You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Winners write history and define "right". I thought everyone know this by now. If in an alternate dimension, Nazis won, whatever their ideology is will be the right one.
It is what it is. It's not always about being "right"(which in itself is difficult to define), it's about weighing the pros and cons. It's just reality.
In a way, China in itself knows this since China has been learning "winners make the rules" the hard way historically. Make yourself stronger or bend over, it's really just that simple.
Right is always subjective to the very situation is in.
In this case, upholding the rules of law is the right thing, at least IMHO as a Canadian. Our extradition laws are very clearly written with little if any ambiguity in it. The only "little" in it is simply different interpretation on some wordings, as the case of Meng showed.
And ultimately, the judge gave a clear interpretation of it on this specific case. Fraud - lying to the bank is a crime in the US as well as Canada. That's the basis of the 2xpages ruling. It has NOTHING to do with US having a stronger muscle or whatever.
Yes, the winner gets to write the laws, but the idea is that once something becomes law, EVERYONE, winners or losers are bound by it. China thinks otherwise.
China always say they are a country run on law. But the fact is, they write and adjust the law as they see fit, that's basically what they feel about the law. And they think everyone else can do the same...
You want proof of that? Simple... our MPs can debate to death about a simple word or 2 on a new proposal, because wording is what our judicial system follows and interprets. China, OTOH, writes their law almost purposely ambiguous and vague. So much so that it's impossible for one to NOT break a law on day to day activities because it's all up to how one interpret those words. The only thing is CCP doesn't enforce it normally... but if one becomes a subject of interest... say a Michael or two... the rest is... you know...
Fact is, Canada has an extradition deal with them that makes both countries better in general. If Canada had found any other reason to deal with this other than following the law, then that would be "the wrong thing" to do. Regardless of what you think of USA's laws, or China's politics, or anything else.
Can you pontificate how an extradition law between US and Canada makes both countries better in general and you were so against the extradition law between China, HK, and Taiwan? Then there is the other issue of an extradition law in which you keep someone here for over a year ... WTF??!! Seriously, is that reasonable or fair? Ship her arse to the US within 6 months then.
And please try not to throw a temper tantrum, and see all who have a different opinion than you as Pro-China, and say dumb shit like, 'It is so obvious you must be a troll.'. Heard that line from you ad nauseum.
Frankly, I don't even know how you are a purported mod.
Also to note, this wasn't even a trial on whether she violated the sanctions or not but many people have already decided that she did. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't but we won't know until the facts come out in court. Canada should've just let her slip through to Mexico, she would've been their problem... lol
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,666
Thanked 10,387 Times in 3,913 Posts
Failed 1,390 Times in 625 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by !LittleDragon
Also to note, this wasn't even a trial on whether she violated the sanctions or not but many people have already decided that she did. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't but we won't know until the facts come out in court. Canada should've just let her slip through to Mexico, she would've been their problem... lol
What I don't get is why the US didn't just have her plane to Mexico diverted to an airport in the states
Direct flights do land at times outside their intended destination
Can you pontificate how an extradition law between US and Canada makes both countries better in general and you were so against the extradition law between China, HK, and Taiwan? Then there is the other issue of an extradition law in which you keep someone here for over a year ... WTF??!! Seriously, is that reasonable or fair? Ship her arse to the US within 6 months then.
And please try not to throw a temper tantrum, and see all who have a different opinion than you as Pro-China, and say dumb shit like, 'It is so obvious you must be a troll.'. Heard that line from you ad nauseum.
Frankly, I don't even know how you are a purported mod.
I believe that extradition law between Canada/US do make better in the grand scheme of things.
It used to be, and you can still see quite often on TV shows or movies making references, that if you commit crime in one country, you'd try to flee to the other.
Think it this way, if Conrad Black scammed tens of thousands of Canadians on Canadian stock market and fled to the US, without a treaty in place, he'd live happily ever after while enjoying similar living standard that both countries share. Would that be something you'd like to see?
Now, unlike China, who bends the law at its will and fulfill its international obligations (WTO anyone?) when it wants to, when we make an agreement, we stand by our words.
So when US requested Meng's arrest, it had nothing to do of us giving in to US requests. We were simply honoring the words we agreed to when we signed the treaty.
I'm glad that our system, be it good or bad for our country given the things and people involved, would always live up to agreements we made.
We despise so much when Trump drops out of x agreements, but bear in mind, all treaty and agreements have a drop out clause. And as long as we all follow the rules set in order to do anything in the framework, then, all powers to Trump's US.
Thus, now... wouldn't you despise your own country, as a Canadian, if Canada as a whole doesn't live up to its words?
In the case of HK/China/TW extradition... come on now... do you really think one'd get the same fairness in court? (yeah, we can argue "fairness" in each country all we want, it's just China is infamously bad)
What I don't get is why the US didn't just have her plane to Mexico diverted to an airport in the states
Direct flights do land at times outside their intended destination
Personally, i think US wanted to stifle China-Canada relations.
And if so, personally, I'm thankful for the reality check.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
I'm more curious of the outcome of the US court case....
1. She's found not guilty = It was a huge waste of everyone's time. It screwed over Canada's trade relationship with China. Using Canada as a pawn in their trade war isn't cool.
2. She's found guilty goes to jail = least likely. Rich people don't often go to jail and if they do, they're out within a year. This outcome also screws over Canada, etc...
3. She's found guilty and she's let go in exchange for a trade deal = rule of law doesn't mean shit and it was a huge waste of time... screwing over Canada and all that...
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
Right is always subjective to the very situation is in.
In this case, upholding the rules of law is the right thing, at least IMHO as a Canadian. Our extradition laws are very clearly written with little if any ambiguity in it. The only "little" in it is simply different interpretation on some wordings, as the case of Meng showed.
And ultimately, the judge gave a clear interpretation of it on this specific case. Fraud - lying to the bank is a crime in the US as well as Canada. That's the basis of the 2xpages ruling. It has NOTHING to do with US having a stronger muscle or whatever.
Yes, the winner gets to write the laws, but the idea is that once something becomes law, EVERYONE, winners or losers are bound by it. China thinks otherwise.
China always say they are a country run on law. But the fact is, they write and adjust the law as they see fit, that's basically what they feel about the law. And they think everyone else can do the same...
You want proof of that? Simple... our MPs can debate to death about a simple word or 2 on a new proposal, because wording is what our judicial system follows and interprets. China, OTOH, writes their law almost purposely ambiguous and vague. So much so that it's impossible for one to NOT break a law on day to day activities because it's all up to how one interpret those words. The only thing is CCP doesn't enforce it normally... but if one becomes a subject of interest... say a Michael or two... the rest is... you know...
Ideally, yes, this is all sound. In reality? There are a million jokes about lawyers going to hell. You probably know why.
You are rich and powerful, you can bend the law. You just hire some good lawyers and they will find holes.
I don't necessarily agree with this, I know you don't either, but again, this is how things work. It really is just about having the stronger muscle, there are plenty of examples in history if you look. Ultimately, I think politics will play a part in this.
the crown tells corporate China and the CCP by extension that international fraud and IP theft is not okay
i think that's a pretty important message to send given all the crap that's happened the last 18 mos...if it eats up substantial tax dollars in the process, so be it-- about time we grew a backbone
Can someone remind me what our government said about international fraud and rule of law in the SNC Lavalin fiasco? What important message did corporate Canada send? So Canada is all of a sudden growing a righteous backbone?
From another angle on this particular case, we are being played and used so badly by the US that it's laughable ... if you were American !
What was unbelievable was on the news yesterday, Harjit Sajjan was interviewed for a soundbite on local TV about this case and he said (I'm paraphrasing), "This shows that in Canada, it is important that the judicial system works independently from the government." Has he forgotten what his boss, JT did with Jody Wilson Raybould to ensure that the government "works independently from the judicial system"?
As has been mentioned, this isn't Canada standing up to fraud, as she hasn't broken Canadian law. It's Canada recognizing our agreement with the US.
When push comes to shove globally, and as we are approaching shove territory, the US is a Canadian ally. China is not.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
^ OK ... I find it hard that you would reduce this complex case down to it being ONLY recognizing our extradition agreement with the US but let's debate purely on this angle alone.
If it is only about extradition, what do you think is a fair time frame to hold her before shipping her to the US? A reminder that she was arrested in Aug of 2018. Is 6 months reasonable? Is one year hitting the maximum time of reasonable? I mean after all, you are just holding a person who has purported to commit a crime in another country. You don't have to try her here. What takes a country so long to decide whether to extradite or not? In a country that supposedly upholds rule and law, is one year max enough time?
well if SNC execs visits a country with an extradition treaty with Libya (if Libya even has anything close to a respectable judicial system), maybe they can arrest them?
I never said our shit didn't stink but the scale and degree of scandal is not even close to being comparable.
we shouldn't grow a backbone and let the following continue?
would be naive to think diplomatic sensitive matter can be wrapped up in 6 months or a year tops when local criminal proceedings drags on for years
at end of the day, we signed a treaty, gotta honour them. you see it as dirty work and being played, i see it as favour for a neighbour...in these uncertain times we have a better chance of US helping us (ie. national defense) than China (masks that can't even filter 1% of particulates)
Last edited by twitchyzero; 05-28-2020 at 10:40 AM.
If it is only about extradition, what do you think is a fair time frame to hold her before shipping her to the US? A reminder that she was arrested in Aug of 2018. Is 6 months reasonable? Is one year hitting the maximum time of reasonable? I mean after all, you are just holding a person who has purported to commit a crime in another country. You don't have to try her here. What takes a country so long to decide whether to extradite or not? In a country that supposedly upholds rule and law, is one year max enough time?
Dude, we are hardly "holding her". She has a curfew, a GPS ankle brace; she can't leave Metro Vancouver; she has security guards with her. But she can roam free anywhere in Vancouver, or do whatever else she wants.
Ask our 2 Michaels what their lives have been like.
The judicial process has always been time consuming and expensive, and the system doesn't just process Meng's case. Besides, if I were Meng, I'd really say her time here in Canada right now is almost certainly going to be her best and most comfortable years compared to what lies ahead for her in the future. If she gets extradited to the US, her live is not gonna be anywhere nearly as cozy as what she can enjoy right now. And if she can somehow manage to get back to China, bear in mind that China never treats their ex-spies or captured spies well. Esp for those who have been captured by its "enemy" and subsequently released, China considers them to be untrustworthy, and no good things come out of that.
^ good, it's probably best you stay out of this. Anyone who simply reduces this to Pro-China or not is really simple minded, black or white, this or that.
Those who cannot hold the tension of someone who is NOT Pro-China and yet see holding Meng Wanzhou for over a year for extradition for a crime that the US imposed is so effed up probably should stay on the sidelines. Let me put it in like this, wanting this shit to end doesn't necessarily mean you are Pro-China. Or, you can think China is corrupt, dirty, and ruthless but still think this shit should end.
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,666
Thanked 10,387 Times in 3,913 Posts
Failed 1,390 Times in 625 Posts
You realize the only reason it takes so long is because she's fighting extradition right? And so she's allowed a fair trial to argue all the points they wish to argue against extradition... It's her and her lawyers who are playing the stalling game, add to that the pandemic, and you have a long long timeframe to deal with
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
