Huawei to Hell where China’s 5G giant wants to take us. Why Canada must block the road.

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Huawei to Hell where China’s 5G giant wants to take us. Why Canada must block the road.

Finally, and written by one of the most best investigative journalists in Canada, who cuts through the entire Huawei nonsense, and clearly spells it out for all of us to see. 

 

Huawei to Hell

Where China’s 5G giant wants to take us. Why Canada must block the road

COVER.Huawei.jpg

Meng Wanzhou’s extradition hearing in Vancouver last week drew a crowd of protesters. Photo by Jonathan Hayward, the Canadian Press.

The extradition hearing for Huawei top executive Meng Wanzhou (a.k.a. Sabrina Meng) grabbed attention in Vancouver last week, with more to come in June. The case pops in and out of view. The details might seem irrelevant to those of us who don’t inhabit the tech biz stratosphere.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, EVENTS & MORE FROM TYEE AND SELECT PARTNERS

Just remember that Huawei, like every colossus from Amazon to Alibaba, hopes to disarm Canadians with aggressive charm. Huawei’s story, the only one it wants Canadians to hear, is this unbelievable heartbreaker:

Sabrina Meng, Huawei’s trusted CFO and daughter of its billionaire founder Ren Zhengfei, was on her way to Mexico to champion 5G technology when she got unfairly arrested at the Vancouver airport.

Meng, a glorious global leader of the next phase of the internet revolution, is entirely innocent of fraud, as charged by the U.S. Justice Department.

Moreover, the company denies operating a shadow company in Iran that violated U.S. sanctions against that country.

The Tyee is supported by readers like you

 Join us and grow independent media in Canada

In fact, Canadians should regard the whole Trumpian affair as “contrary to the rule of law.”  

We also are to pity Meng, because she has been confined to one of her two multimillion-dollar Vancouver mansions and must wear a GPS bracelet along with her Jimmy Choo stilettos. How merciless!

We are to forget that the Chinese Communist Party, in retaliation for the arrest of Meng, jailed two Canadians and holds them in solitary confinement. They also turned a jail term for another Canadian into a death sentence.

We are told that Huawei considers these arrests to be unfortunate, but “these are not issues for a tech company to get involved in,” said Alykhan Velshi, Huawei’s Canadian VP of corporate affairs, to CBC’s the Current earlier this week.

The idea that Huawei operates like an arm of the Chinese government is silly, said Velshi.

Huawei Canada does its own thing. “We have been operating in Canada for 10 years,” he added.

Now comes the part of the story that wants us to accept that technological progress can’t be stopped or challenged.

First, we are to believe that Huawei is just another company like Facebook and Google with nothing but purity in their corporate hearts and dedicated to the gods of convenience and efficiency.  

Huawei does, after all, lead the globe in developing 5G technology, which will connect all digital devices and accelerate the progress of artificial intelligence and robots.

Do not believe, say the Chinese, that 5G technology can serve as a Trojan horse for their totalitarian state to spy on Canadians.

If there happens to be a bug or a backdoor in the technology, well, “there is a technological solution,” because 5G technology is just a “technology issue,” said Velshi.  

If Canada were to ban Huawei’s 5G technology and stand in the way of progress, Canadians would become “laggards.” Nobody wants to be a laggard.

Huawei would like you to know that it makes neutral technologies that connect and enrich people’s lives.

If that technology is used to help conduct surveillance on millions of Chinese Uighurs, Huawei isn’t responsible for the application.

“We sell technology all around the world, but we don’t operate it. We don’t know how our customers choose to operate it,” Velshi explained to the Current.

Last but not least, Huawei is a nice company that sponsors Canadian hockey games and works diligently with our universities.

You can’t stop globalization by walling off Huawei and 5G technology.

Let’s expose these lies.

About 40 per cent of the world’s population is now enmeshed in cellular systems designed by Huawei. The company earns $108 billion a year and employs nearly 200,000 people. The Communist Party of China has 300 committees embedded in the company.

As a consequence, Huawei is not just another technology firm (no such fiction exists anywhere) but a manifestation of the imperial goals of the Chinese government, which is committed to winning a global war in artificial intelligence.

Every day the Chinese state already uses a variety of technologies, including systems made by Huawei that support facial recognition, to limit dissent and expand its Social Credit System.

The Social Credit System consists of constant state surveillance of people’s shopping, watching and even walking habits that creates a computational score. The Big Brother score allows the state to assess the trustworthiness of its citizens. With the help of an algorithm, the state can deny a shiftless citizen travel or credit.

As the machinations of Facebook and Google have proven, no technology can be free of the encoded bias of its makers, let alone the tendency of technology to erode human freedom overtime.

Last year, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute deftly mapped out the political role that China’s tech companies play at home and abroad.

The Australian report, which Canadian politicians should read, spoke bluntly. “China’s ambitions to influence the international development of technological norms and standards are openly acknowledged.”

It added, “The [Chinese Communist Party] recognises the threat posed by an open internet to its grip on power — and, conversely, the opportunities that dominance over global cyberspace could offer by extending that control.”

As such, Huawei has played a prominent role in making world a more insecure and totalitarian place.

The Australian report, for example, documents how Huawei has erected scores of so-called Smart City Public Security projects around the world.

“Those projects — which are often euphemistically referred to as ‘safe city’ projects — include the provision of surveillance cameras, command and control centres, facial and licence plate recognition technologies, data labs, intelligence fusion capabilities and portable rapid deployment systems for use in emergencies.”

IMAGE1.Huawei-5G.jpg

Huawei announces its first 5G chip in Barcelona in February 2018, paving the way for the company’s mobile devices to mesh with next generation of cellular networks.

The company has also been supplying video surveillance and analysis systems to the dictator of Belarus in Europe. And it has enabled the surveillance of millions of Uyghurs in Xinjiang province by providing security forces with technical support and training.

The real story takes another unhappy turn.

The Wall Street Journal recently documented how Huawei technicians that were embedded in the cybersecurity operations of two African states helped those government spy on their political critics. (Huawei denies the charge.)

Last year, the Financial Times described the growing global reach of China’s digital authoritarianism.

Chinese tech companies, among the largest and most innovative in the world, are now throwing their weight around at the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU).

That means that China Telecom, TZE, Huawei and China’s surveillance camera giants are now setting global standards for the total surveillance of people in cities. In effect, the Chinese fox is now wiring parts of the global henhouse for happy surveillance.

Given these unsettling developments, Huawei’s claim to be a neutral player is absurd. Every company in China, whether private or state owned, serves the interests of the Communist Party.

In 2017 President Xi Jinping, a dictator in all but name, passed the National Intelligence Law. It doesn’t hide the state’s intentions. The law requires any company to co-operate with state intelligence work and to keep that work secret. The law makes every Chinese company operating abroad a potential Trojan horse.

Even long-time promoters of better Chinese-Canadian relations can see the writing on the wall. “It would be folly to hand the keys to our national infrastructure to what is effectively a Chinese State Owned Enterprise,” argues Margaret McQuaig-Johnston, a senior fellow at the University of Ottawa.

Richard Fadden, former security advisor to the prime minister, goes further. “If China would resort to putting Canadians to death to defend its corporate national champion, what might it do if the Chinese Communist Party had unfettered access to Canada’s vital communications networks? ”

Last but not least comes the issue of 5G technology itself.

The issue is just not about the security of the system, but the tyrannical nature of the entire system itself. Whether engineered by Huawei or Nokia, 5G cinches the technological noose on every aspect of human life.

To date, each new development in cellular phone networks has offered a novelty along with increased security risks: 2G offered texting and spam; 3G boosted speeds and introduced wireless threats; 4G delivered streaming and created a “dynamic threat landscape.”

Now 5G promises to accelerate artificial intelligence by linking a complex network composed of “drones and air traffic control, cloud-driven virtual reality, connected vehicles, smart factories, cloud-driven robots, transportation and e-health.”

5G, the equivalent of a colonial occupying force, requires the rollout of a massive infrastructure of wireless base stations, because it operates on wavelength frequencies that can’t travel far without assistance.

Contrary to Huawei’s assurances, computer researchers have repeatedly warned that “new types of security threats and challenges will arise along with the deployment of novel 5G technologies and services,” because 5G makes the whole system easier to hack.

Meanwhile, the political status quo fails to signal the need for caution. Instead, citizens are told we should welcome each new technology as a great liberator delivering us shiny conveniences and efficiencies.

But who feels liberated? Successive waves of gadgets and their networks have eroded our freedom, abolished our privacy, undermined our democracies and blunted our spirits with algorithms designed to make people more predictable and docile.

James Bridle, a powerful critic of this state of affairs, argues that the uncritical belief in technology’s amoral utility “perpetuates our inability to rethink our dealings with the world.”

Such thinking weakens our resistance, but resistance is all that we have left.

What is clear is that Canada must follow Australia and New Zealand and ban Huawei from 5G infrastructure.

That’s only a first step. Canada must also establish a national office to assess all emerging technologies regardless of national origin and their threats to democracies.

China, which has no belief in freedom, has mastered a technology whose wind fills the sails of tyranny.

Huawei is just one of many interconnected high-tech firms trying to make the world a better place for machines and machine thinking.

The U.S., a failing democracy destabilized by its technologies such as Facebook, has fallen behind in this new cold war.

It has no real strategy on how to retain its tentative grip on global communications other than trying to impede Huawei.

Wired reporter Garrett Graff argues the dispute “could calve the world into two separate tech ecosystems, one in North America and parts of Europe and the other across Asia and the Southern Hemisphere. The former would be dominated by Nokia, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple, and the latter by Huawei, Alibaba, Tencent, and Baidu.”

And that is now happening.

image atom

‘Fingers in All Pots’: Canada’s Reckoning with China

READ MORE 

Robert Spalding, a former brigadier general in the U.S. Air Force and a member of the National Security Council, has studied 5G technology for years.

Given its threatening nature, he once advocated that the U.S. should build an “Eisenhower National Highway System for the Information Age,” that reflected an appreciation for freedom as opposed to the Chinese Communist Party’s declared preference for authoritarianism. 

The idea went nowhere in the Trump regime.

Spalding, who now works at the Hudson Institute, doesn’t think ordinary people appreciate the danger now pulsating through their smart phones. The danger is “existential to democracy” when “allowing totalitarian regimes — or any government — full knowledge of everything you do at all times,” he said.

“Because the tendency is always going to be to want to regulate how you think, how you act, what you do. The problem is that most people don’t think very hard about what that world would look like.”

And that’s the story Huawei doesn’t want you to believe. Or share. Or even think about.  [Tyee]

 

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2020/01/27/Huawei-Hell-5G-Risks/

NorthReport

Canadians need to get a clue about what is going on, eh!

‘Fingers in All Pots’: Canada’s Reckoning with China

The Meng Affair as a six-act opera starring Trudeau and the fate of nations.

 

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2019/01/31/Canada-Reckoning-China-Fingers-Pots-Meng-Trudeau/

 

kropotkin1951

Andrew Nikiforuk is the reason after being an initial monthly donator I stopped sending the Tyee any money. He is very good on energy and other issues however this article like many of his articles on China displays only his deep hated. It diminishes the Tyee when it publishes this kind of biased invective.

NorthReport

.

NorthReport

Some folks have concerns about the 2 Canadians languishing in China's jails. Others, not so much.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

NorthReport wrote:

Some folks have concerns about the 2 Canadians languishing in Chinese jails. Others, not so much.

The two Canadians languishing in Chinese jails would likely be released in short order if Canada would deny the U.S. request to extradite Meng Whanzou, and release her from her house arrest. I don't approve of U.S. sanctions against Iran, and therefore don't care whether anyone violates said sanctions.

I consider this to be an entirely seperate issue from whether or not Canada adopts Huawei's 5G technology.

JKR

I think opposition to Huawei has much, much more to do with the U.S. trying to support their companies by sidelining a non-U.S. competitor than it does with human rights or security.

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

 

The issue is just not about the security of the system, but the tyrannical nature of the entire system itself. Whether engineered by Huawei or Nokia, 5G cinches the technological noose on every aspect of human life.

 

...

 

That’s only a first step. Canada must also establish a national office to assess all emerging technologies regardless of national origin and their threats to democracies.

In this story there are some nuggets despite some of the distrubing statements. At least here there is an acknowledgement that a problem exists around the technology itself and the apporach to technology. As well, there should be deep concerns about the nature of tech companies in general and it should not be limited to Huawei but include ocmpanies such as Google and Facebook which we have seen show a priority of making money wherever they can without concern for the ethics of principles of law. They hire ways of getting around the law and avoiding infomred consent.

The elephant in the room is that Huawei might be no better or worse than any other of these companies which is very bad indeed. Many of the legitimate concerns about Huawei are equally true about every other tech giant that maximizes profit in the world of big data.

As nations consider the Huawei participation the emphasis is on the Chinese nationality of the company rather than the reach of the technology, the role of large for profit companies in setting priorities, and protection for people regardless of who creates the technology. this is an obvious mistake apart from concerns about the treatment of China it creates a false sense of security any time another company takes Huawei's place.

As far as the issue of Huawei cooperating with the government of China. There may be cause to be concerned. A basis for this concern is in the behaviour of other companies: 

https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/04/cooperation-or-resistance-the-role-of-tech-companies-in-government-surveillance/

It is important to note that companies asked to provide assistance to govenrment do not do so without the presumption of benefit. They do this without any public accountability and do it based on a moral stance informed by propaganda of whatever country their decision makers live in. Companies are a-moral actors and the decision makers in any of them tend not to be sophisticated in morals but rather technology innovators with a keen eye on profit. Some of the most critical moral decisions are made by these people. It is not difficult to have in these arena without accountability poor justifications for self interest trump any more lofty moral principles.

the article I linked to contains some serious quesitons and demonstrates a rather scary optimism about the US government agencies. If you bring that optimism back down to earth you can see many of the questions result in far darker answers.

It may be wise not to trust Huawei, but don't make it about that company alone. Other companies based in other countries (many in the US) are euqally untrustworthy and equally willing to sell out people to whomever is able to give them a worthwhile benefit.

Questions could be asked baout having this technology in private hands at all. The problem is then who do you trust more? Government or companies? At least government is supposed to have your interest. Companies make no such pretence. The workings of the non-security parts of government may be easier to probe than private companies who claim just about anything as competatively sensitive. Any private company can deal with any government in its most shadowy sector. 

The Huawei controversy is asking questions but I am not sure that they are the right ones.

We might start with another one: the technology this 5G system offers -- is this something we need and would benefit from or is it just another centre for profit at cost to most of the people?

Sean in Ottawa

Left Turn and JKR are making statements here that are not in opposition to each other. Canada has no reason to want to enforce sactions on Iran, given that I do not believe that Canadians believe in them. Certainly the Canadian govenrment does not believe in them considering the fact that this country is awash in laundered money from the worst actors in this regime so why are we supporting penalties imposed on the entire Iranian population while supporting Revolutionary Guard laundering. Let's be clear this smae issue also exists in other countries like the US who also profit from turning away at convenient times. The government of Canada betrayed the Iranian people by allowing the seizure and sale of Iranian public assets in Canada to pay Americans who had no legitimate claim on them -- At the same time as allowing money laundering in this country that basically steal from the Iranian people. A pro Iranian people position would be to restrict the laundering and protect the long term public assets of the Iranian people.

NorthReport

Tech Giants Rely on Big Lies — and We Fall for Them

From ‘the cloud’ to ‘free’ services, we’ve been conned by tech babble.

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2020/01/29/Tech-Giants-Babble/

NDPP

Nobody is surveilled by a more powerful and comprehensive consortium than those of us under the Five Eyes umbrella. The mythology around Huawei's 'back door' is purely a propaganda construct designed to buttress the US side in an  ongoing competition for the 5G market, utilizing the ever-ready Sinophobia, yellow-peril xenophobia as required to leverage global market-share advantage. Even BoJo and Perfidious Albion has the good sense to reject American pressure tactics to forego a superior technology. What we should be as interested in examining are the possible health implications of this further and significant addition to the electromagnetic spectrum 'saturation bombing'.

Ban 5G Technology Due To Health And Environmental Risks

https://rabble.ca/toolkit/reports/ban-5g-technology-due-health-and-envir...

Sean in Ottawa

NDPP wrote:

Nobody is surveilled by a more powerful and comprehensive consortium than those of us under the Five Eyes umbrella. The mythology around Huawei's 'back door' is purely a propaganda construct designed to buttress the US side in an  ongoing competition for the 5G market, utilizing the ever-ready Sinophobia, yellow-peril xenophobia as required to leverage global market-share advantage. Even BoJo and Perfidious Albion has the good sense to reject American pressure tactics to forego a superior technology. What we should be as interested in examining are the possible health implications of this further and significant addition to the electromagnetic spectrum 'saturation bombing'.

Ban 5G Technology Due To Health And Environmental Risks

https://rabble.ca/toolkit/reports/ban-5g-technology-due-health-and-envir...

Exactly: the technology offers more risk than any country can. We should focus our concern on the technology rather than the nationality of the builder. I am not saying I trust China but I also do not trust private companies or other governments either. Technology this invasive should not be deveopled and in the hands of anyone.

In part the hostility to Huawei comes from a false sense of security in the companies we are familiar with and our own governments.

NorthReport

When are Canadians going to protest with placards and the media at China's government offices in Canada over China's paying to hire protesters in Vancouver. Just askin' 

kropotkin1951

NorthReport wrote:

When are Canadians going to protest with placards and the media at China's government offices in Canada over China's paying to hire protesters in Vancouver. Just askin' 

Tell us as soon as you organize this mass movement.

NorthReport

Go back to sleep!

kropotkin1951

I've organized marches for issues I care about as have many other people who post here. It seems to me that if this is your issue then you would be an ideal person to lead the way. 

After almost all the marches I've taken part in, whether they have been trade union or environmental or pro-Palestine, the MSM pundits use the term Rent a Mob or some such slur to describe the participants.  Irony of ironies would be if the Chinese embassy people were naive enough to think we had a unbiased press and actually thought hiring protestors was part of our culture. After all they regularily read in the Sun and Province about all those "rent-a-crowds" for every other issue.

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

When are Canadians going to protest with placards and the media at China's government offices in Canada over China's paying to hire protesters in Vancouver. Just askin' 

I think the problem here is that you are particularly angry about this. I don't respect paid protesters but I hardly think it is that big a deal. It happens everywhere in many different ways. I just cannot get upset about this with the other 999 real priorities out there to think about.

We have really serious issues we cannot get people to come out to protest for. 

NDPP

Britain's Huawei Gamble (and audio)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csy7kz

"The UK's decision to give the Chinese telecom equipment maker partial access to its 5G network risks trade retaliation from the US. Listen now..."

 

UK's Proposal to Limit Huawei's Role in the 5G Network Most 'Pragmatic' Path, Expert Says (and audio)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/u-k-s-proposal-to-limit-huawei-s-role-i...

"Britain's final decision will leave Canada the only undecided nation in the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. 'I think a lot of people are playing quite a zero-sum game here, that just banning Huawei is the golden ticket to securing 5G networks. That's simply not true..."

kropotkin1951

NorthReport wrote:

Finally, and written by one of the most best investigative journalists in Canada, who cuts through the entire Huawei nonsense, and clearly spells it out for all of us to see.

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2020/01/27/Huawei-Hell-5G-Risks/

The Tyee proclaims itself a progressive voice its readership thinks this article is an outrageous piece of bullshit propaganda. Apparently not many others have your glowing opinion of the piece.

We have allowed our governments to embrace this technology and we have allowed companies like Google Apple and Facebook to collect so much data on our lives it has provided these companies and their owners billions in profits. Yet no government or agency can tell us just what all these companies have collected on us nor how it is being used. Huewei may just be an evil Nikiforuk wants us to be wary of yet we also must be very wary of our own western companies who already are operating in our advanced democracies with evil intent.

  • If there was ever a reason to read both 1984 and Brave New World this is it.

    42

...

The US and other ' western democracies" all have " backdoors" into google, microsoft,i-phone,facebook, instagram and other social technologies to use when ever they need it. Where do you think the 20+ ' security ' agencies in US government get much of their 'surveillance?

12

...

  • s the Tyee a branch of the CIA now? Remember Edward Snowden? Ever heard of the NSA? Or the “Five Eyes”? Spying 24/7 on the entire world? Just like that Apple or Android phone in your and my pocket - all “Designed in USA”, and busy recording this as I type. We kidnapped Meng because Apple and Google are losing market share to Huawei, not because Huawei is spying on us.

    16 2

  • My mistake, I didn't realize I was reading the National Post, the New York Times, or CNN. I thought I would come to The Tyee and see what was going on in the progressive world today. Instead, I get hit with this Yellow Peril piece typical of the corporate MSM. China bad. USA good. Canada an innocent bystander. I would unsubscribe if I had a subscription.

    13 3

 

NDPP

Sunderland Is A Beneficiary of Huawei 5G

https://sunderlandglobalmedia.com/2020/01/29/sunderland-is-a-beneficiary...

"...Huawei might be subject to scrutiny from American politicians, but nevertheless holds the world's largest number of verifiable 5G patents, leaving its competitors trailing. As of October last year it specified it had over 65 commercial 5G contracts worldwide, with roughly half based in Europe. Italy, Spain, Portugal, France and Ireland are amongst the countries who have embraced the Chinese firm, shrugging off US warnings against it, as well as attempts to stifle the company by blacklisting it from American markets..."

NorthReport

Really!

That's amazin'

Truly amazin!

 

Britain ignored the US to welcome Huawei. Can Canada do the same with 5G and Meng Wanzhou’s trial?

  • The British cabinet rebuffed intense US lobbying over the Chinese tech firm, driving a wedge into the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance
  • There are lessons for PM Justin Trudeau as Canada looks to develop its mobile phone infrastructure amid legal proceedings over Meng’s extradition

Wang Xiangwei

Wang Xiangwei

Published: 9:30am, 1 Feb, 2020

 

 

NorthReport

New U.S. charges claim Huawei stole trade secrets, did business in North Korea

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/huawei-meng-criminal-us-doj-1.5462770

NorthReport

Well that's it then!

U.S. Senator says Congress will cut off intelligence sharing with Canada if it approves Huawei 5G

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-us-senator-says-congress-will-cut-off-intelligence-sharing-with/

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

Well that's it then!

U.S. Senator says Congress will cut off intelligence sharing with Canada if it approves Huawei 5G

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-us-senator-says-congress-will-cut-off-intelligence-sharing-with/

Ok. Canada is either going to get continually bullied or it will have to take a few blows before the US remembers that it also gains in the relationship.

Problem is the political situation is that a few blows and we could get a Conservative government sign on the dotted line.

kropotkin1951

And how would this be a bad thing for Canadians? Pulling out of 5Eyes is something to applaud not fear. Less integration with the US security regimes should be the goal.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

And how would this be a bad thing for Canadians? Pulling out of 5Eyes is something to applaud not fear. Less integration with the US security regimes should be the goal.

I don't think you understood my post.

My point is that we need to stand up to the US but the problem is that in so doing there will be short term economic consequences which brings the risk that a Conservative government could win. If a Conservative government wins then the standing up to the US will cease.

It is not about whether or not we are better off standing up to the US but the fact that we are integrated so much that the short term pain could affect our political process whereby a party not wanting to stand up could come to power.

The only solution to this circular problem would be a government honest enought to seek a mandate to do this where the population understood that the short term pain was behind a long term independence. 

As well I do not think this can be done in half measures like we typically get from the Liberals. Canada has to have a policy of resistence to a number of things at the same time -- and then deal with the fight -- becuase small resistence will not deliver the independence on policy we need and it will still attract the retribution.

At some point we should recognize that Canada is almost at the point where it has to declare an intent to have greater independence and pursue a policy of doing so while ensuring the public are on board and doing what it can to make sure that the people affected are helped as much as possible.

Putting this off only increases the bill. A number of cowardly governments unwilling to pay the price of independence has led the country to become more and more trapped. This latest version of NAFTA, is a continuation of that trend. Rather than get us out this gets us in deeper.

So nothing I am saying says I do not think Caanda should seek independence as much as it can, I am just pointing out the risk of this resulting in economic difficulty whichwould result in a Conservative government which would abort the process -- unless we take steps to make sure it does not happen. This requires a couragious and honest government the likes of which we have not seen federally. 

Does that clarify?

 

kropotkin1951

My point was that whether or not we stand up to the US is irrelevant to the fact I would prefer not to live in the current 5Eyes police state that I find myself in.

I do not believe that any real change will ever come out of the House of Commons because we do not live in a real democracy so I place none of my hope for the future in that realm.

I hope that clarifies things for you.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

My point was that whether or not we stand up to the US is irrelevant to the fact I would prefer not to live in the current 5Eyes police state that I find myself in.

I do not believe that any real change will ever come out of the House of Commons because we do not live in a real democracy so I place none of my hope for the future in that realm.

I hope that clarifies things for you.

So the question was not for me? You seem to write in a tone of disagreement when there is not any. I do not disagree with anything you said -- just that fact that it was presented in the tone of a rebuttal/question when as it turns out it had nothing to do with my point at all.

NorthReport

Let's not be ridiculously naive

Recruiters for controversial pro-Meng Wanzhou protest have Richmond and Regina links

https://thebreaker.news/business/meng-protesters-hired/

NorthReport

Fraud, not sanctions violations, is at the heart of the Meng Wanzhou extradition case, says Government of Canada’s top lawyer

https://thebreaker.news/business/crown-responds-meng/

NorthReport

Doing double duty: Meng Wanzhou’s court-appointed bodyguard found working at the Chinese consulate

https://thebreaker.news/news/meng-security-at-consulate/

NDPP

US Threatens Europe Over Huawei at Munich Security Conference

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/02/17/muni-f17.html

"Amid a sharp deterioration in US-European relations, Washington sent a bipartisan delegation of White House officials and members of Congress to the Munich Security Conference to pressure and threaten European countries not to do business with the Chinese telecommunications firm Huawei. The conference followed announcements by Germany, France and most recently the UK that they would not ban Huawei from their networks.

Huawei's 5G telecommunications infrastructure is far more advanced that that of its European rivals Nokia and Ericcson, and a decision by any country not to use Huawei's technology will put it at a significant disadvantage. But the American officials, with their combination of threats, demagogy and empty promises, got a chilly reception from the European representatives..."

Sean in Ottawa

Telus has announced that it will use Huawei equipement meaning that the governmetn will either have to go along, cost them tons of money, or pay to replace it all.

Sean in Ottawa

Behind the USbullying on Huawei you have the real gap between the US and many other countries. Many countries used to do what the US wanted and they recieved a number of perceived benefits in exchange including that the US would spend more on defence. The problem now is partly that the US does not understand the transaction that exists. By not being an ally and making other countries have to pay more for their defence and other moves, the US is no longer putting on the table what if provided in return for many areas of dominance. Now the US is being very aggressive with what it wants: Iran, pipeline position in Europe, Huawei -- but it is pretending that it never got anything for spedning extra and supports it previously provided. It now wants to dominate AND charge for everything it does. Push back is predictable.

Increasingly people like most of us here are getting a recpetive audience when we argue agaisnt the US being able to enforce its will outside the US. Why should the US get to deicde what every other country's position should be? Why should they get to enforce sanctions nobody wants but themselves? Now that they do not want to pay why should they get the benefits that were part of the unwritten understanding. People put up with the US doing this for years becuase they felt they got something. Now that the US is behaving aggressively across the board, there is resitence when they are seeking to push poeple around. Trump adminstration does not udnerstand that the US bargaining power and so called soft-power is in decline due to their actions. Some countries have more ability to resist than others of course.

NorthReport

There is even talk now of 2 separate internet systems.

NorthReport

The US Fears Huawei Because It Knows How Tempting Backdoors Are

US officials allege that Huawei has backdoors in its technology. The US knows firsthand how powerful those can be.

https://www.wired.com/story/huawei-backdoors-us-crypto-ag/