Huawei Arrest Tests China's Leaders as Fear and Anger Grip Elite
The arrest of one of China's leading tech executives by the Canadian police for extradition to the United States has unleashed a combustible torrent of outrage and alarm among affluent and influential Chinese, posing a delicate political test for President Xi Jinping and his grip on the loyalty of the nation's elite.
The outpouring of conflicting sentiments — some Chinese have demanded a boycott of American products while others have expressed anxiety about their investments in the United States — underscores the unusual, politically charged nature of the Trump administration's latest move to counter China's drive for technological superiority.
In a hearing on Friday in Vancouver, Canadian prosecutors said the executive, Meng Wanzhou of the Chinese telecom giant Huawei, faced accusations of participating in a scheme to trick financial institutions into making transactions that violated United States sanctions against Iran.
Unlike a new round of tariffs or more tough rhetoric from American officials, the detention of Ms. Meng, the company's chief financial officer, appears to have driven home the intensifying rivalry between the United States and China in a visceral way for the Chinese establishment — and may force Mr. Xi to adopt a tougher stance against Washington, analysts said. In part, that is because Ms. Meng, 46, is so embedded in that establishment herself.
Previously: Canada Arrests Huawei's Global Chief Financial Officer in Vancouver
Related: New Law Bans U.S. Government from Buying Equipment from Chinese Telecom Giants ZTE and Huawei
Australia Bans China's Huawei (and maybe ZTE) from 5G Mobile Network Project
Washington Asks Allies to Drop Huawei
Related Stories
President Trump yesterday signed a defense funding bill that included a sweeping ban on the US government using technology supplied by Chinese telecommunications giants ZTE and Huawei. The bill also includes a narrower ban on using surveillance gear provided by Chinese companies Hytera Communications, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology, or Dahua Technology for national security applications.
The legislation directs federal agencies to stop using the Chinese-made hardware within two years. If that proves impractical, an agency can apply for a waiver to permit a longer phase-out period.
Obviously, being banned from selling to the US government is a significant blow to these companies. But overall the bill actually represents something of a reprieve for ZTE. Back in June, the US Senate passed a version of the bill that would have re-imposed an export ban that would have been a de facto death sentence for ZTE because ZTE is heavily dependent on components like Qualcomm chips and Google's Android operating system.
Previously: Verizon Cancels Plans to Sell Huawei Phone Due to U.S. Government Pressure
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Huawei CEO Still Committed to the U.S. Market
Rural Wireless Association Opposes U.S. Government Ban on Huawei and ZTE Equipment
ZTE Suspends Operations Due to U.S. Ban (UPDATED)
The Sydney Morning Herald reports that Australia's government on Thursday banned major Chinese telecoms firm Huawei Technologies from supplying equipment for its planned 5G mobile network, citing risks of foreign interference.
The 1000-word statement did not mention China, or the Chinese telecommunications equipment giants Huawei or ZTE. Nor did it plainly state the bombshell decision that they are to be banned from building Australia's new telecommunications network.
The fifth generation mobile telecoms system, or 5G, is a big deal. It's to be the key architecture of an increasingly wired nation, connecting power and water systems, medical and driverless technologies, systems in homes and hospitals, factories and farms, enabling the so-called "internet of things".
If you're getting the impression that the government didn't want to draw attention to the announcement, you're right. After months of careful scrutiny, the cabinet's national security committee had made the decision a week earlier. Then sat on it.
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
Washington Asks Allies to Drop Huawei
The U.S. government has initiated an extraordinary outreach campaign to foreign allies, trying to persuade wireless and internet providers in these countries to avoid telecommunications equipment from China's Huawei Technologies Co., according to people familiar with the situation.
American officials have briefed their government counterparts and telecom executives in friendly countries where Huawei equipment is already in wide use, including Germany, Italy and Japan, about what they see as cybersecurity risks, these people said. The U.S. is also considering increasing financial aid for telecommunications development in countries that shun Chinese-made equipment, some of these people say.
Also: The US is warning other countries against using Huawei's 5G tech
Canada Arrests Huawei's Global Chief Financial Officer in Vancouver, Canada
Canada has arrested the chief financial officer of China’s Huawei Technologies who is facing extradition to the United States on suspicion she violated U.S. trade sanctions against Iran.
Wanzhou Meng, who is also the deputy chair of Huawei’s board and the daughter of company founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested in Vancouver at the request of U.S. authorities.
“Wanzhou Meng was arrested in Vancouver on December 1. She is sought for extradition by the United States, and a bail hearing has been set for Friday,” Justice department spokesperson Ian McLeod said in a statement to The Globe and Mail. “As there is a publication ban in effect, we cannot provide any further detail at this time. The ban was sought by Ms. Meng.
A Canadian source with knowledge of the arrest said U.S. law enforcement authorities are alleging that Ms. Meng tried to evade the U.S. trade embargo against Iran but provided no further details.
Also at The Register and c|net.
Michael Kovrig, former Canadian diplomat, reportedly arrested in China
A former Canadian diplomat has reportedly been arrested in China. The International Crisis Group said Tuesday it's aware of reports that its North East Asia senior adviser Michael Kovrig has been detained.
The Brussels-based non-governmental organization said in a statement it's doing everything possible to obtain additional information about Kovrig's whereabouts and that it will work to ensure his prompt release.
The Globe and Mail in Toronto and the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported the arrest, citing unnamed sources.
Reports of Kovrig's detention come after China warned Canada of consequences for its recent arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou at Vancouver's airport. It's unclear if there's any link between the cases.
Some Chinese companies ban iPhones, require Huawei after CFO's arrest: report
Some Chinese companies are banning iPhones and requiring that their employees use Huawei products following the arrest of Huawei's chief financial officer, according to a new Yahoo News report. Meng Wanzhou, the CFO of Chinese telecom giant Huawei, was arrested by Canadian authorities last Saturday at the request of the U.S. after allegedly violating trade sanctions against Iran. Chinese officials have strongly protested Meng's detention.
Canadian Michael Spavor detained in China as Huawei row continues
A second Canadian has been detained in China on accusations of harming national security, as tension continues between the two countries. It was confirmed on Thursday that Michael Spavor, a businessman, had been detained in addition to former diplomat Michael Kovrig.
Canada drew Chinese protests after it arrested an executive at telecoms giant Huawei at the request of the US. Meng Wanzhou has been bailed but may face extradition for fraud.
[...] Michael Spavor is a businessman based in Dandong, near the Chinese border with North Korea. He has ties to the North Korean government and has met its leader Kim Jong-un many times.
Ex-diplomat Michael Kovrig currently works for a think tank, the International Crisis Group (ICG), which has said it is concerned for his health and safety. He is being held officially "on suspicion of engaging in activities that harm China's state security".
However, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Lu Kang, suggested another reason, saying the ICG had not been registered as a non-governmental organisation (NGO) in China and therefore it was unlawful for its staff to work there. Checks by Reuters news agency did not turn up a registration for ICG on government databases for NGOs or social enterprises.
Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has said Mr Kovrig's case was raised directly with Chinese officials.
The article has a photo of Spavor standing with Dennis Rodman.
Previously: Canada Arrests Huawei's Global Chief Financial Officer in Vancouver
Arrest of Huawei Executive Causing Discontent Among Chinese Elites
China Arrests Former Canadian Diplomat; Chinese Companies Ban iPhones, Require Huawei Phones
The makers of a super-hard smartphone glass made partially of synthetic diamonds took part in an FBI sting on Huawei, according to a new Bloomberg report. The operation apparently took place at a Prime Burger joint in Vegas during CES last month, while a Businessweek reporter watched from a nearby gelato stand. The embattled Chinese company had ordered samples of the "Miraj Diamond Glass" from US startup Akhan Semiconductor in 2017, only to return them badly damaged. Suspecting Huawei of intellectual property theft, Akhan's founder Adam Khan reportedly contacted the FBI, which drafted him and COO Carl Shurboff to take part in its Huawei investigations.
Email and text communications between the startup and a Huawei engineer were reportedly forwarded to the agency as part of the inquiry. A phone call between Khan, Shurboff and the same Huawei representative was also allegedly tapped on December 10th. Then came the Vegas sting, with the same Huawei staffer in attendance along with her colleague, Jennifer Lo, a senior official with the company in Santa Clara, California. Unbeknown to them, Khan and Shurboff were allegedly taping the entire get-together.
Throughout the meeting, the Huawei reps denied that it had violated US export laws, including provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which control the export of materials with defense applications -- diamond being one of those materials. They also "claimed ignorance" when it came to the damaged samples.
The FBI also raided a Huawei lab in San Diego. This particular investigation has not resulted in any charges yet.
Also at CNBC.
Related: Arrest of Huawei Executive Causing Discontent Among Chinese Elites
China Arrests Former Canadian Diplomat; Chinese Companies Ban iPhones, Require Huawei Phones
Huawei Under Investigation by DoJ for Theft of T-Mobile Trade Secrets
Despite U.S. Pressure, Germany Refuses To Exclude Huawei's 5G Technology
The Trump administration insists that Chinese firm Huawei, which makes 5G technology, could hand over data to the Chinese government. The U.S. has warned European allies, including Germany, Hungary and Poland, to ban Huawei from its 5G network or risk losing access to intelligence-sharing.
Germany has refused to ban any company, despite pressure from the U.S. Instead, Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated that her country would instead tighten security rules. "Our approach is not to simply exclude one company or one actor," she told a conference in Berlin on Tuesday, "but rather we have requirements of the competitors for this 5G technology."
Did The U.S. Just Lose Its War With Huawei?
"There are two things I don't believe in," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday, referring to Germany's standoff with the United States over Huawei's inclusion in her country's 5G rollout. "First, to discuss these very sensitive security questions publicly, and, second, to exclude a company simply because it's from a certain country."
Europe now seems likely to settle on 'careful and considered' inclusion of Huawei instead of any blanket bans. Chancellor Merkel stressed this week that a joined-up EU response would be "desirable", and Italy and the U.K. are also backing away from Washington's prohibition on Huawei's 5G technology. If they fold, it is likely the broader European Union will follow suit. And if those key European allies can't be carried, what chance Asia-Pacific, Africa, the Middle East?
Huawei to stop making flagship chipsets as U.S. pressure bites, Chinese media say:
Huawei Technologies Co will stop making its flagship Kirin chipsets next month, financial magazine Caixin said on Saturday, as the impact of U.S. pressure on the Chinese tech giant grows.
U.S. pressure on Huawei's suppliers has made it impossible for the company's HiSilicon chip division to keep making the chipsets, key components for mobile phone, Richard Yu, CEO of Huawei's Consumer Business Unit was quoted as saying at the launch of the company's new Mate 40 handset.
[...] "From Sept. 15 onward, our flagship Kirin processors cannot be produced," Yu said, according to Caixin. "Our AI-powered chips also cannot be processed. This is a huge loss for us."
Huawei's HiSilicon division relies on software from U.S. companies such as Cadence Design Systems Inc or Synopsys Inc to design its chips and it outsources the production to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), which uses equipment from U.S. companies.
Also at PhoneArena.
Previously: Arrest of Huawei Executive Causing Discontent Among Chinese Elites
Huawei Soldiers on, Announces Nova 5 and Kirin 810
U.S. Attempting to Restrict TSMC Sales to Huawei
TSMC Dumps Huawei
Huawei on List of 20 Chinese Companies that Pentagon Says are Controlled by People's Liberation Army
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:31AM (33 children)
The US hegemony is threatened, and Trump is rattling his sword. And, I can't say whether he's doing right or wrong. The time for sword rattling may very well be past. Those swords should have been rattling in the 1990's when Clinton was busily giving China a leg up. The Assassin's Mace seems to have fallen behind some, but it is still the Chinese goal to dominate the US militarily, politically, and economically. They've missed their 20 year schedule, but they already have a lot of power. Meanwhile, we squander power in the dozens of little "wars on terra".
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:55AM (31 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @01:33AM
Meet the New Boss — Same as the Old Boss
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:04AM (29 children)
The arrest is outrageously dumb. The Chinese do take this kind of stuff personally, and if the US doesn't resolve this real quick, US businesspeople, students and tourists are going to be Red Cornered all over the People's Republic. And China has the muscle to keep them jailed despite America's bitching.
It's going to be a real hit on America's psyche if Americans get locked up and their government can't get them out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:20AM
What goes for the US goes for their running dogs, the Canadians, too.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:32AM (25 children)
Erm. Sigh.
There's been a warrant since August. Maybe the warrant was 'dumb', I don't know. But the arrest? NO.
The true mark of a democratic and non-elitist society is that you aren't above the law. Other foreign nationals are arrested and extradited to and from Western nations all of the time.
Are you suggesting that because someone is special "They're from China!! Don't arrest them!", or that because someone is powerful "They have money! Political power! Don't arrest them!", that the arrest should be abandoned?
You're pretty much suggesting that the rich and powerful shouldn't be touched.
No, the arrest wasn't "dumb".
(Score: 2) by Lester on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:00AM (2 children)
Laws that try to tell to foreigners what to do in their own countries with their own money are absurd. Even UN sanctions are complicated. Let alone unilateral sanctions from a country.
Those laws are not justice, just economy and geopolitic. The message is not none is above the law, but none can escape from my power.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:00PM
The US is far from the only nation to have laws that effect non-citizens outside their borders.
However, my stated point was that the *arrest* was not 'dumb'. The OP was, as I mentioned, saying that the power and money and connections of the arrested, made the choice to arrest "dumb".
You are countering with an argument on whether or not the laws in question are wrong and inappropriate. Well, that's not really what I was even discussing, and yet you're linking my statements about the *arrest*.
However, to respond? I think you're wrong.
Why?
Well I don't know about your country, but my country (Canada) monitors, tracks, and gathers evidence on international spies -- even when not in Canada. And if as case is built (eg, spying against Canada), then they can be arrested in say.. the UK, or German or what not, and extradited to Canada for trial.
But that's wrong too, I suppose? I don't think that is.
What if a country has a law, stating that genocide is wrong? Crimes against humanity is wrong? Where ever committed?
Or are you suggesting that a dictator should never pay for his crimes, as long as he stays in his own country?
It isn't the concept that's wrong.
Now I think the US overreaches too. But that doesn't make the concept wrong.
Nor does it mean that my statements about an arrest, performed via a bilateral treaty, are wrong.
(Score: 3, Informative) by khallow on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:23PM
The bank-related fraud apparently involved US businesses. So if true, it wasn't "in their own countries". From the story about the hearing:
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:31PM (10 children)
The real question is how far Canada is about to go to protect their legal privilege. Note that China, being historically Confucian country, treats the laws differently. Specifically, in Confucian religion a judge decides what the law is and executes it personally. That's because they recognize the limitations of the institution and that understanding allowed them to survive for a way longer as a developed country than any western one. Perhaps it is time for the West to change their ways or at least to get a lesson in diversity.
In practice, would Canada go all the way protecting her laws, including accepting nuclear strike? I doubt it. Canada will likely to fold.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:21PM (9 children)
You're not even making any sense. A nuclear strike, over a corporate executive?
If you think China would do that, the what do you think they'll do over sanctions that destroy their economy? Or tariffs?
And why do you think China wouldn't fear retaliation? You do realise that while Canada isn't a nuclear power, it's the only country in the world that *was* and *gave up* nuclear weapons? You also realise that we literally keep all components on hand, and can build working nuclear weapons in 24 hours, yes?
Regardless, this is all silly. And frankly, if you think Canada folds on things, you know so little about history... of course, I will say this...
Few know precisely what a politician might do... in any country.
Sadly, one thing that might happen, depending upon the economic / other responses from China? Well, Canada has spent decades trying to increase ties with the rest of the world, including increasing trade with China. We don't hate the US, but having all your trade in one basket is just silly.
Yet if China starts to act improperly over this, if it threatens too much, does the wrong things? It could completely and totally backfire, causing the West to grow closer together, and alienate China.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:19PM (5 children)
She is a daughter of a former high level military and security executive. He can not allow anybody to threaten his family. This "can not" is way stronger than Canadian "can not". If he folds, his whole family will be in danger possibly for 7 generations.
Besides, what would you think happen if say Russia is to arrest Chelsea Clinton?
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:31PM (4 children)
You're just completely out of your mind. I mean, really.
You honestly think someone will throw a nuke over that? Even the most simplistic of brains, would realise that would lead to more nukes, not a resolution.
If China threw a nuke, it'd be nuked with 10x the response. And sanctions. And driven back into the stone age. It would not obtain its goals, and it would lose far more than it would gain.
I'm trying to figure out if you're a troll, or really believe this.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:48PM (3 children)
No, I don't think nukes will fly over this. What I do see though is total ignorance Canada's government as well as Canada's citizens demonstrate. They have no clue whatsoever about the consequences because they do not know the culture they are dealing with.
Canada will pay for this dearly. I don't know how it will happen, but it will sooner or later. Canada had a choice to avoid this and it passed.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @07:04AM (2 children)
You assume ignorance, merely because Canada doesn't act the way you wish. Yet it is not ignorance, but purposeful intent.
You do not keep your democracy, by allowing it to be undermined when you feel stress. In fact, it is *easy* to do the right, the correct, the proper thing when you are not pressured, not stressed, not bothered by external forces.
The true display of 'grit', if you will, is how one stands when pushed.
Amusingly however, you think this is a 'big deal'. It isn't. This is a tiny, little, minuscule incident. China can turn this into a larger incident, but if they do?
I assure you... it will turn out poorly for them, if so.
Lastly? You seem to be deluded as much as some in China are. I suspect you are either Chinese, or come from a country/culture/upbringing where you just can't understand.
Politicians in Canada? Have *no* sway here. None. Zero. Nada. No politician can demand her release. Nothing a politician can do, will cause her to be released.
Judges will not be swayed by political requests, domestic or foreign. They operate 100% independently from the executive branch. The Prime Minister, MPs, can do *nothing*, zero, nada to have her released.
There are many countries in the world that have a hire rate of corruption, and bribery as a cultural norm.
We don't. This is the way we *want* it. It is entrenched in how our democracy works.
(Score: 2) by legont on Monday December 10 2018, @11:16PM (1 child)
Man, you gonna have a few psyche shocks within the next decade.
China is already bigger than the US in ppp terms. While this measurement might be controversial, it definitely the best one to assess military strenth.
But fear not, there are less controversial options available. China, for example, could drown Canada in fetanyl so your government would have to build the police state itself to stop it. Opium wars in reverse. Do you think they forgot what your ancestors done to them?
How could a sane, supposedly peaceful, government get itself in the middle of an ugly fight between superpowers? Of a country that depends on both so much...
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Tuesday December 11 2018, @12:01AM
You just don't get it, democracy isn't worth a damn, if you don't follow the rule of law.
The arrest is doing just that.
All this hand waving, "fear of the future", doesn't matter. It's meaningless. You don't save a democracy, by giving up what makes it such.
You've blathered on with inane statements in that other thread too.
You know we've lived beside the US forever, and we certainly don't hesitate to arrest their citizens either. What the hell is wrong with you?
It's like you think China is special.
(Score: 2) by dry on Monday December 10 2018, @02:56AM (2 children)
Well there's S. Africa, who actually may have tested their nukes and threw them away. And then there are Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine who inherited nukes when the USSR fell apart and gave them up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons#States_formerly_possessing_nuclear_weapons [wikipedia.org]
Besides, Harper gave the Americans most of our plutonium, the bastard.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @07:10AM (1 child)
Well, the breakup of the Soviet Union did change things a bit, true. My statement was true at one time, and might be considered true with alterations.
But the point is -- we didn't truly give them up. We have the parts in storage, they are maintained, we have all of the resources to reassemble them, the knowledge and technical/scientific skill is abundant here.
They were dismantled to 'make a point' and to appease certain segments of our society. But that doesn't mean the capability is lost -- and it's even placed on hold to make it quick to recover. Very quick.
(Score: 2) by dry on Monday December 10 2018, @07:21AM
While I won't argue that we have the knowledge and skill to build them, I've never heard that we actually built any or have the parts in storage. After WWII, the Americans screwed all their partners, including Canada and it probably took a while before we had the materials and as I said, about 10 years back, forget exactly, we shipped most all our weapons grade plutonium south, or at least that was the news at the time. Personally, it pissed me off as it can be a handy capability which some nations respect.
(Score: 2) by dry on Monday December 10 2018, @03:10AM (1 child)
Yet, we don't arrest important Americans who have violated human rights, helped take part in genocide and are guilty of war crimes, especially the ones who are still called Mr President.
The opposite happens as well, like illegally extraditing Marc Emery to the States. In his case, his crime was worth a small fine in Canada, not the 10 year minimum that American law called for. But Harper and the Americans didn't like his politics. To quote an American official,
All for the horrible crime of selling plant seeds and founding political parties as well as running for office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extradition [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @07:26AM
You're not discussing the same thing.
We're talking extradition via treaty. We're talking about arrest. This happens both ways, all the time.
Yet you're discussing whether or not there is sufficient evidence that a Canadian court might lay charges, and further -- if anyone has compiled, vetted, and submitted that evidence, allowing for an arrest warrant to be issued.
You're trying to divert that into "We should be doing this!". Well, fine but.. this certainly isn't about the same thing. Not even remotely.
In terms of Harper? Harper had nothing, nada, zero, zilch to do with it. Prime Ministers don't extradite. They don't arrest. The don't control the courts.
The extradition was 100%, completely and fully legal. Nothing "funny" happened, in fact? Political interference would have been *abnormal*.
I know who Marc Emery is. I also know he shipped product to the US, full well knowing it was 100% illegal there. I know he also did quite a few other things, and that legally the US, and Canadian courts were on firm ground.
This is what happens when one pushes against laws, in protest. You often run afoul of them, and end up incarcerated.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @07:09AM (8 children)
Yeah, right.
Like all those banksters who were arrested in the wake the 2008 GFC, right? And given sentences involving forced labor, eh?
As for " Other foreign nationals are arrested and extradited"... really? But not quite all of them, isn't it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @07:34AM (7 children)
Great! You've identified an area where (primarily Americans) should do better. After all, Canadian banks weren't directly involved.
You're also confusing "compiling evidence and creating an arrest warrant" with "following through with that arrest once evidence is presented" and "extraditing".
These are different things. Do you have proof that there is sufficient evidence for a Canadian court to arrest and charge a specific US banker with a crime that is illegal in Canada?
If so, you realise that court cases can be brought in civil court, and that the burden of proof is MUCH lower there. 50.1% is what often wins a civil court case, where as 99.9% might best describe a criminal court win.
Meaning? If there was loads of evidence, why haven't people in Canada sued these same bankers, and won? Because it's very easy to register judgements in a foreign court, and collect.
Well, no evidence!
I think part of your confusion is -- people managing to evade the law, by trickery, collusion, and destruction of evidence -- without the ability to prove it, compared to "we have PROOF!" and people doing nothing.
It's a constant battle to take down crooks, get evidence on crooks.
But to not arrest when a court has the evidence? THAT IS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING! :P
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @07:54AM (6 children)
What the banksters did was illegal in US (misrepresentation of the risk for those derivatives)
Nothing happened to them in their own country, you want me to accept as realistic the probability they would be extradited?
And no, Americans don't have monopoly in preferential dealings with 'elite corruption', as the Forex scandal [wikipedia.org] shows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @08:31AM (5 children)
You're not even paying attention to what I'm saying.
Your contention is that there was evidence, and that state prosecutors / federal prosecutors / various others *ignored* that evidence... and said "Our buddies will go free!".
Mine is that there was not sufficient evidence, because those involved were good at covering their tracks. And that what they did often skirted legal acts, often inside the boundaries of laws loosened in prior decades.
From where I sit, I see you confusing "arresting because we have evidence" with "having evidence". These are two entirely different discussions. Completely and entirely different, and entirely and completely non-related in any way.
Collective evidence is not easy at the best of times. Crooks of all types get to go free. Houses are broken into by people, for example, ALL of the time -- and often charges are not laid, arrests are not made, even when people KNOW who broke into said house and robbed it. Why?
LACK OF EVIDENCE.
This is, in fact, part of what a free society must entail. Courts must not jail those, if the evidence isn't very compelling. Society can not be free, if the state monitors everything, and can use that monitored evidence in a court room. In fact, the very concept that "people can get away with things", is demonstrative of a 'chink' in the armour of a free society. And I would suggest, a necessary one.
This has nothing to do with what I stated -- that when evidence is present? The mark of a healthy, democratic society is that your political and financial powers do not prevent you from arrest, trial, etc.
I'll say it again... you are confusing 'sufficient evidence to charge' with 'once charged, arresting'. People are stating that Canada should just let her go. Or should have no arrested, when provided with an obligation to do so under democratically enacted laws, treaties, and so forth.
Do you not see the difference here? Can you not?
Lastly -- you've provided a link to a wikipedia article, stating a variety of fines for corporations? In other words, you're trying to prove your point, that corps / people get off free, by showing them being punished in some fashion?!
I'm not sure I get the argument.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @12:08PM (4 children)
In the context of your
My answer: if you really believe that we are living in a non-elitist society, I don't have a bridge but I'll sell you one anyway.
You really believe that the entire world finance grind to a halt (and needed bailouts to be supported through taxes by the plebs) and the ones who caused it covered their tracks so perfectly that nobody can be proven guilty?
From where I stand, Hanlon's razor and all that, I think is more probable those who were in charge of the investigation had their hearts in using thick brush to whitewash the banksters (as part of the elite) rather than doing justice.
What's my take on the case at hand? The ones who pushed for the arrest warrant don't have justice and law in their mind, only a burning desire to piss on Trump's "deals" (see the Khashoggi case too). I might be right, I might be wrong about their motive, just but don't sell it to me as "Fiat justitia, pereat mundus", I'm not buying it.
Ah, so it's Ok for the western corporation to pay fines but let the guys sleep well**, but when it comes to the Chinese we need to arrest their people.
Great sense of law and justice, indeed, no sign of elitism anywhere. The guys were just too smart and covered their asses, the brilliant investigators couldn't find anything provable, right?
**
From the linked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @04:24PM (3 children)
You're really good at taking words, and twisting them -- but a logical argument that does not make.
Simply because I defined what I believe, does not mean there are not inadequacies to be addressed.
Yes, I defined a true mark of a democratic and non-elitist society. However, you're claiming a failure to reach that mark, and therefore saying -- what? That since there is a failure, all attempts to reach that mark should be stopped?
If your stance is upheld, then if anyone -- ever, at any time gets away with murder, then all attempts to prosecute murder should stop, are foolish, wrong, and improper.
That is precisely what you are contending.
Further, again you're not thinking clearly here. If people paid fines, they were found guilty of something, fined, sentenced, and so on. In other words -- the problem isn't the legal system, but the legislative bodies not having strict enough laws.
Lastly, you're comparing someone breaching international sanctions, with an entirely different crime.
I don't really understand what you're trying to argue.
It seems to me, like you're trying to find some obscure law somewhere, or someone that was 'let go', and then said "SEE!!! SEE!!!! Someone got off free! Someone got away with it! Clearly, that means that 'special' people should be let go!!!"
It's like you're arguing on the side of... well, evil or something.
"Let that criminal go! Other criminals got away with it, it's OK!" or something bizarre.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @10:15PM (2 children)
Didn't intend to make one. You see, democracy doesn't function well (or at all) with secrecy. And guess what? Secrecy and distortions are prevalent in the today's post-truth world; other than 'show me everything you have or I won't trust you', there's no rational position I can take
My post is exactly that: a statement of disbelief.
And therefore the ones that pretend to administer justice in US cannot be trusted.
Starting with 'the fruit of the poisonous tree's and ending with 'better X guilty go unpunished then an innocent surfer', the principles of justice are based on fairness. Show a discriminatory application of it and, in all fairness (pun intended), you cannot be trusted (to apply the same rules for all)
International court of justice orders US to lift new Iran sanctions [theguardian.com].
Europe, China and Russia want to stick with the deal, so they 'join forces with a new mechanism to dodge Iran sanctions" [cnbc.com].
From their point of view, no crime has been committed.
Providing telecom equipment is absolutely orthogonal to 'nuclear threats' this, personal point of view, I don't see a crime being committed either.
I argue that the arrest is fishy, and rotten fishy come to that.
If the US 'justice' want to regain credibility, it should start cleaning their own act and start with their own yard before asking the arrest of foreign citizens. How about starting with dismatling FISA 'court', wouldn't transparent justice be an improvement?
Bzzzt... Wrong. I argue from what the common-sense of Joe Average would consider fair.
'cause lately, what comes from US over Pacific and a whole red arid continent sounds totally alien. Like there's a space-time rift somewhere and US lives in a weird parallel universe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @11:59PM (1 child)
1) You've stated you aren't intending to make logical arguments -- therefore you are just spewing worthless blather
2) This isn't about the US, it's about a Canadian arrest. I believe you have no idea how extradition works.
3) Your response to my sanctions statement, doesn't explain why you're comparing entirely different things, it just diverts and spews more blather
4) The arrest isn't fishy.. it was performed inline with a international (US/Canadian) reciprocal treaty covering extradition. Countries all over the world have these treaties, and what is happening is 100% logical, sensible, and correct from a Canadian perspective.
We're done with this thread.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 11 2018, @12:23AM
De gustibus.
On an American DoJ (OIA)'s request.
And the relevance is...?
Phew.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:30PM
What's dumb about it? Are the "Chinese elite" allowed to break laws in other countries with impunity? At some point you have to decide what is important: the rule of law or the feelings of the powerful.
So now, we're supposed to care about some sort of collective psyche? My bet is that it won't take many such "hits" on the old psyche before they stop having any effect at all.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday December 10 2018, @01:16AM
I really doubt that, because that is something that cuts both ways. If China started locking up Americans in China just because, then the US could do that, too. The children of most of China's elites are going to college and grad school in America (elsewhere in the world, too, but america is the most popular choice).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:43PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kudlow-trump-didnt-know-about-huawei-executives-arrest-before-dining-with-chinese-leader/2018/12/09/da667a6c-fbc4-11e8-83c0-b06139e540e5_story.html?utm_term=.ad9e22941c74 [washingtonpost.com]
Yes, I believe it.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:46AM (13 children)
China is a state full of amoral people who do things like sell pet food which contains melamine and sell drywall made from toxic waste.
Mark my words, China is the enemy of the western world and it will get worse.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @01:09AM (10 children)
Amoral people. Yes, no, maybe . . .
The Chinese have just recently been pulled out of the 12th or maybe the 15th century. I mean the general population, the average Yee. Government officials and employees, as well as the academics, have had it pretty good for the past fifty years, but the population is still working on catching up to the 20th century, let alone the 21st. A lot of the stupid shit we've seen from China is due to ignorance, more than any amorality.
Yes, of course China has it's share of evil sons of bitches, just like we do. But it seems important that we separate the evil from the ignorant and naive. Ignorance explains quite adequately why all of the steel and iron from China was shoddy. As time passes, they seem to be getting better at making steel. I'm still not willing to buy candy or other foods from China, but some of their work is actually becoming competitive with the world wide market.
If you want to assign morality to China, maybe you should reserve those judgements for the government and the business leaders.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @01:37AM (5 children)
I've personally experienced Chinese people behaving in unethical ways in the US.
It is part of their culture. Money is all that matters. If they can screw you and get away with it, for many Chinese it's a no-brainer to do so. Ask ANYONE who has rented from a Chinese person in the Bay Area. You'll get an earful, guaranteed.
You don't have to believe what I wrote, and I don't give a fuck whether you do or not, because I am well acquainted with your posting history and I am convinced that you are not very smart, and I am trying to be kind when I put it that way.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @01:48AM
Bay area? I presume you mean Gay Bay, in California? And, you're attempting to convince me that you have higher morals than Chinese people? Face it, dude, you're just another xenophobe.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:27AM (1 child)
In defense of the Chinese, I'd say a lot probably has to do if they grew up in Mao's hellhole. It was a dog eat dog society, and you did what you had to to get ahead. If you want to see authentic Chinese, go to Taiwan.
Other Chinese run societies like Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore each have notably different culture - and prejudices against Mainlanders.
(Score: 2) by aiwarrior on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:31PM
Hmmm Macau? I do not think you know how dirty the gambling industry is.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:22AM (1 child)
So.... what? You're saying they're Republicans?
--
I've fallen off your lawn and I can't get up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:49PM
FTFY
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:56AM (3 children)
There are two things I'd like to add here.
The first is -- China, as with most Oriental countries, is a very https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_piety [wikipedia.org] filled culture. If you're of higher rank, if you're an elder?
Dissent is not really as much of an option.
What I've seen in mostly Chinese run companies, is a much stronger "top to bottom" hierarchy and level of obedience. And in fact, much less of a desire to even question decisions, or even consider "why", from the average Chinese person embedded in said culture.
So, where as our laws, customs, culture and so forth in the West tends to lean towards "Holy crap, what is my boss doing with this stuff?", in China? I strongly suspect it's more like "I can't wait for this 14 hour day to get over, I need to put more of this stuff in this food, or my elders will feel shame, I'll feel shame, and my life will be over".
Couple that with the fact that most Chinese people working in factories are not educated as the average Westerner is. As parent poster eluded to, most were living in small farming villages, and migrated to the city as China expanded / grew rapidly.
Of course, that doesn't absolve anyone of blame... but it may absolve people of moral turpitude. On can, after all, be guilty of manslaughter -- and not murder. The difference is intent, and moral compass.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:05AM (2 children)
Yup. I've never made any claims to be a scholar of oriental society, but I do read a lot. I used to ask myself, "How can anyone be so STUPID as to" do whatever the people were doing. It took time to realize that the children are brought up with entirely different attitudes. Parents don't dote on their children. A spoiled child would have been an extreme rarity at any point in Chinese history - something that only the very elite could afford. In the US, we have helicopter parents, soccer moms, and spoiled children have always been a thing. Very young children are probably lectured on the many aspects of honor. Instead of our sort of religion, ancestor worship taught the kids that they owe something to the elders, not the other way around.
Starting from that perspective, one can see that many of our concepts in western society simply don't apply to the Chinese, or any other Asian culture. "Fair" and "right" start from entirely different assumptions than we would ever consider.
In another conversation, I told someone that Christianity gave us our "western values". The person I was talking to was shocked that I would make such a statement. China is a perfect example of a reasonably well functioning society, in which religion has had little influence. Without the influences of Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam, we might expect that the West might be very much like Chinese culture.
Or, maybe not. Animism was a huge thing in most western and mideastern countries. We may just as well have gone some entirely different route without the Abrahamic religions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:23PM (1 child)
the white man's laws with an attempt at fairness were being developed before they were exposed to Judaism.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:50PM
Well, yes, of course they were. But, so few examples have been handed down through history. Were the Vikings "fair"? Or the Celts? The Germanic tribes? How 'bout those Vandals? Or the Druids? Fact is, from the fall of Rome until Christianity spread far and wide across Europe, there really isn't a lot of example to pull from. Let us try to imagine a world in which Christianity was abolished, and snuffed out in Rome's last years. Would "western values" be what they are today? Would you, as a modern day Westerner, agree with their concepts of fairness?
I suspect that if you were transplanted right now into that alternative reality, you would suffer a culture shock. That shock may or may not be as great as being transplanted into Chinese culture, or Arabic culture, but there would be a shock.
I'm sure you would adapt, but for the rest of your life, you would be faced with instances in which you would wish you were back in our current society.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:06AM (1 child)
China today is very similar to the U.S. in the 1930s. The U.S. ended up with food safety laws because of the shenanigans during that period. Chemists trying to make spoiled meat appear and smell ok enough to sell, sawdust added to bread, etc.
The Chinese people are aware of the issues, and as the middle class grows, it will only be a matter of time before their regulation of rich greedy assholes reigns this minority in.
Rich greedy assholes are the same everywhere. The damage they do to others is only limited by how strong they are reigned in by society and regulations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:47PM
Except China is a dictatorship which might throw some spanners in the works. These greedy assholes are pretty well entreched. I do hope I'm wrong though.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Revek on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:12AM (6 children)
At least she is not just missing with no due process. China really doesn't have any say in this. They regularly just snatch their own citizens with no trial and no oversight. Hypocrisy was probably invented in china.
This page was generated by a Swarm of Roaming Elephants
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ikanreed on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:04AM (5 children)
"Oh, yes, our great, free country has no problems with disappearing people [wikipedia.org], completely skipping due process [wikipedia.org], or policing our citizens with no oversight." he said as he hefted a giant-ass boulder inside his pleasantly transparent home, ready to toss. [wikipedia.org]
And the brazen-ass balls you have to call anyone else a hypocrite.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:47AM (3 children)
Not sure why you brought NSA monitoring into a discussion about "disappearing" people.
In terms of "disappearing" people, you are equating the *normal way* of dealing with pretty much everyone in China, with rare and unusual circumstances in the US.
What is it, with all the China apologists? What is it, with people looking at a non-democratic, police state.. and trying to say "Oh, the US is far worse than that!!!".
NO. No, no, fucking no!
Good grief. I'm a Canuck, and I assure you I have my complaints against the US. But compared to every other nation on this planet? The US is a *beacon* of freedom.
You can point out foibles and faults. Yet to compare it to China? To try to even begin to claim that China "isn't so bad" because "oh look at something the US did!"?
Absurd. Absolutely absurd.
Please, get a dose of reality. Please.
(Score: 3, Informative) by ikanreed on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:43PM (1 child)
Because it's relevant to the question of due process.
I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post, because that part should have been intuitively obvious, and I have to assume you don't think about any of the rest of the things you said either.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:46PM
lmfao if you think China has a shred of due process.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:47PM
What is it, with all the US apologists? What is it, with people looking at a democratic social welfare state such as The Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal or the UK and trying to say "Oh, the US must surely be better than that!!!".
NO. No, no, fucking no! I'm sick and tired of people claiming that the US is best in anything, and then only comparing it to the worst example they can think of to support their illusion.
Absurd. Absolutely absurd.
Please, get a dose of reality. Please.
No, you were not comparing it to China were you? You specifically said every other nation. Sure, there's 130 nations on this planet, and compared to every other nation the US ranks 7th (22nd when only considering the recreational drug use index) [wikipedia.org]. That's not a bad score, but the US has a long way to go to live up to their self-procaimed "beacon" status.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:45PM
Back at you on that. Funny how people can excuse evil elsewhere in the world (particularly China) because the US supposedly does it too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:03AM (8 children)
Can someone please explain to me what business a Chinese citizen would even have in trying to enforce the blatantly illegal sanctions put on one of the world's poorest countries by one of the world's richest and most powerful?
Also why the hell is Canada even involved in this? Did they gain statehood without me knowing about it somehow?
This whole case is like a Wookie living on Endor, it just makes no sense.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:10AM
Huawei lied to HSBC Bank about Iran. HSBC has US operations and has to agree to enforce anti-Iran rules. Lying to HSBC was bank fraud.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:19AM (1 child)
It isn't the first time the US has pulled this kind of crap. Remember their illegal assault against Kim Dotcom using NZ cops?
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:01AM
You're confused. There was no illegal assault and warrant-less search here. There is no comparison.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:28AM (3 children)
Why Canada is involved.
Canada had no choice but to arrest Huawei executive at Washington's request: expert
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/meng-huawei-extradition-1.4937146 [www.cbc.ca]
TLDR version = Treaties
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:04AM (2 children)
Yes, thanks for saving me a lot of typing. Good article to point to.
I might add, that this works in the reverse. The US arrests and extradites people to Canada all of the time. The same is true with many, many countries worldwide.
It's why someone is in an Ecuadorian embassy. No extradition treaty.
FYI -- we often refuse extradition to the US if someone will be executed as a result. And we won't extradite unless evidence is compelling.
(Score: 2) by legont on Monday December 10 2018, @11:31PM (1 child)
Canada could, before making the arrest, place a friendly call to Trump and ask if he is aware. Canada could, using it's secret service, leak the arrest order to China. Canada could simply divert the airplane under some excuse.
Instead she choose to become a boxing bag for superpowers. Perhaps it was the intent, who knows.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Monday December 10 2018, @11:53PM
Leak the arrest order to China?! Diverting planes?! Wtf are you even talking about.
It's like you have no concept of law or justice. You're nuts.
Do you have no moral backbone, no legal comprehension?
(Score: 2) by Username on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:22AM
Huawei made the mistake of incorporating in the United States in an effort to globalize. Which means they have to follow US laws.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:54AM (15 children)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meng-wanzhou-arrest-huawei-china-warns-of-grave-consequences-2018-12-08/ [cbsnews.com]
Does it mean a military strike is inevitable?
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:15AM (4 children)
They had to say something blustery to show that they are doing everything possible to get her out.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:04AM (3 children)
Hmm... it's rare in diplomacy because diplomats need a way to get the point across when it matters.
What "grave" is supposed to mean? In diplomatic terms I mean?
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:01AM
In diplo-speak, "grave consequences" is usually the last escalation step of "talking" and before "actually doing things". A final warning.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:52PM
Anything from nothing to bombs flying. Here, I think if the US has solid evidence of wrong-doing by Meng Wanzhou, the mention of "grave consequences" is not going to amount to much. China isn't going to defend an obvious crook.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:58PM
Grave consequences was in the press release. They probably said something else to the Canadian ambassador.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:20AM (5 children)
Amusingly, if the quotes in this article are true -- it appears China has no comprehension of due process. They probably know it exists, but believe it's just a convenient guise.
No. Sorry. In Canada, due process is followed -- regardless of who you are, who you know.
So no China, there is NO WAY AT ALL for a politician to order her release. There are provisions to deny extradition:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/meng-huawei-extradition-1.4937146 [www.cbc.ca] (someone else posted this excellent article), I quote:
"Canada's extradition laws give Ottawa the power to reject requests that it considers oppressive or politically motivated, a back door known as the "political offence exception." For example, extradition requests that seek to prosecute people for their race, religion, sexuality or political opinions would be out of order."
Note though, this doesn't mean that "because politics are involved". No, not AT ALL. If there is proper evidence, the evidence meets the standard -- politics are meaningless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_offence_exception [wikipedia.org]
What I find interesting, is that there has been a warrant for her arrest since August.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:28AM
To add to this...
I wonder, do they realise the difference between a Canadian and Chinese jail? She's in a Canadian jail this weekend, but the only hardship is confinement... our jails are like US jails, and certainly not Chinese jails.
On top of this, I'm sure that she's in solitary. Not because she deserves special treatment because of who she is, but to protect her -- because of who she is. Most Canucks are very open, very friendly, very multicultural. But it wouldn't be a stretch to say that some intolerant people might happen to exist in our prisons. Solitary would be for her own protection.
And plus, we also sometimes use solitary prior to psychological assessment. Will the person suicide? Will they be a threat to others?
Yet there are books in solitary... compared to all the hub-bub of the trial, the arrest, the media -- spending a couple of days sleeping/reading may be a blessing.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:11PM (2 children)
Well, Saddam Husein had no way to destroy nonexistent chemical weapons either.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:57PM (1 child)
oh they existed. it's just that only US black ops knew where they were buried...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @02:26PM
Since they were probably the ones who planted them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:12PM
Glad to know we still have some sane neighbors to the North. God bless, brother.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:08PM (3 children)
Due to Canada's uncommonly - and strictly speaking, incorrect - dedication to peace, it's the ONLY nation in the world that other nations are willing to accept their use of Heavy Water Reactors, the CANDU.
The greatest advantage of Heavy Water is that due to Deuterium Nuclei _already_ having a Neutron, and due to Tritium being unstable, the CANDU does not require refined Uranium.
But this has the "unfortunate" "problem" of producing vast quantities of Plutonium.
It's not like Canada has any shortage of Physicists; it was also active in the Manhattan Project.
If you think Canada is truly peaceful, have a read of their history during WWI and WWII.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:15PM (2 children)
Fortunately, the CANDU will then proceed to nom the resulting plutonium, because it is a Multi-oxide fuel [wikipedia.org] reactor and really doesn't care what it eats, as long as it's fissile.
Some of our provincial governments are trying to shut down out coal plants, and it's long overdue. But, I wish they were building CANDU's to replace them, instead of the current plan, which seems to consist of "what? oh erm, right.. gas turbines! eventually. somewhere. after we're done closing down coal."
As far as I know the only country still building and improving the CANDU designs is... China.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:19PM (1 child)
I should further add, the solution to the "radioactive waste problem" the US has been wrestling with for over a decade is really quite simple: Ship it to Canada. Feed the CANDU. Woohoo, cheap fuel means cheap electricity. What eventually comes out as waste is even more radioactive, and vastly reduced in mass. Easier to store.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:54PM
That means it has a short half-life, and so won't require watchful security for the next half-million years.
That Plutonium waste is such a problem to store is that provided its Nuclear Cascade Reaction is not significant - that is, it's broken into small pieces, each piece far from the others, or as the current plan calls for, to dissolve it dilutely in molten glass - is due to its natural radioactivity being quite mild. Get This:
Both Plutonium and Uranium can be handled safely with heavy rubber gloves.
That leads to its half-life being roughly 26,000 years, but that natural radioactivity is so very weak that we do not yet have accurate measurements of the half-lives of some of its isotopes.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 1, Troll) by shortscreen on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:35AM (3 children)
At the G20, Donny and Xi supposedly made a deal whereby China was going to start buying a bunch of US goods to wittle down the trade imbalance, and Trump was going to hold off on some tariffs. Now Canada is urinating in the punch bowl?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:51PM
Canada didn't issue the arrest warrant... get a clue chum.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @02:40AM
FTFY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Monday December 10 2018, @09:36AM
Modded troll for blaming Canada? How'd they get mod points?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:05PM (1 child)
I asked someone in the government cybersecurity field to write a Letter Of Recommendation for me.
"WE NEED YOU!"
He told me that as far back as then, the PRC was ransacking our defense manufacturers, as well as trade secrets from leading Technology firms.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:00PM
stupid whores (the US companies using Windows) should be charged with a crime for being so negligent.