Detention of Meng Wanzhou - CFO of Huawei

799 posts / 0 new
Last post
WWWTT

Holy F@&$!

NATO cheif is now commenting. Guess he's all worried about his precious spies getting caught.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

They're being held without charge. We don't yet know if it's an allegation of espionage that they're "definitely guilty" of.

At least Ms Meng knows what her charges are and is able to mount a defense.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I think she's also permitted to sleep with the lights off.

montgomery

The only positive news so far is McCallam's claim that he was confident that she won't be sent to the US. It's surely no mystery why Trudeau had to treat him like a loose cannon and fire him.

WWWTT, I'm more of the opinion that it's politics by the US and it's politics by China, turnabout. One is worthy of the other. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Timebandit wrote:

They're being held without charge. We don't yet know if it's an allegation of espionage that they're "definitely guilty" of.

At least Ms Meng knows what her charges are and is able to mount a defense.

Meng was not arrested because of espionage. If she had been charged by the Canadian authorities with espionage she would have no more rights here than in China. Canada hauls people off to maximum security facilities were it is almost impossible to talk to them and they are detained for months and even years with no legal recourse. Magoo can speculate about leaving the lights on but I hope he is wrong and the Chinese are not treating suspected spies like Canada treats marginalized indigenous people who are incarcerated.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

My point, kropotkin, is that we don't know what charges Kovrig or Spavor were arrested on. The Chinese authorities have not specified charges, leaving us to speculate. It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Meng has been apprised of the charges against her since the beginning.

montgomery

Quote:
From the tweet posted at the margin of this page: "

 

rabble.ca@rabbleca

The full impact of Trudeau's subservience to U.S. authority will be seen when Meng Wanzhou is handed over to face a U.S. trial and serve a prison term for alleged bank fraud, a sentence that no U.S. banker faced after the bank frauds of 2008. https://buff.ly/2MCOJ6M

Sounds like it's already been decided that Meng is going to be handed over to the US. That contradicts McCallam's loose cannon remarks, so who is right? 

I'm going to go with McCallam but that's mainly because my heart's with him and Meng. 

And I think it would be nice if the NDP would try to put that political spin on it for now at least.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Magoo can speculate about leaving the lights on but I hope he is wrong

It's not me speculating.  It's been reported by a number of news outlets.

You can, of course, speculate that the source doesn't really exist, or is lying, but if not, I'd say there's a significant difference between Meng's situation and Kovrig's, and it's not explained by differences in their alleged crimes.

Quote:
It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Well, when he's found guilty you'll have to eat those words since he will clearly have been right!

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Magoo can speculate about leaving the lights on but I hope he is wrong

It's not me speculating.  It's been reported by a number of news outlets.

You can, of course, speculate that the source doesn't really exist, or is lying, but if not, I'd say there's a significant difference between Meng's situation and Kovrig's, and it's not explained by differences in their alleged crimes.

Quote:
It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Well, when he's found guilty you'll have to eat those words since he will clearly have been right!

Magoo if I was a Christian I would tell you to take the plank out of your eye. I am not saying China is a paragon of virtue but you keep insisting on comparing specific cases. Yes you can find cases of the Chinese authorities inflicting what I consider to be torture on people. However that is the same as in Canada. Adam Capay was awaiting trial and he was held in the same conditions for four years that you are decrying the Chinese for. I hate hypocrisy from imperial apologists.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/adam-capay-solitary-moved-1.3...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Timebandit wrote:

My point, kropotkin, is that we don't know what charges Kovrig or Spavor were arrested on. The Chinese authorities have not specified charges, leaving us to speculate. It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Meng has been apprised of the charges against her since the beginning.

They have said that they are suspected of spying. I note it didn't take long to get an alleged spy from Belgium to the US.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/10/10/Chinese-official-charged-with...

And who knows whether this was another entrapment like the Victoria legislature plot.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/canadian-police-make-arre...

As for a judicial official telling people they are guilty before the trial I saw a Canadian Judge say the same thing to a hundred defendants. He said the alleged facts mean that you are guilty and if you plead guilty now you get a discount but not if you pursue any legal arguments including ones based on the Charter.

I am not saying the Chinese have a great system I am saying that they cannot both be the most dangerous spy nation on the planet and so incompetent that they arrested random people instead of low level spooks. What countries do with spooks or other undesirables is all beyond the pale for me. Gulags, Guantanamo Bay, Japanese detention camps, Doukhobor detention camps, Indian reserves.

montgomery

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Timebandit wrote:

My point, kropotkin, is that we don't know what charges Kovrig or Spavor were arrested on. The Chinese authorities have not specified charges, leaving us to speculate. It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Meng has been apprised of the charges against her since the beginning.

They have said that they are suspected of spying. I note it didn't take long to get an alleged spy from Belgium to the US.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/10/10/Chinese-official-charged-with...

And who knows whether this was another entrapment like the Victoria legislature plot.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/canadian-police-make-arre...

As for a judicial official telling people they are guilty before the trial I saw a Canadian Judge say the same thing to a hundred defendants. He said the alleged facts mean that you are guilty and if you plead guilty now you get a discount but not if you pursue any legal arguments including ones based on the Charter.

I am not saying the Chinese have a great system I am saying that they cannot both be the most dangerous spy nation on the planet and so incompetent that they arrested random people instead of low level spooks. What countries do with spooks or other undesirables is all beyond the pale for me. Gulags, Guantanamo Bay, Japanese detention camps, Doukhobor detention camps, Indian reserves.

Personally, I'm about 50/50 on one or both of the Canadians being spooks. 

I hope they are because that opens up the possibility of them being traded off for Meng. 

Doing that would be action taken that has no basis in law but it can't be high profile and in the daily news. And the US would have to quietly accept it because the very life of a Canadian is 'supposed' to be at stake. 

But if that fails, then Trudeau can always make sure our courts arrive at the correct decision.

Sean in Ottawa

montgomery wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Timebandit wrote:

My point, kropotkin, is that we don't know what charges Kovrig or Spavor were arrested on. The Chinese authorities have not specified charges, leaving us to speculate. It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Meng has been apprised of the charges against her since the beginning.

They have said that they are suspected of spying. I note it didn't take long to get an alleged spy from Belgium to the US.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/10/10/Chinese-official-charged-with...

And who knows whether this was another entrapment like the Victoria legislature plot.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/canadian-police-make-arre...

As for a judicial official telling people they are guilty before the trial I saw a Canadian Judge say the same thing to a hundred defendants. He said the alleged facts mean that you are guilty and if you plead guilty now you get a discount but not if you pursue any legal arguments including ones based on the Charter.

I am not saying the Chinese have a great system I am saying that they cannot both be the most dangerous spy nation on the planet and so incompetent that they arrested random people instead of low level spooks. What countries do with spooks or other undesirables is all beyond the pale for me. Gulags, Guantanamo Bay, Japanese detention camps, Doukhobor detention camps, Indian reserves.

Personally, I'm about 50/50 on one or both of the Canadians being spooks. 

I hope they are because that opens up the possibility of them being traded off for Meng. 

Doing that would be action taken that has no basis in law but it can't be high profile and in the daily news. And the US would have to quietly accept it because the very life of a Canadian is 'supposed' to be at stake. 

But if that fails, then Trudeau can always make sure our courts arrive at the correct decision.

And there it is: proof of your cluelessness of international and legal affairs. Please do not expect anyone to defer to you now that you make clear that you presume that the PM can direct the judiciary in the middle of a case.

If you were actually knowledgeable you might have noticed that the argument against McCallum was his comments that could appear to be a message from government trying to influence the judiciary in an open case. It is especially enlightening given that McCallum's comment did not include a direction or desire but simply an assertion by an ambassador that Meng had a good case. I sincerely doubt that the PM could get away with a direct personal attempt to influence the court in a case such as this. This is the issue, that you cluelessly miss, regarding the Meng case. The Canadian government does not have the direct link to the judiciary that exists in China. The Canadian people do not want such a link to exist as the separation of powers is perhaps the most important safeguard in our political system, preventing a PM from having dictatorial powers. This is what rule of law means. The PM and his party, together, if they have a majority in the House, may change legislation for the future, but a direction to the courts is not as simple as you suggest.

Nevermind that, you ignore the implications of abrogation of the extradition treaty with the US and what that could mean to Canada. It is a topic worth discussing but not something simple that a PM can do.

You might want to read up on the powers of each branch of government and the way international treaties work before you try to dazzle people here with your delusions of personal superiority.

montgomery

Sean, I'll just ignore all your personal insults and address this: 

Quote:
Nevermind that, you ignore the implications of abrogation of the extradition treaty with the US and what that could mean to Canada. It is a topic worth discussing but not something simple that a PM can do.

Yes, it's worth discussion and I'll take part in that as long as you can discuss it calmly and without your typical personal insults. Very simply stated, the decision may very well be made that the extradition of Meng can not be allowed, based on the lack of legitimacy of the US charges and contentions. 

And now I'll once again say that it's my opinion that politics plays a very large role in the courts' decision on that matter. I know that Kropotkin dumps a huge amount of scorn on that idea, and you might too, but it will remain my opinion. And not to insult you or anyone else, but I consider it naive to say that it doesn't. And I'll also suggest that McCallam wasn't speaking his own mind with his 'loose cannon' remarks. He was making the mistake of echoing his boss's true feelings, which obviously don't go down well with the Canadian people.

If Canada's participation in a US led war can be decided by a P.M., why would anybody doubt a pissy little issue such as this can't be. That's why I've referred to it as much ado about nothing. In the final analysis that is.

WWWTT

Timebandit wrote:

My point, kropotkin, is that we don't know what charges Kovrig or Spavor were arrested on. The Chinese authorities have not specified charges, leaving us to speculate. It's also worrying to have a government official say that you're "definitely guilty" of an unspecified charge, isn't it?

Meng has been apprised of the charges against her since the beginning.

Borderline double standard hypocrisy comment 

As kropotkin pointed out, Canada has similar procedures when detaining so called terrorist suspects. 

The only reason why I call your comment border line hypocrisy is because I’m not sure if you’re as concerned that the Canadian government has detained people in the same manner as the Chinese. 

Sean in Ottawa

montgomery wrote:

Sean, I'll just ignore all your personal insults and address this: 

Quote:
Nevermind that, you ignore the implications of abrogation of the extradition treaty with the US and what that could mean to Canada. It is a topic worth discussing but not something simple that a PM can do.

Yes, it's worth discussion and I'll take part in that as long as you can discuss it calmly and without your typical personal insults. Very simply stated, the decision may very well be made that the extradition of Meng can not be allowed, based on the lack of legitimacy of the US charges and contentions. 

And now I'll once again say that it's my opinion that politics plays a very large role in the courts' decision on that matter. I know that Kropotkin dumps a huge amount of scorn on that idea, and you might too, but it will remain my opinion. And not to insult you or anyone else, but I consider it naive to say that it doesn't. And I'll also suggest that McCallam wasn't speaking his own mind with his 'loose cannon' remarks. He was making the mistake of echoing his boss's true feelings, which obviously don't go down well with the Canadian people.

If Canada's participation in a US led war can be decided by a P.M., why would anybody doubt a pissy little issue such as this can't be. That's why I've referred to it as much ado about nothing. In the final analysis that is.

I am no longer interested in any engagement with you now that you have offered to badmouth posters by PM and that you have demonstrated that there no value in having any conversation with you.

I will now sit back and wait for the banning that will come from your continued attacks on people on this board. I am no longer interested in being one and have nothing more to add that I have not already said to you.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

As for a judicial official telling people they are guilty before the trial I saw a Canadian Judge say the same thing to a hundred defendants. He said the alleged facts mean that you are guilty and if you plead guilty now you get a discount but not if you pursue any legal arguments including ones based on the Charter.

I am not saying the Chinese have a great system I am saying that they cannot both be the most dangerous spy nation on the planet and so incompetent that they arrested random people instead of low level spooks. What countries do with spooks or other undesirables is all beyond the pale for me. Gulags, Guantanamo Bay, Japanese detention camps, Doukhobor detention camps, Indian reserves.

Re: judicial official - Not exactly the same thing. And I'm assuming here, from your comment, that the accused knew what they were accused of and what the alleged facts were. Spavor and Kovrig have not been formally charged, just held and interrogated. But an official has publicly said they are "definitely guilty", although he didn't cop to what, exactly, that was.

Re: second paragraph - I don't think anyone is making that argument, so it's a bit of a straw man you're debating.

Are they the "most dangerous spy nation on the planet"? I'm not even sure what that means, so it's not anything I've asserted. I have pointed out that the level of scrutiny on the actions and movements of both foreign nationals and Chinese citizens is much higher than in other countries, and I've given illustrative examples.

Arresting "random people" vs "spooks"? We don't have anything other than sheer speculation that either Spavor or Kovrig are "low level spooks". We really don't know at this point. It's been intimated, perhaps, but without charges or more information that the Chinese government doesn't seem to be forthcoming about right now, it's hard to say.

I don't know much about Spavor, but Kovrig is connected to the diplomatic corps, so I don't think there was anything random there. If these arrests were for political impact, and they've also intimated this is the case, it would certainly have been thought out carefully. I don't think anyone is arguing that they were just random.

What has been random is the detention of other Canadians such as Tianna Wang, who was transiting through Beijing from South Korea to Canada. Random in that the people just happened to be handy, not random in the message they're trying to get across.

The other examples you give are whataboutisms. Yes, they're awful. I agree (although only one example of detention is an occurrence less than 50 years ago and not Canadian). That doesn't mean this isn't bad or wrong. It certainly doesn't make it okay.

WWWTT

Mr. Magoo wrote:

It's not me speculating.  It's been reported by a number of news outlets.

Highlighting this comment because of the link and not about lights being left on (to disrupt regular sleep I assume)

At the beginning of this corporate media link, the writer wastes no time to say how fast after Ms Mengs detention these Canadians were detained, implying that they are innocent and just at the wrong place at the wrong time carrying the wrong passport. This is total bullshit pro liberal corporate media propaganda 

Take a look at this link and give it a good think!

http://www.rcinet.ca/en/2018/12/21/nearly-200-canadians-detained-in-china-say-federal-officials/

Special note would be the Toronto star link I posted up thread that states 200 Canadians detained in China. I believe the ts writers editors knew that the number of Canadians detained in China was less than 200, but intentionally lied, bumped the numbers up to 200 so that they could exaggerate the headline to hundreds of Canadians detained in China!

One of the reasons why I support rabble/babble is because we simply can not trust the corporate media! Real sad seeing posters here swearing by the  propaganda  

 

NDPP

US Charges Absurd, Political: Attorneys

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1137586.shtml

"...The allegations are absurd because, first of all, US laws imposing sanctions on Iran are illegal and no one is obliged to obey them, Christopher Black, an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto told the Global Times. Another serious problem with the indictment is that the names of the US banks they claim were used for money transfers between Huawei and its Iranian counterparts are kept secret, Black pointed out..."

A rather crude and transparent stitch-up the Americans are famous for and  msm-fed Canadian chumps famous for falling for...

WWWTT

Thanks for the link NDPP!

Upthread I mentioned that the extradition treaty clearly said that it was not to be used for political reasons. 

But several posters here, whom use length of time as a babble poster to justify their rambling idiotic posts, claimed that I didn’t know shit from shineola! 

Noops

Timebandit wrote:

They're being held without charge. We don't yet know if it's an allegation of espionage that they're "definitely guilty" of.

At least Ms Meng knows what her charges are and is able to mount a defense.

And GTMO prisoners are treated any differently?
They are considered threats to the 'national security' of the U.S.

Is the U.S. the only country in the world who can lay claim to threats to 'national security' allegations?

I hate this phony 'trump card' as much as anyone else, but so long as the U.S. uses it,  all other countries should be able to use it as well.

NDPP

Be careful what you wish for...

Noops

NDPP wrote:

US Charges Absurd, Political: Attorneys

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1137586.shtml

"...The allegations are absurd because, first of all, US laws imposing sanctions on Iran are illegal and no one is obliged to obey them, Christopher Black, an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto told the Global Times..."

Interesting that an international criminal lawyer has basically said the same thing I did in my OP of the thread.  :)

montgomery

WWWTT wrote:

Thanks for the link NDPP!

Upthread I mentioned that the extradition treaty clearly said that it was not to be used for political reasons. 

But several posters here, whom use length of time as a babble poster to justify their rambling idiotic posts, claimed that I didn’t know shit from shineola! 

Their behavioiur is unacceptable and we need to make it clear to them that others have valid and worthwhile opinions too. Their attitudes are destructive to the party, even though they are probably not nearly as outspoken with their rude behavious when they have to face people in person. 

WWWTT

I better edit this comment responding to Montgomery out

montgomery

NDPP wrote:

US Charges Absurd, Political: Attorneys

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1137586.shtml

"...The allegations are absurd because, first of all, US laws imposing sanctions on Iran are illegal and no one is obliged to obey them, Christopher Black, an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto told the Global Times. Another serious problem with the indictment is that the names of the US banks they claim were used for money transfers between Huawei and its Iranian counterparts are kept secret, Black pointed out..."

A rather crude and transparent stitch-up the Americans are famous for and  msm-fed Canadian chumps famous for falling for...

You've nailed it there! So we should all be confident that justice must be done and Meng will be returned to China, the two Canadians will be returned, the US will have to face that they were on the wrong side of the law!

Right? Yeah, it's right alright but maybe it doesn't always work that way when we have to deal with the US.

Now had it been the Conservatives in power, this crisid situation would have never developed. The Conservatives would have taken care of the situation immediately and Meng would be sitting rotting in a US jail. And then ya know what Canadian courts decision saying that Meng must be returned to Canada so Canada can send her home would mean?

NUTHIN!

NDPP

Canada will do as Washington wishes. 

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

dp

NorthReport
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture
montgomery

NDPP wrote:

Canada will do as Washington wishes. 

That has always been true since the end of WW2 at least. But with the Nafta agreement alone, divisions have opened up between Canada and the US. I have little doubt that this is a test case being promoted by the US at an opportune time to serve their agenda. 

The US may have chosen a bad case in which to throw all their marbles. If there is a way for Canada's courts to win this for China, it will be our way out. I believe firmly that we have indications that government is with Canada's cause on this issue and that's enough to spin it correctly for Canada, and also to oppose the political right's subserviance to US demands. 

Do you and others honestly believe that Canada and justice will be trumped again by US power?

montgomery

Most forums frown on the practice of posting links with no commentary by the poster. Some totally disallow it. What do you think of the idea of posting your opinion to say whether or not you support the content of the link? And possibly more with some sort of explanation? 

just asking, and as a newcomer I'm alright with being overruled.

WWWTT

Fair question montgomery. 

North Report does as she pleases, I suggest u follow your own advice about posting links. I won’t click her links most of the time just because she posts way to many and with no comments 

montgomery

WWWTT wrote:

Fair question montgomery. 

North Report does as she pleases, I suggest u follow your own advice about posting links. I won’t click her links most of the time just because she posts way to many and with no comments 

First, I didn't know North Report is a she, so thanks for that.

I never post a link without saying something about the content of the link, so I guess I'm following my own advice.

As to clicking on links that are posted without comments, I usually don't but I'm sometimes tempted. Those who practice the posting of links alone may be interested in knowing that a lot of us don't bother.

NorthReport

I hope it’s not too late for Canada to get the Panda’s claws off our back but we had better smarten up and smarten up very quickly 

NorthReport

And kudos to Trudeau for giving McCallum the boot!

NDPP

Toward A Remedy For International Extradition By Fraud: The Case of Leonard Peltier

https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&con...

"As it now stands, the extradition treaty between the US and Canada is but a hollow promise, another broken treaty..."

Not the first time Canada has collaborated to illegally extradite for Amerikkka. 

montgomery

NDPP wrote:

Toward A Remedy For International Extradition By Fraud: The Case of Leonard Peltier

https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&con...

"As it now stands, the extradition treaty between the US and Canada is but a hollow promise, another broken treaty..."

Not the first time Canada has collaborated to illegally extradite for Amerikkka. 

Who is breaking the treaty this time?

A quick read of the first few paragraphs of the Peltier case says he was a murderer. There must be more than that to it if you're posting it as an example of the treaty being broken.

I don't see how it portends to this case?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture
Unionist

Best (and most patient) reply ever, krop! Thanks for the memory too.

montgomery

Unionist wrote:

Best (and most patient) reply ever, krop! Thanks for the memory too.

So it's an inside joke between you and Kropotkin?

When are you two going to stop pouting about having a newcomer who 'gets it' on the issues as much as you?

Probably more on foreign affairs and international politics, but maybe a bit less on the domestic shit.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

It is not an inside joke it is plainly available for anyone who wants to hear. Listen to the lyrics.

montgomery

WWWTT wrote:

Holy F@&$!

NATO cheif is now commenting. Guess he's all worried about his precious spies getting caught.

Yes, Nato getting involved does definitely imply something bigger going on behind the scenes! Maybe by now there's been some investigative work done to determine if your 'spy' theory has legs.

I have to say that I have no particular opinion so far on that.

montgomery

A quick search found this: https://news.vice.com/en_ca/article/d3bkkv/what-we-know-about-the-two-ca...

Well now!! some pretty important information that I sure wasn't aware of! True or false?

NorthReport

Meanwhile back in the land of the living

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5002577

montgomery

NorthReport wrote:

Meanwhile back in the land of the living

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5002577

What's your opinion on that CBC story by Proctor? Isn't all this supposed to be about Huawei not obeying US sanctions against Iran?

What about that part of it? Is the US justified on that issue?

I thought it was at least interesting to know more about the two Canadians. Didn't you?

WWWTT

montgomery wrote:

A quick search found this: https://news.vice.com/en_ca/article/d3bkkv/what-we-know-about-the-two-ca...

Well now!! some pretty important information that I sure wasn't aware of! True or false?

I read a couple Kovrig works, and it sounded like he was skirting on the edge. He was probably in contact with others in China being watched. But that’s speculation 

 

montgomery

WWWTT wrote:

montgomery wrote:

A quick search found this: https://news.vice.com/en_ca/article/d3bkkv/what-we-know-about-the-two-ca...

Well now!! some pretty important information that I sure wasn't aware of! True or false?

I read a couple Kovrig works, and it sounded like he was skirting on the edge. He was probably in contact with others in China being watched. But that’s speculation 

 

Yes, I agree that it's speculation, but it's speculation with a little more information than has been publicly spoken on some of the facts. I hope Babble members are interested enough to check it out too.

Personally, I've been moved to the point at which I wouldn't rule out the 'spying' theories.

NDPP

Trudeau Denies News Report That His Office Pressed Former Justice Minister to Drop SNC-Lavalin Charges

https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2019/02/07/prime-minister-justi...

"...Asked how Canadians can believe the Liberal government's claims of never politicizing the judical system which it has repeated in the Meng Wanzhou extradition case...Trudeau insisted that 'we have been consistent that Canada is a country of rule of law that respects the independent judciary and always will. It's something we have stood for on the international stage, it's also something we ensure on the domestic stage..."

Yeah, right. And the farmer hauled another load away.

Pages