Trudeau takes rare swipe at China, says they don't seem to grasp Canada's judiciary is independent

That is an understatement but the one thing he got wrong was the fact that the Red Chinese do understand that our judiciary is supposed to be independent but choose to ignore that fact.

What they pretend not to comprehend is the fact that you can't bribe, coerce or intimidate other countries into doing what "you" demand but that isn't going to stop them from trying. Just ask Australia.

Judging Trudeau by the same standard as Trump he's therefore a big racist.

Can't use the same standard. OUR judicial is independent. Can't fucking say the same of yours after Trump. JUST LIKE China's.

Herb, dial it back about 25% there bud.



rules.php

Dial back comments on Trump corrupting the justice system? Why do you assume it's a personal attack on Bart? He didn't make or corrupt the US Justice system, but he is American so it's his system not ours.

Because you made it about Bart, not Trump. It may not be a personal attack, but it does seem like you were trying to get an emotional reaction out of him. That's the thing I'm supposed to be trying to prevent.

Keep it about Trump, and no one has any problem.

We should never have detained Meng. It’s brought us nothing but grief and may result in a Canadian being executed and two others given prison sentences they don’t deserve. Trump has already publicly made clear she will used as a bargaining chip so let’s not get so high and mighty about the independence of Western judiciaries in this particular case. Even at this late stage, we could still do a deal, get our three guys back and send her home.

Yes, we should have not lived up to our treaties and gone back on our word so that we could take the easy way out and act more like China.

Yes, we should have not lived up to our treaties and gone back on our word so that we could take the easy way out and act more like China.

The US is only going to use her as a hostage anyway, China-style. I wouldn’t mind if she’d been caught doing some regular Huawei industrial espionage that would be a clear and grave crime in any country. Instead we have detained a person from country A in country B to face charges in country C, which may not even be crimes in Canada, regarding business with country D. These high-profile cases often have a political element. Israel’s most notorious spy in America, Arnon Milchan, wasn’t even charged, let alone extradited, for exporting US nuclear technology. To this day, he even spends much of his time in the US!

If you want to know what the US really thinks about sending their own citizens back to face justice, even to allies, look no further than here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... harry-dunn

i thought the whole trading people for people thing had precedent for like decades now

yanks gave russia back that nra lady, spent just five whole months in american jail

Yes, we should have not lived up to our treaties and gone back on our word so that we could take the easy way out and act more like China.

The US is only going to use her as a hostage anyway, China-style.

Not our problem. We have treaty obligations to hold her and determine if she should be extradited to the US.



That's actually what she's on trial for, right now. To see if the fraud the US wants her on, is a crime here. The Iran sanctions are a smokescreen. We already know that is not a crime here, as we don't have those sanctions against Iran.



I am well aware. But Canada is not Israel or the US, so it's no excuse to follow their lead.

Only in spy craft. The NRA lady was an obvious plant. She's not wanted for fraud.

For years, HSBC did massive business with Iran (and the drug cartels), deliberately and knowingly concealing such transactions. Nobody went to prison for that because bankers are well-connected and can pay billions in fines. Now we are expected to believe that HSBC was conned into this scheme with Huawei:

https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-econ ... nzhou-ties

If we are party to hostage-taking, it doesn’t matter how legal - or as accountants like to say when they’re creating some evasive scheme, completely legal - it is by our laws; it’s still wrong.