They were definitely not, you’ve got to be shitting me. They wanted their glorious Cheeto Man to still be president after he lost a democratic election
They also did a bit more than speech and assembly, if it were just that we wouldn’t be imprisoning them. It doesn’t matter what you believe, if you shoot your friend because you think he’s a zombie and then he turns out not to be, that’s still a crime
The arrest itself was actually “motivated” by what they referred to as unauthorised assembly during the pro-democracy protests. This 73 year old man went somewhere he shouldn’t have, and clearly threatened the mighty CCP enough to warrant 20 months in prison in the process. Additional charges up to life are being stacked on top following from the “security law” meant to silence pro-democracy voices in Hong Kong, but as far as I know these charges have not been made public. His newspaper was published daily though, so the nature of his crime was quite public if you’re really interested.
Authoritarians often give vague or even contradictory justifications for arresting people. Apple Daily was promoting democracy in Hong Kong which was enough for him to be made an example of.
They didn’t need justifications, at least not specific ones. There’s a very distinct implication here that China vaguely found this man’s pro-democracy speech and assembly dangerous to the establishment and that was enough
deleted by creator
The Jan 6 people were not arrested for publishing a newspaper.
deleted by creator
They were definitely not, you’ve got to be shitting me. They wanted their glorious Cheeto Man to still be president after he lost a democratic election
But they believe they have the silent majority behind them.
They also did a bit more than speech and assembly, if it were just that we wouldn’t be imprisoning them. It doesn’t matter what you believe, if you shoot your friend because you think he’s a zombie and then he turns out not to be, that’s still a crime
deleted by creator
The arrest itself was actually “motivated” by what they referred to as unauthorised assembly during the pro-democracy protests. This 73 year old man went somewhere he shouldn’t have, and clearly threatened the mighty CCP enough to warrant 20 months in prison in the process. Additional charges up to life are being stacked on top following from the “security law” meant to silence pro-democracy voices in Hong Kong, but as far as I know these charges have not been made public. His newspaper was published daily though, so the nature of his crime was quite public if you’re really interested.
Here’s a BBC story on the history of the newspaper.
I’m sorry I couldn’t find anything published by Xinhua News Agency, I have a feeling you might have appreciated that more.
deleted by creator
Authoritarians often give vague or even contradictory justifications for arresting people. Apple Daily was promoting democracy in Hong Kong which was enough for him to be made an example of.
deleted by creator
They didn’t need justifications, at least not specific ones. There’s a very distinct implication here that China vaguely found this man’s pro-democracy speech and assembly dangerous to the establishment and that was enough