Dynasty for 99 years? British got the whole HK in such a barbarian way! Those kinds of inequality treaties were not recognized by the United Nations since 1971, and they were never recognized by the two Chinese Governments since 1911! Deng Xianping was only did his right job to get HK back to China! :bash:

Well obviously I know that HK was part of China....but I was saying how I like British ruling HK....hm, I kind of like the idea of being a bit westernized....have you notice that a lot of HK people are a bit different than people say from mainland China? ... but either way, it would have been nice if Britain was still ruling HK....

Well obviously I know that HK was part of China....but I was saying how I like British ruling HK....hm, I kind of like the idea of being a bit westernized....have you notice that a lot of HK people are a bit different than people say from mainland China? ... but either way, it would have been nice if Britain was still ruling HK....
So you'd rather have Chinese being ruled by the British?

Yes HK people are "a bit different" than mainland Chinese because in the past 100 years or so, HK, and Britian in general, enjoyed a much more relatively stable and peaceful time. China was plagued with wars and conflicts ever since its "official" contact with the West in the 1800's. It wasn't until the 1980's did China START to enjoy relative peace and stability. England, on the other hand, was a world power that colonized much of the world and had great riches. If we go back a few more hundreds of years, China was way ahead of Europe when Europe was plagued with internal wars and conflicts while China enjoyed relative peace and stability.

It's sad when people don't care about history when it's history that shape how our world is today...

So you'd rather have Chinese being ruled by the British?

Yes HK people are "a bit different" than mainland Chinese because in the past 100 years or so, HK, and Britian in general, enjoyed a much more relatively stable and peaceful time. China was plagued with wars and conflicts ever since its "official" contact with the West in the 1800's. It wasn't until the 1980's did China START to enjoy relative peace and stability. England, on the other hand, was a world power that colonized much of the world and had great riches. If we go back a few more hundreds of years, China was way ahead of Europe when Europe was plagued with internal wars and conflicts while China enjoyed relative peace and stability.

It's sad when people don't care about history when it's history that shape how our world is today...

That's true but I believe that China isn't real communist country?

So you'd rather have Chinese being ruled by the British?

Yes HK people are "a bit different" than mainland Chinese because in the past 100 years or so, HK, and Britian in general, enjoyed a much more relatively stable and peaceful time. China was plagued with wars and conflicts ever since its "official" contact with the West in the 1800's. It wasn't until the 1980's did China START to enjoy relative peace and stability. England, on the other hand, was a world power that colonized much of the world and had great riches. If we go back a few more hundreds of years, China was way ahead of Europe when Europe was plagued with internal wars and conflicts while China enjoyed relative peace and stability.

It's sad when people don't care about history when it's history that shape how our world is today...

Yes, but without Britain, HK wouldnt be what it is known as today.

That's true but I believe that China isn't real communist country?
There are no real communist countries in the world right now and the closest ever to being a true communist country were early Soviet Union and early People's Republic of China. Communism isn't necessarily bad, it's just a very fragile system and doesn't work well in reality especially for large populations. Many people incorrectly think China is communist because 1.) PRC's own political party calls itself "Chinese Communisty Party" and 2.) for the West, it's easy to point fingers and call someone a "commie"...

Yes, but without Britain, HK wouldnt be what it is known as today.
Perhaps, but that's just like saying, without China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam wouldn't be what it is known as today or without Columbus, the world as we know it wouldn't be the way it is today.

Bottomline is, when it comes to predicting "alternate future", no one can know for sure and any guess is just that, a guess.

Besides, while HK developed pretty well as an economy, it still has its flaws and problems and far from being an utopia.

Without China, HK would be one of those unknown tiny British occupied islands on Pacific Ocean.

BTW, HK was not even close to the level of Guangzhou before Korean War. History will sure give people an extra dimension of thinking.

There are no real communist countries in the world right now and the closest ever to being a true communist country were early Soviet Union and early People's Republic of China. Communism isn't necessarily bad, it's just a very fragile system and doesn't work well in reality especially for large populations. Many people incorrectly think China is communist because 1.) PRC's own political party calls itself "Chinese Communisty Party" and 2.) for the West, it's easy to point fingers and call someone a "commie"...


Perhaps, but that's just like saying, without China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam wouldn't be what it is known as today or without Columbus, the world as we know it wouldn't be the way it is today.

Bottomline is, when it comes to predicting "alternate future", no one can know for sure and any guess is just that, a guess.

Besides, while HK developed pretty well as an economy, it still has its flaws and problems and far from being an utopia.

Yeah, Americans are just idiot for call like that at CvsC but I'm think that China is freedom country.

Yeah, Americans are just idiot but I'm think that China is freedom country.
Americans aren't idiots, a people don't become the world's sole superpower by being idiots.

China is not a "freedom country" either. China is nowhere as bad as U.S. claims but it still lacks some freedoms that exist in the U.S. But honestly, if you've ever lived in China, you won't really feel like you're restricted by anything or miss anything.

After nearly nine years as Chinese territory again, most people agree that HK's future lies with China. Until the very last years, Hong Kong's society was led by an aristocracy of Brits and a few wealthy Chinese elite. The rest of Hong Kong remained a duck sitting in poverty until finally the city surged to world-class reputation in the very late 20th century.

Britain guaranteed free trade and good human rights, but now that HK has achieved it, it ought to forge its own way ahead. It is above all things a very, very culturally Chinese city. Hong Kong's history of English colonization and its westerner-guided development brought it to the economic power that it enjoys today, and that is what continues to make the city unique.

The political bickering aside, China allows Hong Kong to develop and maintain itself--whether it can continue to stand at the top and lead the rising mainland cities is up to the people of these cities. Hong Kong continues to enjoy its own destiny.

Yes, but without Britain, HK wouldnt be what it is known as today.

Without China, HK would be one of those unknown tiny British occupied islands on Pacific Ocean.

BTW, HK was not even close to the level of Guangzhou before Korean War. History will sure give people an extra dimension of thinking.

Better put it in this way: :|
HK's success is determined by the Hardworking Chinese People and the Good System from the British.

After nearly nine years as Chinese territory again, most people agree that HK's future lies with China. Until the very last years, Hong Kong's society was led by an aristocracy of Brits and a few wealthy Chinese elite. The rest of Hong Kong remained a duck sitting in poverty until finally the city surged to world-class reputation in the very late 20th century.

Britain guaranteed free trade and good human rights, but now that HK has achieved it, it ought to forge its own way ahead. It is above all things a very, very culturally Chinese city. Hong Kong's history of English colonization and its westerner-guided development brought it to the economic power that it enjoys today, and that is what continues to make the city unique.

The political bickering aside, China allows Hong Kong to develop and maintain itself--whether it can continue to stand at the top and lead the rising mainland cities is up to the people of these cities. Hong Kong continues to enjoy its own destiny.


Very true for this! ;)

Perhaps, but that's just like saying, without China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam wouldn't be what it is known as today or without Columbus, the world as we know it wouldn't be the way it is today.

By the way, there is now evidence that Zheng He was the first to tour around the world and that he discovered the Americas (without exploiting it) before Columbus did.

Besides, while HK developed pretty well as an economy, it still has its flaws and problems and far from being an utopia.

Of course, everyone has it's flaws and problems. You cant really have a perfect world. ;)

By the way, there is now evidence that Zheng He was the first to tour around the world and that he discovered the Americas (without exploiting it) before Columbus did.

I've heard about it, nevertheless, Gavin Menzies's, and other new evidences from Mr Liu Gang, had many controversies to say if Zheng He was really the first to tour around the world. I still prefer to say Columbus was the first before any REAL evidences proven for Zheng He. :|

Freedom in Hong Kong

R.I.P. 1997

Hong Kong was never free under the British. The governor was appointed by London without Hong Kongers' input. Elections only started in the 1990s leading up to the handover, and the governor was not one of the elected officials. Ironically, even with the present voting scheme for the Chief Executive, Hong Kong is more democratic as a Chinese special administrative region than as a British colony.

British got the whole HK in such a barbarian way!
Same as Chinese got Tibet. Hypocrisy! And don't tell me Tibet was integral part of China, 'cause it's bullshit. Tibet is under ILLEGAL occupation.


Communism isn't necessarily bad
It's allways BAD! I'm from Poland, wich was under communist rule for over 50 years til 1989. Belive me, I know sth about it.


Freedom in Hong Kong

R.I.P. 1997
Agree!

Same as Chinese got Tibet. Hypocrisy! And don't tell me Tibet was integral part of China, 'cause it's bullshit. Tibet is under ILLEGAL occupation.
To say any region is an "integral part" of any nation is simply silly. No nation got to where they are today by being "nice". You think the U.S. got all its land by being nice to the Native-Americans? How about Australia, New Zealand, Central & South Americas and Russia?

You can shout "free Tibet" all you want, but that doesn't make you right.

It's allways BAD! I'm from Poland, wich was under communist rule for over 50 years til 1989. Belive me, I know sth about it.
There is no absolute in this world. I was just talking about communism as an idea and system, and NOT how people have carried it out. Like I said, currently we don't have any true communist nations and the closest we ever had was EARLY Soviet Union and EARLY People's Republic of China. Just because your government of Poland wasn't able to carry out communism like it's supposed to, it doesn't make it bad.

Until the very late 20th century, "freedom in Hong Kong" was enjoyed by the elite. Not the working class.

Therefore, "Freedom died in 1997" is a really a very naive thing to say. The Hong Kong of today, despite all its problems with the officials in Beijing, is much better off than it has been in the past.

If you want to talk about civil liberties, consider that mainland China has ZERO government officials and ZERO police officers stationed in HK.

Until the very late 20th century, "freedom in Hong Kong" was enjoyed by the elite. Not the working class.

Therefore, "Freedom died in 1997" is a really a very naive thing to say. The Hong Kong of today, despite all its problems with the officials in Beijing, is much better off than it has been in the past.

If you want to talk about civil liberties, consider that mainland China has ZERO government officials and ZERO police officers stationed in HK.

Besides, since Deng Xiaoping knew the difference between HK and China, he allowed two systems within a country. Also, the Fundamental Rights and Duties of the Residents is ALREADY GUARANTEED within HK's Basic Law. You may check this on here (http://info.gov.hk/basic_law/fulltext/index.htm). :|

Until the very late 20th century, "freedom in Hong Kong" was enjoyed by the elite. Not the working class.

Therefore, "Freedom died in 1997" is a really a very naive thing to say. The Hong Kong of today, despite all its problems with the officials in Beijing, is much better off than it has been in the past.

If you want to talk about civil liberties, consider that mainland China has ZERO government officials and ZERO police officers stationed in HK.

But some of the People's Liberation Army are staying at the former Prince Of Wales Building.

It would be nice if HK was still ruled under British....gotta love those Brits!

I hope your not Chinese buy saying that. Such a disgrace.

Yes, but without Britain, HK wouldnt be what it is known as today.

Without the Chinese in Hong Kong it won't be what it is today! The Brits didn't built HK, the working people of HK did.

Hong Kong was never free under the British. The governor was appointed by London without Hong Kongers' input. Elections only started in the 1990s leading up to the handover, and the governor was not one of the elected officials. Ironically, even with the present voting scheme for the Chief Executive, Hong Kong is more democratic as a Chinese special administrative region than as a British colony.

Couldn't agree more... this is the misconception that many people have, especially those overly-pro-western people...

all the rights and freedom that we used to have with the British we still have... hell even homosexuality wasn't legal until freaking 1991!

and the whole thing about elections is so overblown... we didn't have ANY SAY WHATSOEVER back when we were under the British and nobody said a thing!

Without the Chinese in Hong Kong it won't be what it is today! The Brits didn't built HK, the working people of HK did.

No really?? French, Germans, Americans built HK.... :| :|

Some people have no sense of humor these days....:| :| :|

I hope your not Chinese buy saying that. Such a disgrace.

I hope you are not chinese, such a disgrace with such an attitude. :| :|

Also, people are entitled to their opinion, so what??

^^ What are you up to?

You are not even funny! :sleepy:

"Also, people are entitled to their opinion, so what??"

Do you know the difference between an opinion and an insult?

^^ What are you up to?

You are not even funny! :sleepy:

"Also, people are entitled to their opinion, so what??"

Do you know the difference between an opinion and an insult?

No one said I was funny..... :|

Really, I dont know why people take things seriously.....its a forum. :sleepy:

The PLA stationed in HK is just a symbolic presence. They never come out, and even if they do, they're nowhere near enough to control the entire city. Since they are military, they cannot come out and arrest people.

The PLA stationed in HK is just a symbolic presence. They never come out, and even if they do, they're nowhere near enough to control the entire city.

Well if they come out of their bases, they come out as civilians and not as soldiers.

I barely finished typing my previous post.

Ok, anyway, I don't think the PLA have the right to arrest anyone. That's the duty of the HK Police. But I think the PLA is there to defend the region just in case of an attack which I doubt will ever happen.

Actually, I liked HK under the Brits too, if I may say, I don't want to offend anyone but I kind of feel sorry for the British as they've lost most of their colonial empire. HK truly wouldn't be the city it is today if it weren't for the Brits, no one can argue that.

Couldn't agree more... this is the misconception that many people have, especially those overly-pro-western people...

all the rights and freedom that we used to have with the British we still have... hell even homosexuality wasn't legal until freaking 1991!

and the whole thing about elections is so overblown... we didn't have ANY SAY WHATSOEVER back when we were under the British and nobody said a thing!

We didn't have that sense of "Hong Konger rules Hong Kong" back then. But now we are actually ruling ourselves. I would love to pick my own leader and legco; not appointed by someone in Beijing just like it was by London. The possibly of universal suffage is listed in the Basic Law, but the HKSAR government and Beijing ignored the voice from people of HK. We asked for universal suffage in 2007/08 a few years ago; and were turned down by the Central Gorvernment before even discussed it. OK, so we would like to start discussing the possiblilty of Universal Suffage in 2011/12. A lot of people have already willed to push back our hope and give the government enough time to work on it; and some people are even just asking for a time schedule. Well, obviously, once again, Tsang's government and Beijing aren't listening to the HKer but a small group of rich people. If we don't remind our governemnt what we want occasionaly, Tsang and Beijing will not pay attention to a real polictical reform for democraization in HK anymore.

One Man. One Vote.

Actually, I liked HK under the Brits too, if I may say, I don't want to offend anyone but I kind of feel sorry for the British as they've lost most of their colonial empire. HK truly wouldn't be the city it is today if it weren't for the Brits, no one can argue that.

Funny though that only some white guys (two from Polonistan and two from the Anglo world) are whining about Chinese ruled HK. All Chinese are more or less content about the situation. That tells alot about the racist/ colonial mentality of the "West" underneath the mask of "freedom, tolerance and democracy". :sleepy:

No one said I was funny..... :|

Really, I dont know why people take things seriously.....its a forum. :sleepy:

Well, it's a forum, right? :D

Actually, I liked HK under the Brits too, if I may say, I don't want to offend anyone but I kind of feel sorry for the British as they've lost most of their colonial empire.

Didn't you read my first reply on Page 2 and other replies in a CORRECT HISTORY VIEW!!?? The British REALLY DID WRONG for just on the trading problem in 1830s!!! HK wouldn't cesed to British without that BARBARIAN TREATY!!! I don't say all the British are bad, that Opium War was REALLY a controversy for the Parlament that time, but they still passed this act!!! Whose fault at all? Those GREEDY Opium Traders and those politians who wanted to declear the war on China!!! :rant: :rant: :rant:

HK truly wouldn't be the city it is today if it weren't for the Brits, no one can argue that.

It should be the People in HK (mainly in Chinese) and the Good British Legal System to build HK into a city today!!! :speech:

Funny though that only some white guys (two from Polonistan and two from the Anglo world) are whining about Chinese ruled HK. All Chinese are more or less content about the situation. That tells alot about the racist/ colonial mentality of the "West" underneath the mask of "freedom, tolerance and democracy". :sleepy:

Who said I was white? lol

Hey, the US was once a British colony, but I don't mind when Brits talk about their colonial days in America. We were smart tho and whooped some jolly good red coat ass. :)

Actually, instead of Hong Kong being Chinese, I think it should be it's own country. It's different than China, more democratic, and I just think it would be cool for HK to be it's own little nation, kind of like Singapore, except better! :cheers:

Actually, instead of Hong Kong being Chinese, I think it should be it's own country. It's different than China, more democratic, and I just think it would be cool for HK to be it's own little nation, kind of like Singapore, except better! :cheers:

Ok thats just ridiculous. Everybody in HK has ties to China, they all originate from there. Seperating from the motherland is not what they're looking for nor do they care and its not in their interest. All they want is to be part of the Chinese society with limited Central Gov. interference. Until China is fully democratic or reached to the level of that of HK then people there would happily embrace China without borders.

I hope you are not chinese, such a disgrace with such an attitude. :| :|

Also, people are entitled to their opinion, so what??


You don't get it do you? We Hong Kong people have mixed feelings about the Brits. Yes they gave HK prosperity but remember HK was created out of the Opium War which was an unfair treaty in Chinese eyes. A Chinese territory finally back in Chinese hands is the best thing it could ever happen. No matter how the Chinese gov. is governing HK whether its good or bad I would still prefer being ruled by our own kind than the Brits. Are we not capable of ruling the territory ourselves that we need the Brits? Being ruled by foreigners is a sign of weakness, China is becoming very powerful today, and having a country like China behind HK's back is a blessing. The rise of China gives all Chinese, whether overseas or domestic, pride that once western nations took from us. The hell with colonial days.

But don't you feel sorry for the Brits? Poor poor Brits. :(

But don't you feel sorry for the Brits? Poor poor Brits. :(

HELL NO! They've reaped up so MANY benefits already. Hong Kong was a COLONY which means its a place where the Brits could exploit the people and get rich themselves. True, true, they brought us prosperity but let's not forget how they even got Hong Kong ORIGINALLY.

I don't think forcing a country to pay for opium is right- especially when you don't want it. Do you?

But don't you feel sorry for the Brits? Poor poor Brits. :(

sorry for what? for forcing china to hand over hong kong to UK?

if anything the Brits should be sorry

But don't you feel sorry for the Brits? Poor poor Brits. :(

I don't feel sorry for them at all. But at least give them credit for developing the city.

Anyway, even back then, they knew that they were leasing HK. And The British have to give it back to China and it's good that they did it.

Now if HK was leased to the United States, then it's gonna be a very different story!

Poor red coats, they cry at tea time now.

Poor red coats, they cry at tea time now.

:D :cheers:

I feel sorry for the Brits who built and governed Hong Kong with all their heart and were alive to witness the handover. But I don't feel sorry for Britain.

Here's a video of the handover ceremony:

http://www.rthk.org.hk/classicschannel/video/90s_0012.asx

I feel sorry for the Brits who built and governed Hong Kong with all their heart and were alive to witness the handover. But I don't feel sorry for Britain.

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic30.jpeg
Does he look happy :D

Anyway, I was wondering if Chris Patten visited HK or still visits the territory after 1997 besides promoting his book.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0812930002.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

You don't get it do you? We Hong Kong people have mixed feelings about the Brits. Yes they gave HK prosperity but remember HK was created out of the Opium War which was an unfair treaty in Chinese eyes. A Chinese territory finally back in Chinese hands is the best thing it could ever happen. No matter how the Chinese gov. is governing HK whether its good or bad I would still prefer being ruled by our own kind than the Brits. Are we not capable of ruling the territory ourselves that we need the Brits? Being ruled by foreigners is a sign of weakness, China is becoming very powerful today, and having a country like China behind HK's back is a blessing. The rise of China gives all Chinese, whether overseas or domestic, pride that once western nations took from us. The hell with colonial days.

No, I am a HKer too and we all have different opinions. Some may preferr the Brits and some may preferr the Chinese. Yes, the lost of the Opium War was humilitating to China, but in my opinion, in today's society I dont believe that people care as much as they used to 100 years ago. Again, its a matter of opinion.

http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/hkpix/pic30.jpeg
Does he look happy :D

Anyway, I was wondering if Chris Patten visited HK or still visits the territory after 1997 besides promoting his book.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0812930002.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

chris patten recently visit hk to promote his book, and also had something to do with the starting an eggtart store, or something like that, im not that clear, maybe someone could expand on that

How is going the political relationship between Hong Kong and Britain in your views?

What political relationship? =P

Who said I was white? lol

Hey, the US was once a British colony, but I don't mind when Brits talk about their colonial days in America. We were smart tho and whooped some jolly good red coat ass. :)

Actually, instead of Hong Kong being Chinese, I think it should be it's own country. It's different than China, more democratic, and I just think it would be cool for HK to be it's own little nation, kind of like Singapore, except better! :cheers:

Hong Kong is better under Chinese rule, nearly no one in Hong Kong wants HK to be independent.

There has never been a vocal independence movement. Despite SARS and the subsequent economic downturn, Hong Kongers never looked back. There is no point in doing so. Yet we embrace our past by welcoming Chris Patten back and showing up in droves to say hi for the several visits he has made since the handover.

Heard that the prince charle is not really happen with the China government after 1997, how come?

Now I am a HKer whos living in Auckland. I do agree that most of Hong Kong's success today as an international city is due to its british past. Hong Kong attracted investors, visitors from overseas because of the British governance, making it stand out from the rest of the chinese cities as being an English speaking, stable city. If the Brits didnt take over Hong Kong, Hong Kong would be involved in years of civil war and unrest as being part of china, meaning that it will no longer have the rule of law and stability for the economy to grow let alone being an international city. Think about it, Hong Kong would be just another chinese city to china, maybe even lesser to guangzhou if was left to the governance of China. Attentions would be paid by the Chinese government to much more major cities such as Shanghai and Beijing. Hong Kong would be no more than a fishing village. I reckon the major contributions be the British is that they have set up an English environment (essential for oversea investors and being a world city, just like singapore) and giving Hong Kong stability. Although one might argue that the Brits gave no freedom/democracy to HK, we must acknowledge that Britain itself is a democratic country and that we as HKers can express our thoughts to the British parliament and force them to take matters seriously. On the otherhand, China is known for its lack of human rights. If the Chinese government cant even treat its own people good, what chances are there that they will listen to us HKers. I would be very happy for HK to fall back into chinese's hands if the government itself is elected by its people, just like Taiwan. This way the fate of HK lies with the HKers and not by commie Beijing. Lets not forget what makes HK unique and what gave Hong Kong the advantage over other cities.

1. English speaking background
2. Ruled by basic law (silimar to the laws created by the Brits with no nasty article 23)
3. the most westernised city in China

so as I've sed we can not deny the importance of British to HK ;)
they have shaped what we are today.

Heard that the prince charle is not really happen with the China government after 1997, how come?

The Telegraph today extracts the diary of the Prince Charles at the time before and after the handover. You many have a look of this: :|

The Handover of Hong Kong - or The Great Chinese Takeaway - June 27-July 3 1997

A chartered British Airways 747 took a large party of official representatives from Heathrow to Hong Kong and I found myself and my staff on the top deck in what is normally Club Class. It took me some time to realise that this was not first class(!) although it puzzled me as to why the seat seemed so uncomfortable. I then discovered that others like Edward Heath, Douglas Hurd, the new Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, several former Governors of Hong Kong such as Lord Maclehose and Lord Wilson and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Paddy Ashdown, were comfortably ensconced in first class immediately below us. "Such is the end of the Empire I sighed to myself…

I had been dreading the thought of Hong Kong in June and on arrival my worst fears were realised. The temperature was in the 90s and the humidity must have been very nearly 100 per cent. A slightly perspiring Governor met me at the foot of the steps and delivered me to Britannia which was tied up alongside the old naval base and near to the Prince of Wales building I must have opened in the 1980s. (Goodness only knows what the Chinese will have renamed it by now). As usual, it was wonderful to step into the familiar atmosphere but, this time tinged with an overwhelming sadness at the thought that this was going to be the last time of doing so on an overseas visit.

Every moment seemed precious, to be held as a lifelong memory of what it used to be like and how incredibly well Britain could be represented - and marketed - overseas. Everybody on board felt this and there was a kind of exasperated sadness experienced by all and sundry.

Every important visitor including every foreign minister who came to the reception and the other official representatives who came to the two dinners in HMY (Her Majesty Yacht Britannia) were completely bemused by the decision to ex-commission her. "Why is this happening?" asked Madeleine Albright the US secretary of state, after she had had a breakfast meeting with the Foreign Secretary in HMY followed by a press conference on the jetty with HMY in the background. "A wonderful negotiating advantage" mused Robin Cook after I had invited him and his wife to stay the night on board and he had witnessed Miss Albright devouring home-made Danish pastries during their breakfast meeting.

The PM and Mrs Blair came on board for an hour and seemed suitably impressed after their whistle-stop tour round the ship. If only he could have seen the yacht with the receptions and dinners underway and heard people's reactions … But they are all in such a hurry, so never really learn about everything. In this case he had flown out to Hong Kong for 14 hours, stayed in HK for 14 hours and flown back to the UK for another 14 hours.

They then take decisions based on marketing research or focus groups, or the papers produced by political advisers or civil servants, none of whom will have ever experienced what it is they are taking decisions about.

On the first evening in Hong Kong I went to a reception in Government House for a lot of the local people. It ended with a rather marvellous beating retreat by the Hong Kong police so there were very few dry eyes in the house. This was followed by a dinner in HMY at which I sat next to CH Tung, the man selected by the Chinese to take over from Chris Patten. A businessman with a background in shipping, I found him thoroughly inscrutable but eminently talkative. He was very soothing about everything staying the same after the handover and assured me that the Chinese Government were intent on showing the Taiwanese that all could be well with Hong Kong as part of "one country with two systems" - the aim being to seduce Taiwan back into the motherland.

All the locals were being outwardly, thoroughly optimistic about the immediate future but in the background was the sneaking worry about creeping corruption and the gradual undermining of Hong Kong's greatest strength - the rule of law. The Chinese Army provides another concern owing to the fact that the soldiers are paid so badly that there may be irresistible temptations to intimidate or threaten local people when the soldiers discover that a glass of beer costs about as much as their weekly salary. Apparently in China itself the Army is heavily involved in pretty corrupt practice, so one can only hope they are confined to barracks in Hong Kong.


On the third day… Back at Britannia I had another lunch - this time for my Institute of Architecture - and then saw the PM for his short visit to HMY when we had a very good talk about a whole variety of subjects. He is a most enjoyable person to talk to - perhaps partly due to his being younger than me! He also gives the impression of listening to what one says, which I find astounding. He understands only too well the identity problem that Britain has with the loss of an empire and an inability to know what to do next. Introspection, cynicism and criticism seem to have become the order of the day and clearly he recognizes the need to find ways of overcoming apathy and loss of self-belief by finding a fresh national direction. I said I thought the best way was to concentrate on all the things we do best as a nation and try to work out how they can be put to best use in a modern context.

The afternoon/early evening saw the start of the farewell ceremony in a stadium next to HMY. The Patten family had come on board at tea time looking incredibly sad and somewhat shattered, having said goodbye to Government House and all their staff. Chris Patten came on board cradling the Union Jack from Govt House which he had been given on departure. …Having tried to soothe their nerves with a cup of tea, we all set off for the stadium where a kind of extravaganza had been arranged - as it turned out, in the rain. And the rain just came down in a light, steady trickle, thoroughly wetting everything and turning the red carpet on the platform where I was sitting into a soggy, squidgy mess. We sat through various acts and performances and listened to Chris Patten's rather moving speech - which he hadn't shown to the Chinese. I ended up with a lump in my throat and was then completely finished off by the playing of Elgar's Nimrod Variations immediately afterwards. During the course of all these proceedings I had a premonition that the heavens would open in a serious fashion just as I got up to speak - sure enough, just as I had thought and as if on cue, the rain came lashing down and I found myself standing at the lectern and trying to make sense of my speech which by now had become a soggy mess of paper pulp and each page stuck together. Never before had I been called upon to make a speech underwater. This was the first occasion. As it transpired, no one could hear anything I said because of the noise of the rain on the umbrellas. The things one thinks one is doing for England!!!

After all this emotion, and being thoroughly soaked to the skin, I rushed back to HMY for a bath before having to go on to the main Convention Centre for the banquet for 4,000 people. Inevitably, the fireworks display started precisely as I lowered myself into the bath and ended as I came down after changing. At the vast banquet I sat next to the Chinese Foreign Minister who must have had considerable difficulty knowing what to make of me. After a lot of toasting we left the dinner and just waited around until we could go through the ridiculous rigmarole of meeting the Chinese President Jiang Zemin, without loss of face on either side.

The Chinese had been arguing the toss over every single detail of the arrangements of the handover and wanted to insist I came into a room to call on the Chinese President. This was adamantly resisted by all the British - so a compromise was found by which we both walked into the room from different ends and met in the middle.

The President and his cronies sat opposite all of us - ie PM, Foreign Secretary, CDS and me - and then read from a prepared statement. I could see I had no escape from replying, so I desperately tried to think what I could say without causing an incident. After a few pleasantries about Shakespeare (the President seems to like the bard's work) we all trooped off to the main hall of the new convention centre - another day's march from where we were and absolutely vast.

For the hand over this hall had been transformed into a kind of Great Hall of the People of Peking. After my speech the President detached himself from the group of appalling old waxworks who accompanied him and took his place at the lectern.

He then gave a kind of "propaganda" speech, which was loudly cheered by the bussed in party faithful at the suitable moment in the text. At the end of this awful Soviet-style display we had to watch the Chinese soldiers goose step on to the stage and haul down the Union Jack and raised the Chinese flag. The ultimate horror was the artificial wind which made the flags flutter enticingly. The ceremony ended with us all being photographed in a group, shaking hands and marching off through different doors.

Thus we left Hong Kong to her fate and the hope that Martin Lee, the Leader of the Democrats, would not be arrested at once when he tried his demonstration at midnight …Whatever may be thought about colonisation nowadays, Hong Kong was a pretty remarkable example of how to do it well. Thanks to Chris Patten, we left with affection and gratitude ringing in our ears.

We returned to HMY where I followed Chris Patten along a crowd of well-wishers, friends of his and former associates who were lining the jetty, and then we embarked in The Yacht to be met by a gaggle of waiting Patten daughters, all thoroughly overcome by emotion and exhaustion. We steamed slowly down through the harbour, followed by the escort HMS Chatham and accompanied by two fire-fighting tugs spraying their hoses high into the air. I stood on the deck gazing at the departing skyline of Hong Kong and telling myself that perhaps it's good for the soul to have to say goodbye to that and the dear Yacht in the same year. Perhaps.



--How arrogant and ignorant was he!!! Shame on him!!! :rant: :rant: :rant:

Now I am a HKer whos living in Auckland. I do agree that most of Hong Kong's success today as an international city is due to its british past. Hong Kong attracted investors, visitors from overseas because of the British governance, making it stand out from the rest of the chinese cities as being an English speaking, stable city. If the Brits didnt take over Hong Kong, Hong Kong would be involved in years of civil war and unrest as being part of china, meaning that it will no longer have the rule of law and stability for the economy to grow let alone being an international city. Think about it, Hong Kong would be just another chinese city to china, maybe even lesser to guangzhou if was left to the governance of China. Attentions would be paid by the Chinese government to much more major cities such as Shanghai and Beijing. Hong Kong would be no more than a fishing village. I reckon the major contributions be the British is that they have set up an English environment (essential for oversea investors and being a world city, just like singapore) and giving Hong Kong stability. Although one might argue that the Brits gave no freedom/democracy to HK, we must acknowledge that Britain itself is a democratic country and that we as HKers can express our thoughts to the British parliament and force them to take matters seriously. On the otherhand, China is known for its lack of human rights. If the Chinese government cant even treat its own people good, what chances are there that they will listen to us HKers. I would be very happy for HK to fall back into chinese's hands if the government itself is elected by its people, just like Taiwan. This way the fate of HK lies with the HKers and not by commie Beijing. Lets not forget what makes HK unique and what gave Hong Kong the advantage over other cities.

1. English speaking background
2. Ruled by basic law (silimar to the laws created by the Brits with no nasty article 23)
3. the most westernised city in China

so as I've sed we can not deny the importance of British to HK ;)
they have shaped what we are today.

How ignorant you are. Without the Opium Wars and foreign invasions, China probably wouldn't have gone through all the civil wars and ended up being communist.

Here we go again with the Opium War....:|

Here we go again with the Opium War....:|

Sure, unless you really believe that things can come out of the vaccum. Well, for a boot licker, no excuses for the crimes of his white master is cheap enough.

How ignorant you are. Without the Opium Wars and foreign invasions, China probably wouldn't have gone through all the civil wars and ended up being communist.

well whos fault is that that our chinses government is weak and corrupted. The fact is that communist party rose not due to foreign, it success came from the help of the chinese people, to overthrow the nationist party. Hong Kong remained a piece of China thats liberal under the British. Accept the fact.

well whos fault is that that our chinses government is weak and corrupted. The fact is that communist party rose not due to foreign, it success came from the help of the chinese people, to overthrow the nationist party. Hong Kong remained a piece of China thats liberal under the British. Accept the fact.


Yes, you are right. But that was about more than a sixty years ago. I'm glad that China had raised their military in the last few decades and become one of the super power nation of the world. Else, the British probably will refuse to hand Hong Kong back to China. Example: the Falkland island war in 1982 between England and Argentina.

Yes, you are right. But that was about more than a sixty years ago. I'm glad that China had raised their military in the last few decades and become one of the super power nation of the world. Else, the British probably will refuse to hand Hong Kong back to China. Example: the Falkland island war in 1982 between England and Argentina.

The Iron Lady (Margaret Thatcher) lost with the Steel Factory (Deng Xiaoping)!!! :D :D :D

Yes, you are right. But that was about more than a sixty years ago. I'm glad that China had raised their military in the last few decades and become one of the super power nation of the world. Else, the British probably will refuse to hand Hong Kong back to China. Example: the Falkland island war in 1982 between England and Argentina.

I doubt that the British will refuse. Their least ended 1997 and they have no choice but to give it back.

The Falklands War happened because Argentina's military junta at that time invaded the islands which belonged to the British and claimed that the islands originally belonged to Argentina.

Well, the British could start another Opium War in 1997 if the Chinese's army still armed with swords and spears. Ha Ha, just joking. What make Hong kong to become one of the greatest city in the world today is not from the British nor the Chinese. It's all about MONEY and the hard working citizens of hong Kong.

Well, the British could start another Opium War in 1997 if the Chinese's army still armed with swords and spears. Ha Ha, just joking. What make Hong kong to become one of the greatest city in the world today is not from the British nor the Chinese. It's all about MONEY and the hard working citizens of hong Kong.

A little off topic but which civilization invented gunpowder?

Hong Kong's greatness is contributed by both British, Chinese and other minorities in the city like Filipinos, Indians, Pakistani, Nepalese and even Nigerians :D

A little off topic but which civilization invented gunpowder?

Hong Kong's greatness is contributed by both British, Chinese and other minorities in the city like Filipinos, Indians, Pakistani, Nepalese and even Nigerians :D

I don't think that the minorities of HK made a 'real' contribution to the greatness of HK.

I don't think that the minorities of HK made a 'real' contribution to the greatness of HK.

Actually they did in a way. I happen to be one of those minorities ;)

Especially the Filipino, Indian and Nepalese communities.

Actually they did in a way. I happen to be one of those minorities ;)

Especially the Filipino, Indian and Nepalese communities.

It is quite possible that they made a contribution, but I'm wondering than what they have done. Once and a while I'm in HK, I don't see any 'noticeable' contribution of them, but I like to know it.

I doubt that the British will refuse. Their least ended 1997 and they have no choice but to give it back.

The Falklands War happened because Argentina's military junta at that time invaded the islands which belonged to the British and claimed that the islands originally belonged to Argentina.
I think the Falklands War really boosted the confidence and psyche of Britain and made them believe that they could hold on to what remained of the empire. That's why it was the British and PM Thatcher who brought up the issue of Hong Kong's lease to the PRC (not other way around), catching the CCP a little off guard. Maybe if they hadn't said anything, Hong Kong wouldn't have been handed over? Anyways, after they brought it up there was no way Deng Xiaoping could let them keep Hong Kong.

I think the Falklands War really boosted the confidence and psyche of Britain and made them believe that they could hold on to what remained of the empire. That's why it was the British and PM Thatcher who brought up the issue of Hong Kong's lease to the PRC (not other way around), catching the CCP a little off guard. Maybe if they hadn't said anything, Hong Kong wouldn't have been handed over? Anyways, after they brought it up there was no way Deng Xiaoping could let them keep Hong Kong.


Thank you HUHU for re-phrase my message. The British paid a hefty price over the Falklands war and they are not looking forward for another one. Therefore, the hand over was on schedule and without any condition.

I also can not agree more with Wanch that everyone( all nationality and race ) had made a contribution to Hong kong.

Thank you HUHU for re-phrase my message. The British paid a hefty price over the Falklands war and they are not looking forward for another one. Therefore, the hand over was on schedule and without any condition.Actually I think you completely misunderstood Huhu's message. The Falklands War was won easily and, as Huhu said, boosted British confidence. There was no "hefty price"! Britain did not hand back Hong Kong because of fear of the Chinese military but because the lease on the New Territories expired in 1997 and it would not be practical fro Britain to hand back merely the New Territories and keep just Hong Kong Island and Kowloon. And there was a condition in Britain handing back these as well: 50 years of Hong Kong continuing to enjoy the British political freedoms and rule of law that had made it prosperous under British rule.

come to think of it..the basic law make sures that Hong Kong will remain capitalist for 50 years, but what happens AFTER 50 years? well we know mainland china is already capitalist now and it's only communist by name, but wont Hong Kong have to lose its autonomy and be handed over to Guangdong province after 50 years? what about rights and freedoms etc, ideally mainland china would become free by then, but what if it doesnt?

man what a half assed negotiation China and UK did, they probably thought 50 years is a long time, well 9 years have already passed...

come to think of it..the basic law make sures that Hong Kong will remain capitalist for 50 years, but what happens AFTER 50 years? well we know mainland china is already capitalist now and it's only communist by name, but wont Hong Kong have to lose its autonomy and be handed over to Guangdong province after 50 years? what about rights and freedoms etc, ideally mainland china would become free by then, but what if it doesnt?

man what a half assed negotiation China and UK did, they probably thought 50 years is a long time, well 9 years have already passed...

Hong Kong should be its own municipality, like Chongqing,or Beijing.

come to think of it..the basic law make sures that Hong Kong will remain capitalist for 50 years, but what happens AFTER 50 years? well we know mainland china is already capitalist now and it's only communist by name, but wont Hong Kong have to lose its autonomy and be handed over to Guangdong province after 50 years? what about rights and freedoms etc, ideally mainland china would become free by then, but what if it doesnt?

man what a half assed negotiation China and UK did, they probably thought 50 years is a long time, well 9 years have already passed...

Beijing is probably more worried about anti-CCP sentiment spilling over into the mainland from the Hong Kong activists. China has purpose in keeping Hong Kong as it is. If by 2047 the Chinese society is still not as open as Hong Kong's, Beijing will probably heed a request to extend the Basic Law and maintain Hong Kong's autonomy.

Actually I think you completely misunderstood Huhu's message. The Falklands War was won easily and, as Huhu said, boosted British confidence. There was no "hefty price"! Britain did not hand back Hong Kong because of fear of the Chinese military but because the lease on the New Territories expired in 1997 and it would not be practical fro Britain to hand back merely the New Territories and keep just Hong Kong Island and Kowloon. And there was a condition in Britain handing back these as well: 50 years of Hong Kong continuing to enjoy the British political freedoms and rule of law that had made it prosperous under British rule.
Yeah, this is basically what I meant. Although the British did take some bad losses during the war (thanks to Argentine Exocet missiles), they were pretty confident afterwards. Probably thought Deng would be plenty impressed as well. However what Kai says about the UK wanting to avoid Falklands scenario in Hong Kong is true.
"China is no Argentina... We can order troops into Hong Kong this afternoon." -Deng
come to think of it..the basic law make sures that Hong Kong will remain capitalist for 50 years, but what happens AFTER 50 years? well we know mainland china is already capitalist now and it's only communist by name, but wont Hong Kong have to lose its autonomy and be handed over to Guangdong province after 50 years? what about rights and freedoms etc, ideally mainland china would become free by then, but what if it doesnt?
Hong Kong might benefit from the Taiwan situation as long as it remains unresolved. The SAR is supposed to be a model for Taiwan's reintegration so messing it up would be a bad idea for the CCP.

Hong Kong might benefit from the Taiwan situation as long as it remains unresolved. The SAR is supposed to be a model for Taiwan's reintegration so messing it up would be a bad idea for the CCP.
Huhu is online now Report Bad Post Reply With Quote
no that's not what i meant.

i was wondering if basic law states explicitly what Hong Kong's fate might be after "50 year transition period"

the only thing I remember is "under one country two systems, Hong Kong would retain its capitalist system for 50 years". from my limited knowledge of basic law.

Hong Kong should be its own municipality, like Chongqing,or Beijing.

Hong Kong enjoy far more rights than any Mainland provinces, municipalities or autonomous regions.

Hong Kong can issue its own visas, negotiate trade policies with other nations, Hong Kong issue its own currency and has its own fiscal policy, Hong Kong also can represent itself in various international organizations such as WTO, IOC. on top of it even the net domain name is .hk not .cn.
no matter how democratic (and consequently decentralized) China will become, i do not believe central government will hand those rights to provinces and municipalities.

no that's not what i meant.

i was wondering if basic law states explicitly what Hong Kong's fate might be after "50 year transition period"

the only thing I remember is "under one country two systems, Hong Kong would retain its capitalist system for 50 years". from my limited knowledge of basic law.
Well I'm just saying that as long as the current situation with Taiwan remains the same, Hong Kong is in a better position to ask for things from the central government. An extension of its current rights or even an expansion of rights is not out of the question.

Beijing is probably more worried about anti-CCP sentiment spilling over into the mainland from the Hong Kong activists. China has purpose in keeping Hong Kong as it is. If by 2047 the Chinese society is still not as open as Hong Kong's, Beijing will probably heed a request to extend the Basic Law and maintain Hong Kong's autonomy.

i think by then the HKers wont say much as China is rich. You know how it is......they all look to where the money is

come to think of it..the basic law make sures that Hong Kong will remain capitalist for 50 years, but what happens AFTER 50 years? well we know mainland china is already capitalist now and it's only communist by name, but wont Hong Kong have to lose its autonomy and be handed over to Guangdong province after 50 years? what about rights and freedoms etc, ideally mainland china would become free by then, but what if it doesnt?

man what a half assed negotiation China and UK did, they probably thought 50 years is a long time, well 9 years have already passed...

it is scary actually u can neva really trust a government unless it is empowered by its own citizen. Remebering the 1989 massacre in china. what we learnt in history is that it repeats itself. I mean HK has already lost much of its glory since the handover and that the central government is interfering minimal. Imagine when the central government takes full control. I doubt they will care about the will of HKers and prosperity of HK when issues comes in conflict with their reign. I reckon democracy is the way to go to ensure the safety and future of HK. The Beijing government has limited people to be appointed to the the HK Chief executive. They should let the people select who would represent them, this way the very best of Hkers could also have a chance to be elected. Hong Kong is liberal but not democratic. I sure hope China will follow the path of Taiwan, moving from near dictatorship to democracy in an orderly fashion. And btw I thought the British only leased the new terrotories? and that the HK island was ceded?

Beijing is probably more worried about anti-CCP sentiment spilling over into the mainland from the Hong Kong activists. China has purpose in keeping Hong Kong as it is. If by 2047 the Chinese society is still not as open as Hong Kong's, Beijing will probably heed a request to extend the Basic Law and maintain Hong Kong's autonomy.

Yea the Chinese government is pretty happy with HK as it is now i think. They can juz appoint some muppet chielf executives and remote control them from Beijing :rofl: Meanwhile telling Hkers we have full autonomy lol. I think many HKers begin the realise that they r being tricked so the central government is now trying to bribe them......working quite well i think lol.

HONG KONG, MACAU AND TAIWAN FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Charles comments on the handover is terribly naive. Not something in his position would normally write... What's so wrong about travelling in business class? Who the hell are you? XD

I hope everyone realize in the past 9 years, Hong Kong has enjoyed its autonomy more than ever. Getting Donald Tsang in the top job is great. A person with no CCP background unlike Tung. There are different opinions in the society in order to watch over the government.

I don't know why people always brings out the term democracy. I consider it a joke at least in Taiwan... The president elections are so fake. In elections, how often will candidates keep their promise afterward? Do voters have control over them?

Hong Kong is the world's freest economy. When Hong Kong TV news reach the mainland, the program is often being chopped up in parts... (thats really funny)

Mainland is now still some years behind HK but is catching up fast. Thats why the 50 years is designed for. At current rate of development, I see a very good chance mainland will catch up with HK economically and politically by then. :)

Charles comments on the handover is terribly naive. Not something in his position would normally write... What's so wrong about travelling in business class? Who the hell are you? XDI hope you are joking! He's the Prince! I myself find it surprising that he should travel business class when politicians are in first!Hong Kong is the world's freest economy. When Hong Kong TV news reach the mainland, the program is often being chopped up in parts... (thats really funny)You seem to be getting economic and political freedoms confused here. Hong Kong has lighter censorship because it is more politically free - not more economically free.Mainland is now still some years behind HK but is catching up fast. Thats why the 50 years is designed for. At current rate of development, I see a very good chance mainland will catch up with HK economically and politically by then. :)I hope the Mainland does catch up politically. The 50 period was a guarantee for Hong Kong's citizens.

You seem to be getting economic and political freedoms confused here. Hong Kong has lighter censorship because it is more politically free - not more economically free.

Actually, I do mean both! I see Hong Kong much freer than many countries in the world. :)

"A major factor in attracting this cluster of leading companies is the freedom of information and investment that Hong Kong offers. Hong Kong is considered the freest economy in the world and enjoys the most liberal media and multimedia environment in Asia, with an open investment regime and unrestricted foreign ownership rules."

http://www.investhk.gov.hk/content1p.aspx?id=734&code=SEC-TMM-MEDIA&lang=1

I don't know why people always brings out the term democracy. I consider it a joke at least in Taiwan... The president elections are so fake. In elections, how often will candidates keep their promise afterward?

A lot of HKers say "democracy" because after Tung, we don't trust the existing CE selecting systme anymore. We think we have the right to elect our own government as stated in the Basic Law, not by Beijing appointment.

Do voters have control over them?

Yes. If I don't like you, I won't vote for you in the next election. That's mean I don't need to see the same person again in just 4 to 5 years. A classic example would be former HK CE Tung Chee Hwa. In 2002, Tung was voted to be the 2nd CE of HK, in continuous of his 1st term, by a 800-member, mostly left wing, council. During that time, at least half of the HK population did not want him to be the CE anymore. If we have had universal suffage, I am sure he wouldn't have been in the office again for another 3 years til he "resigned" in 2005.

What will happen after the 50 years?

What will happen after the 50 years?

Still gonna be business as usual ;)

Yea the Chinese government is pretty happy with HK as it is now i think. They can juz appoint some muppet chielf executives and remote control them from Beijing :rofl: Meanwhile telling Hkers we have full autonomy lol. I think many HKers begin the realise that they r being tricked so the central government is now trying to bribe them......working quite well i think lol.

HK is more of a headache to the Central Government than an eye-pleaser. That's due to the fact that Hong Kong's a ticking time-bomb for democracy, with dire consequences (e.g. spillover of the democracy movement into the Mainland) if the politburo doesn't handle the democracy question effectively without upsetting the sensitivity of HKers.

[QUOTE=Monkey]I hope you are joking! He's the Prince! I myself find it surprising that he should travel business class when politicians are in first.


Welcome to the real world Charles, you are stayin at the Camelot too long. Perhaps, maybe he should reach into his deep pockets and pay for the first class ticket.

During the 97 handover, Charles also described that some of the Chinese officials as " old waxworks ". When is the last time he take a good look at his current wife. If you want to be treated like a prince, act like one.

Still gonna be business as usual ;)

I hope big business :)

HK is more of a headache to the Central Government than an eye-pleaser. That's due to the fact that Hong Kong's a ticking time-bomb for democracy, with dire consequences (e.g. spillover of the democracy movement into the Mainland) if the politburo doesn't handle the democracy question effectively without upsetting the sensitivity of HKers.

Yea true that bro. With the modern day communication Chinese government is having trouble filtering all the news of democratic cries of the HK people. Is really a dilema for them i reckon. GOGO DEMOCRACY! O and rt_0891 bro dun go to sydney or singapore ;) come to HK!!! I m sure u will have more fun!!!

Hong Kong was growing crazily because a billion people were forced to use this gate. Now, HK people must realise these wonderful days are gone.
前主人不會向中共施壓，連美國也忌中共三分，香港人唔係認為有七百萬人上香港街頭就等同向中共施壓？對千里之遙的北京而言，只談得上乞求而己。論政治，香港一個籌碼都冇。論經濟，大陸唔再需要香港都出入到錢同貨，即係香港已失其自韓戰五十年以來的必要性。香港人現在拿基本法向中共求民主是「刻舟求劍」之類的笑話，只怪當年不好好向前主人抗爭。
政治抗爭吧，求中共還是求英美施壓。乖乖的澳門人真係睬你都傻，佢地新民生政策同新建築工程已令香港唔少長期半失業的低下勞動階層羡慕。如果英國人當年唔叫乖乖的香港人起新機場新大橋新路，香港一定因政治民意同環保到今日都起唔到草圖，睇下西九啟德塊空地不知要再空多少個十年。政治鬥爭，中共從前的洗腦強項啊，反而在九七後的香港找到新捧場客。
中共怕的是地方貪污，六四也是反貪而起....區區一個不再必要的香港，何足為患？這裏不少香港人一早已逃離香港或自認即使中共發火也隨時可成英美永久居民，隔岸觀火的語氣果然豪邁。不過中共現在怎病貓也不再必需香港，這一點是永居香港的香港人要認清的大勢及要接受的現實。

Prince Charles wins judgment on diary, but more disclosures could be in store
By DEREK KRAVITZ
17 March 2006

LONDON (AP) - Prince Charles won a court judgment Friday barring publication of more extracts from a private diary, but a judge ordered a trial to determine if other journals acquired by a newspaper should stay private.

The ruling triggered speculation the prince could be called to testify. But Charles' office said the heir to the throne would not take the witness stand.

"The Prince of Wales will never give evidence even if it goes to a full trial," said his private secretary, Sir Michael Peat.

Charles had sued the publisher of the Mail on Sunday newspaper for breaches of confidentiality and copyright. The paper had published extracts from a diary he kept during a 1997 visit to Hong Kong, in which he referred to Chinese officials as "appalling old waxworks."

High Court Judge William Blackburne ruled Charles could claim damages from the newspaper and could seek a permanent injunction to protect the Hong Kong journal.

However, Blackburne said he was unwilling to bar publication of seven other journals reportedly sold by a former employee without knowing what they contained. He ordered another hearing to determine whether they should be returned to the prince.

The judge said there was "every reason" to conclude that Charles was also entitled to an expectation of privacy for the other seven journals, but was unwilling to grant a summary judgment without knowing what the journals said.

"For all the court knows, circumstances may arise which may make disclosure an entirely appropriate exercise of the defendant's right of freedom of expression," Blackburne said.

Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Mail on Sunday, said it would appeal.

The company said publishing the diaries was in the public interest because they revealed the political beliefs of the man who would be king.

"It cannot be legitimate for the prince to claim the right to engage in political controversy and at the same time deny the public the right to know that he is doing so," Associated Newspapers said.

"These issues will be heard not only in our appeal over the Hong Kong journal, but also in the trial relating to the other seven journals which the judge has agreed we should retain."

The new hearing raised the prospect the prince could be called to testify at the High Court.

A specialist in media law said Charles could not be forced to testify, but suggested the prince could not win otherwise.

"There's absolutely no way the prince can bring home this case successfully without giving evidence under oath to explain his actions," said Mark Stephens, a partner in the media and entertainment law firm, Finers Stephens Innocent.

"If he were anyone else in the country, he would be cross-examined," said Stephens, who is not involved in the case.

Publication of the prince's sometimes curmudgeonly political views -- and the claim by a former aide that Charles often wrote to politicians to offer his "dissident" opinions -- also raised questions about the role of the monarchy in modern Britain.

Charles' caustic comments about Chinese officials in the Hong Kong journal drew particular attention.

"For the handover this hall had been transformed into a kind of Great Hall of the People of Peking. After my speech, the (Chinese) president detached himself from the group of appalling old waxworks who accompanied him and took his place at the lectern," Charles wrote.

Members of the royal family have rarely appeared in court.

Charles' sister, Princess Anne, was in court in 2002 to plead guilty to a charge that one of her dogs attacked two children.

Queen Victoria's heir, the future King Edward VII, gave evidence in a divorce case in 1870 when he was accused of being a lover of Lady Mordaunt. In 1891, he testified on behalf of a friend who had been accused of cheating at baccarat.

But don't you feel sorry for the Brits? Poor poor Brits. :(

I feel sorry for the British, and I miss them too. :(

I don't think that the minorities of HK made a 'real' contribution to the greatness of HK.

Minorities definately make a contribution to HK, Hong kong's sixth richest business man, Roberk Kuok is Malaysian.

Kuok is the Shangri-la guy, right?

Kuok is the Shangri-la guy, right?

I'm not too sure, but this is the person I was refering to, HK sixth richest man. :cheers:

http://www.forbes.com//lists/2006/10/ARHN.html

Kuok is the Shangri-la guy, right?

Kuok owns The Shangri La chain of hotels. Yes he is listed as HK but his nationality is Malaysian.