Comments by "David Wong" (@davidwong5197) on "Rally at Hong Kong’s central business district" video.

@midgelionhart True. Nothing beats stability .
2
@teehee1520 Talk to Kaepernick about the flag, And do the research on the FULL national anthem. You'll be surprised. It actually glorified slavery.
2
@jondoe9934 You do realize the Hong Kong bill in US congress mandated that Hong Kong OBEYS the US sanction law right? And Trump had borrowed $500M from China to build his golf course and hotel. America First. Unless you can buy 24M tons of soybean, you don't have a chance. And you think Boris gonna help you. He's more pro China than Carrie Lam
1
@1wb7kj Ne's in the video, dude
1
@ROSECAO Was he arrested? Who was arrested for free speech? I still don't see what he is fighting for. The way I see it he is protesting for protesting sake. Democracy and freedom are abstract. The Tianmen square protest's demand for freedom are very specific. I do not see any specific demand for freedom. Please don't tell me the 5 demands. None of them has to do with freedom.
1
@ROSECAO Exactly. I'm just saying there are plenty of freedom in HK. The Tienanmen Square protester's freedom demand, HK has all of them.
1
@zilun You are wrong on this one. US cannot confiscate people's property. They are not communist. US did not reject any lawsuit by Huawei. What they're doing is proposing a law that foreign companies cannot collect royalty for their patents. Verizon is using 235 of the Huawei patents and Huawei is asking for $1B in licensing fee. This is basically stealing IP legally. This most likely will not pass. Because if it passes, China and India and the rest of the world will start to do the same to the US drug and tech patents.
1
@zilun One more thing. One of the Huawei defense lawyers was an ex-deputy director with the DOJ in charge of investigating Huawei. I think they'll do all right with discovery. Of course, DOJ objected. The objection was overruled.
1
@zilun It was Canada that dragged out the case. The former Canadian ambassador to China already proclaimed US has no case. 1. The case is political based on Trump's tweet. Political cases cannot be extradited. 2. US has no jurisdiction in HK. US cannot prosecute bank fraud in HK. 3. The case is about Iranian sanction. Canada has no sanction with Iran. So even if Huawei is guilty it did not violate any Canadian law. Canadian extradition law requires double criminality which means the accused crime needed to be illegal in Canada too. BTW, all these provision are also in Hong Kong's extradition bill.
1
@midgelionhart It is a lot more complicated than that. It has to do with tax issue as well as cash flow. Just one example. Taiwan Shinchu Science park is a tax free zone. So when you ship products to China you will pay a 15% tax. But if you ship to a HK distributor, you do not need to pay. The distributor then resell the chips and save 15%. I don't know if you can do that in SG.
1
@zilun TRump tweeted the Meng case will go away if there is a trade deal. That's why it's political. ZTE's case went away after China loaned $500M to Trump organization for developing a golf course and hotel. You tell me how serious is Trump. What does capitalization has to do with anything? The US case is based on National Security. This means US has to show the supposed backdoor in Huawei's 5G. The Brit already verified there is NO backdoor. I supposed you're not an engineer. The 5G forwarding table is encrypted. So it is near impossible to hack or spied on. The only "spying" path is in the management plane which is NOT provided by Huawei. The press media is wrong on this, you need to read technical journal like the EETimes.
1
@zilun Are you serious? ZTE is still in business. They are still buying from Qualcomm.
1
@faigor2457 What about Ray Wong and alan Li? And you can always count on Nathan Law to say the right thing. BTW, what does self determination means?
1
@anonmousey5349 +1
1