Mulan Star Crystal Liu Supports Hong Kong’s Police in the Midst of Ongoing Violent Protests
Comments like Crystal Liu’s only serve the interests of China as it continues to implement its imperialist goals.
The star of next year’s live action remake of Mulan caused a massive stir on social media this past week. Crystal Liu, who portrays the lead character in Disney’s live action remake of the animated Disney princess film Mulan, posted a series of posts in support of Hong Kong’s police amidst widespread violent protests rocking the city.
As reported by the Hollywood Reporter,
Liu’s statement sparked instant outcry in Hong Kong, where the local police have been accused by international human rights groups of excessive use of force in confrontations with protesters and the public.
Posting to her 65 million followers on Chinese social media platform Weibo, Liu shared an image originally released by the state-backed People’s Daily, reading: “I support Hong Kong’s police, you can beat me up now,” followed by, “What a shame for Hong Kong.” Liu added the hashtag “IAlsoSupportTheHongKongPolice” and a heart emoji. The post received over 72,000 likes and over 65,000 shares in less than 24 hours.
For the past several weeks, Hong Kong has experienced major Pro-Democracy protests in response to China’s provocations as recent legislation has threatened to limit Hong Kong’s autonomy as a somewhat independent City-State separate from China. As Legal Insurrection blogged back on August 3rd,
The trigger for these demonstrations was an extradition bill that would have led to Hong Kong residents being handed over to China for trials. Hong Kong citizens are worried about the type of justice they can expected from the Chinese government.
Since then, subsequent weeks of protest have resulted in Hong Kong’s airport being shut down, protesters started waving American flags and the Chinese military has begun to accumulate near the city. International fears of a Tiananmen Square style massacre are beginning to mount as the protestors continue to call for freedom.
Crystal Liu’s statements were called out by online protestors living in Hong Kong who started the hashtag #BoycottMulan which has since started trending online internationally.
Disney’s Mulan actress, Liu Yifei, supports police brutality and oppression in Hong Kong.
Liu is a naturalized American citizen. it must be nice. meanwhile she pisses on people fighting for democracy.
retweet please. HK doesn’t get enough support. #BoycottMulan @Disney pic.twitter.com/lBoQv7BlsZ
— Bbabydoll.Co (@BbabydollCo) August 16, 2019
Sadly the news of the protests has largely flown under the radar as the media focuses on domestic issues. While it’s not clear what can be done to stop the situation from boiling over into a massacre without foreign intervention, the world tacitly watches at a distance as Hong Kong prepares for the possibility of losing it’s sovereignty with little hope of victory over the oppressive Chinese state.
Comments like Crystal Liu’s only serve the interests of China as it continues to implement its imperialist goals.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Send her back to China
Doesn’t Communist China own that studio?
Communist China owns lots of the Hollywood studios.
Well Mulan is now a flop of the future.
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/08/16/disney-faces-boycott-after-mulan-star-sides-with-hong-kong-police/
Why are people surprised, though — surprised that anyone associated with Disney would side with brutal communist enforcers over people waving American flags, who only want to be free? Disney has been kissing Red Chinese ass for at least a decade.
In fact, for the last ten years, all of Hollywood has openly sold its black soul to the Red Chinese. We have been covering this for years at Breitbart News.
Because Hollywood is run by greedy, left-wing tyrants, we have seen movie after movie after movie that portrays this brutal regime as benevolent and heroic. What’s more, Hollywood now censors itself, polices itself, and willingly surrenders its own artistic expression to these censorious monsters, and does so for only one reason — NAKED GREED — to gain access to a country building thousands and thousands of movie screens every year
———————————
Remember when the Red Dawn remake changed the invaders from the Red Chinese to North Korea? The movie was already shot, already in the can, and to appease China, we were suddenly invaded by a country filled with starving people that is no threat to anyone, much less a Red State.
The truth is this… There is no savagery China can commit on its own people that will ever shock the conscience of Hollywood — which is itself staffed with leftist tyrants.
And by building all of those movie theaters, China has brilliantly accomplished something even the Soviet Union could not do, and that is to win control over the content produced in Hollywood, to seize hold of the most powerful propaganda devise ever created — the motion picture.
All China had to do to gain control of Hollywood was to create a market for these greedy studios and executives, and it worked like a charm.
I don’t blame this stupid actress. She doesn’t know any better.
SJW’s and Antifa will protest ACTUAL totalitarian/fascist government any century now…
Wanna bet this actress
A. Has family
B. Knows what happened to the last prominent Chinese actress, Fan Bingbing
In other news, waters wet.
Don’t be too tough on her. She’s in the same boat as a guy who has dirt on the Clintons except any family she has is also on the same hook.
She deliberately chose sides. Boycott her and as much as possible boycott Disney.
Subotai Bahadur
So be it.
Disney wanted their diversity gold star.
Now they’re reaping the rewards.
Communist China has their own swamp and GOPe. This dumbo and jackie chan seem to be part of it.
So hypocritical of the characters they play in movies, isn’t it? They should both be playing bad guys.
I strongly suspect that the Chinese Communist regime does not allow people to become big stars unless they are “ideologically reliable.”
Their Communist China “Social Approval Credits” (as designed by Google – snark) must be high enough.
I was already not watching these live-action remakes, disgusted with the fact that they are retreads. So, I will extra not-watch Mulan!
So, let me get this straight. Hong Kong is a semi-autonomous part of China. The Hong Kong government introduces a bill which would allow those wanted for certain crimes, which occurred in Chinese territory outside of Hong Kong, to be extradited to China for trial. This would require a change in the existing laws which do not allow for extradition go China. The citizens object and the Hong Kong government acquiesces and tables the bill. In response to getting what they said they wanted, the citizens of Hong Kong continue to riot and shut down the Hong Kong airport. In response, China responds by sending in riot police and massing paramilitary forces outside Hong Kong. What is wrong with this response? The Hong Kong government did not pass the offensive bill. So, explain why the “protestors” have any right to riot and disrupt travel into and out of the colony. And, explain to me why China would not have the authority to protect the citizens of one of its territories, Hong Kong. I’m confused here.
The bill was tabled and can be brought up again at any time. The free citizens of Hong Kong want it removed and that is why the latest round of protests began.
“And, explain to me why China would not have the authority to protect the citizens of one of its territories, Hong Kong. I’m confused here.”
In other news, the Nazi’s in Germany had every right to gas the Jews and other undesirables because it was legal.
I’m really surprised you are taking the side of the communists in China over the people of Hong Kong trying to maintain their freedom.
I dunno, Mac always seems to like him some Jackboots.
Barry, Barry, Barry.
First, any bill, even if voted down could be re-introduced later. It happens in democracies all of the time. So, essentially the Hong Kong government gave in to the protestors. Yet, that does not seem to be enough.
As to the population of Hong Kong, attempting to maintain their freedom, this is a noble undertaking. But, they are going to lose. There is NO way that Hong Kong can stand against a nation the size and power of China. And, technically, Hong Kong is part of China today and was, even during the British Colonial period [Britain only had a lease on the territory. The Chinese merely agreed to allow the colony to practice semi-autonomy for 30 years after the British lease expired before exerting full control over the colony.
So, exactly HOW do you figure Hong Kong gets to become an autonomous nation, if China says no? What if the residents of Los Angeles decided that they wanted to be an autonomous nation inside the US? Would our government say; “Okay. Go ahead.”?
You might not like communism or China. But, it has the same right to quell domestic unrest as every other nation does.
Mac, Mac, Mac,
“So, essentially the Hong Kong government gave in to the protestors. Yet, that does not seem to be enough.”
No, it’s not enough – 1: it violates the agreement HK and China entered into, and 2: it can be taken off the table, not just shelved. Can China send in tanks and force this, of course. Doesn’t change the simple fact that what the HK people asked for was to remove it, and that probably would resulted in peace without substantial protest.
“But, they are going to lose.”
Maybe, maybe not. China can overwhelm them certainly. No one is under any illusion. But there will be a cost, several. 1, Currently many foreigners and business are headquartered in HK. They will leave. 2, The Chines part and military have many investments in HK, some of that their “safe haven” money. They lose it if HK is invaded. 3, the west will react economically and China will be hurt. 4, all these may topple a communist party that many Chinese hate.
I don’t predict what ruthless communists will do. But a bit of sunlight on their actions modify it in ways beneficial.
“But, it has the same right to quell domestic unrest as every other nation does.”
Flat out wrong. It has the power of force. It has no “right”.
As for California, sure let it go. Please. Soon.
“No, it’s not enough – 1: it violates the agreement HK and China entered into, and 2: it can be taken off the table, not just shelved. Can China send in tanks and force this, of course. Doesn’t change the simple fact that what the HK people asked for was to remove it, and that probably would resulted in peace without substantial protest.”
The agreement was between the UK and China, not HK. Hong Kong went from being a UK controlled Chinese territory to a Chinese controlled Chinese territory. Second, there is NO evidence to support the claim that had the bill been withdrawn, this would have resulted in “peace without protest”.
“Maybe, maybe not. China can overwhelm them certainly. No one is under any illusion. But there will be a cost, several. 1, Currently many foreigners and business are headquartered in HK. They will leave. 2, The Chines part and military have many investments in HK, some of that their “safe haven” money. They lose it if HK is invaded. 3, the west will react economically and China will be hurt. 4, all these may topple a communist party that many Chinese hate.”
So, there would be economic repercussions if the PRC sent troops or police into HK. Do you honestly believe that the PRC does not have economic troubles now? And, why would a semi-totalitarian regime not react with forceful oppression? Iy has n the past. Remember Tienanmen Square? That certainly brought the PRC to its knees. Please, the PRC is going to assume total control of HK, sooner or later.
“Flat out wrong. It has the power of force. It has no “right”.”
Wrong. Every sovereign nation has the RIGHT to combat civil insurrection. It has always been thus. As long as the PRC is a sovereign nation, then its internal politics are its own business.
“As for California, sure let it go. Please. Soon.”
I think that the USA settled that question way back in 1865. It was quite an argument, as I recall. The Union used armed force to force member states, which had legally seceded, back into the United States.
Mac, you are so flat out wrong on this it’s painful.
One more time, the King has no authority over me other than force. I can and will revolt against the kings. I feel free to use force against the king.
I do not have to have the possibility of winning in order to be right in fighting back against the slavers.
“Every sovereign nation has the RIGHT to combat civil insurrection.”
No, the Chinese have no such rights. Who grants these rights? Power they have. Force they have. Rights, no.
The treaty signed between China and GB said that HK would be treated as an autonomous territory. If you’re subject to extradition to a Commie gulag, you’ve got no autonomy.
Exactly
Actually, extradition from one place to another, to face criminal charges for criminal violations which occurred in the second place are extremely common. The US has extradition treaties with many foreign countries. It even has extradition between the several states which comprise the country. Hong Kong already has formal extradition agreements with 20 countries, including the US and UK, but not with any territories which are part of China or to which China lays claim.
In the case of the Hong Kong extradition amendment, the Chinese government would have been given more power over the extradition process from Hong Kong and the Hong Kong government would have less of a say in the practice. The protests over the passage of that amendment could be justified, legally. However, once the Hong Kong government tabled the amendment, that should have ended the demonstrations. It did not. And, China, of which Hong Kong is a part, has the authority to move against the protestors to protect her citizens in Hong Kong, if the local government proves unable to do so.
The kicker here is that Hong Kong is NOT a sovereign nation. It is a territory of China to which China has extended autonomous self rule. At the moment, that autonomy is set to expire in 2047, per the agreement with Great Britain. At that time the PRC can impose complete control over the colony. And, there is actually NO way that Hong Kong can realistically maintain any autonomy if the PRC does not allow it. So, the colony needs a strong sugar daddy to protect it. Do you think that the protestors in Hong Kong are waving American flags because they want to be the 51st state?
“which occurred in Chinese territory outside of Hong Kong”
It is my understanding, subject to correction of course, under the law that is only temporarily tabled that actions which were taken in and totally legal in Hong Kong, could and would be charged once the Hong Kong resident was extradited out of the semi-autonomous territory of Hong Kong to China proper. So all the Thought Police would have to do would be move you a few miles and imprison or execute you.
Note that I am not urging military intervention or any such. This is not a casus belli for us. But it is a factor in how we deal with them from now on. They are not our friends, they are powerful enemies and need to be treated as such. That does not include submission to them.
While my nom d’ blog is Mongol, I myself am of Chinese ancestry. My dad came here alone as a child back when we Chinese were legally not human beings under American law. He became legally a person when the law changed in 1943, because China was our ally against Japan. He earned his citizenship fighting his way across Europe with Patton’s Third Army, and incidentally liberated the last concentration camp in Nazi hands [Gunskirchen subcamp of Matthausen]. I got it the easy way being born here.
I remember crying with rage during Tienanmen. I teared up when I saw Chinese in Hong Kong facing off against the People’s Police, while carrying American flags and singing our national anthem in English. When the People’s Liberation Army levels large parts of Hong Kong, I will cry again. And I will not forgive. Nor should any people that claims to be free or who wants to see other people free.
Subotai Bahadur
This is an assumption, not fact.
The case from which this amendment stemmed were one in which a Hong Kong businessman was convicted of money laundering and bribery in Macau, but could not be extradited to Macau because of existing Hong Kong law.
Now, we all can acknowledge that the PRC is not our friend. We can readily agree that the government of the PRC will attempt to exert near totalitarian control over where ever it can within territory which it ostensibly controls. And, like it or not, Hong Kong is part of China. The protestors have no chance to prevail in gaining sovereignty now, any more than the Tienanmen protestors did back in 1989. And, neither the US nor any other country is going to use force to back them up. And, without a threat of external force, the demonstrators have already lost the battle and probably the war. And, Hong Kong is part of China, legally.
As I said in my first comment to you, I’m surprised.
That HK can be overwhelmed by mainland China does not mean we have to give in and acknowledge the communists have some set of rights.
They have power, not rights, and people that love freedom and liberty should condemn China and fight back.
Lets’ be clear, China has a totalitarian communist regime, forced upon the Chinese people. They were not elected, they have no “right”. They have no “right” to rule over HK.
The PRC has the same rights that any other sovereign nation with respect to controlling domestic activities which cause civil unrest. It does not matter if they are a totalitarian regime or a democracy. The government has the legal right to police its internal relations.
Now, remember the US civil war. The North invaded the Confederacy and occupied it. The government, which was imposed upon the residents of those states was not voted on by the people there. They did not choose to return to membership in the United States. So, under your argument, the residents of the former Confederacy should be able to rise up in rebellion against the current US government and it would be justified. And, the US would NOT be justified in using force to stop that. Got it. I guess sanctuary cities are perfectly all right, as well.
WE might not like the PRC. We may feel sympathy for the residents of HK. But, we still have to adhere to legal norms in international relationships.
“But, we still have to adhere to legal norms in international relationships.”
Says who? We do not have to do any such thing. See cold war, Soviet Union, for an example.
Back to the Nazi regime was OK since it was legal to murder the Jews. Slavery is OK as long as it’s “legal”. If the king says lick my boot, well OK.
You’ve gone off the deep end.
“Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
Adams
Her family would be ….made uncomfortable. If she did not. End of story.
Pity. I was very interested in seeing that live-action Disney remake of Mulan. It promises to be akin to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.
No longer.
There are a number of dynamics at work here.
One, HK lives on business, and demonstrations and unrest are bad for business.
Two: Many ethnic Chinese are proud of how China is now a major power, and at least respect the Communist Party for leading it to such a position, even if they have little love for the Communist Party.
Three: There is money to be made in China; and it is an open secret that you have to be at least ideologically quiet, if not reliable, in order to access it.
It’s her choice to kneel.
It is her choice to keep her family alive. People who oppose the government in China find their families under house arrest (if they are lucky), imprisoned, or mysteriously dead.