Detention of Meng Wanzhou - CFO of Huawei

Your imagination is working overtime. It's the US gameplan to piss on Canada/China relations and stopping that is much more important then the petty politics bullshit. If she's released then the courts will show they have the balls to make the correct decisioin nd ignore US blackmail.

So let's put the situation in it's proper perspective, in case some haven't alreadya;

The US is simply telling Canada to choose between them and China. We can't be allied to both.

Trudeau and his party have made the decision to do what the US demands because it's the hugely popular position with the Canadian people.

And the courts won't come to the rescue because their position is always going to be dictated by government's direction. 

And we can't just brush it off and say that we'll live to fight another day, because it's a landmark decision being made for our country, in the eyes of Chinia too.

Maybe the NDP and Jagmeet Singh can campaign on the position of telling the US to mind their own business, so to speak, and that Canada will not just brush off China. I wonder how that would work out for him? Assuming he was of the mind to do so? 

So in a nutshell, our mission is to make it possible to have a political party take a ballsy position for Canada. Right now it would be political Hari-Kari.

Can you expand on that statement with something of substance? Preferably on this topic?

Canadian Peace Congress: The Arrest of Meng Wanzhou - A Public Discussion

What's at Stake and Where will it lead?

With International lawyer, author, Christopher Black and Miguel Figueroa, activist, CPC President.

Thursday, January 31 @ 7:30 PM, Steelworkers Hall, 25 Cecil Street, Toronto

Very funny Montgomery. Who cares about the NDP position? Is that your apologizing excuse for Justin? Look at the NDP?

Where did the request to arrest her come from? Who passed on the request to the police? Would the request have gone to the Commisioner of the RCMP? Would he have asked for political advice? 

By who? Politicians? The RCMP head cop? 

I'm totally opposed to bending over for the US but I'm also aware of the feelings of the majority of Canadians. 

How did that arrest actually happen? Could the US have contacted the Conservative party (maybe Scheer) and asked him to assert some political pressure on the RCMP to get the job done?

What would Kropotkin think? He seems to be able to hold our justice system to a high standard that would rule out the influence of the political party in power! I told  him that Meng would be in irons in a US jail by now if the Conservatives were in power.

Ah ha! Now I get it, you're a Conservative hack. 

A Conservative would understand that a lot of money is going to be made on trade with China but they would also understand that a lot of money could go up in smoke if Canada doesn't bend over and take it up the a-- for the US. A Con would obviously choose the option that paid best, and screw the social implications. For Cons, a US dollar in the pocket is worth 2 in China .

No, I'm not about to take that kind of shit from you or anybody on this site. I'm as left as it can get and that puts me furthest from the US criminal regime. Get the kcuf off the 'Ban the Liberal' scam. 

I must have missed the question and it took me a while to figure out what the mlw is or was. 

Are you one of the 'ban the Liberal' cops I have to answer to, or can I just ignore your crap?

Anyway, I think not very long because they were full of the same paranoia and exclusionist bullshit as this one used to be. If that's your goal then drop a note to the forum cops and maybe they will bow to your wishes. 

Scheer has criticized the government for not being tough enough with China

Canadian Ambassador Sacked For Speaking His Mind

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201901/28/WS5c4e0314a31d6c65c34e6b5b.html

"The resignation of Canadian Ambassador to China John McCallum has further demonstrated the political motives behind Ottawa's detention of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, said those familiar with the matter.

Ruan Zongze, Executive VP of the China Institute of International Studies, said McCallum's resignation was due to McCallum's  'relatively objective' comments over the extradition of Meng to the US - and his remarks seem to be not 'politically correct' in Canada regarding the case. Ruan said McCallum's removal is evidence of political manipulation over Meng's case which runs counter to the rule of law that Canada claism to abide by regarding the case."

'Inconsistent Messages' May Have Deepened Dispute

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/inconsistent-messages-may-have-deepened-...

"...McCallum's comments were apparently received with 'cautious optimism' in China, according to one expert on the country. Lynette Ong, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, said reports in China appeared to be encouraged that a senior Canadian official was suggesting an element of politicization to Meng's arrest, backing up the Chinese government's claims. 

While McCallum's remarks might have played well in China, Ong said, they presented a problem for Freeland and other Canadian officials portraying Meng's arrest as strictly a legal affair. 'From the outside, this whole situation - looks like a mess, like Canada somehow cannot get its act together,' she said. 'We keep on sending inconsistent messages to the Chinese authorities and to the world about what our position is..."

The firing of an ambassador is almost unknown in international diplomacy. China may well refuse to accept the credentials of McCallum's replacement.The Trudeau/Freeland gong show is racking up some pretty serious costs that Canucklheads might want to consider. Just wait until the full effects of the USMCA TPP 'free trade' surrender agreements begin to bite. Now the trashing of a major trading relationship in exchange for turning tricks for Trump and 'Five Eyes'...We are almost guaranteed a return to Tory government IMHO.

90% of US extradiction requests from the US to Canada succeed

Now I think there is some evidence that Trudeau mishandled this file.

I think that Canada had little choice but to arrest Meng given the treaty. The government of Canada should have spoken to the ambassador there and moved to explain to China the difficulty it was in and that Meng had a Canadian process to go through. It was weathering the storm, albeit badly.

Then the ambassador spoke. Either he did so with the PM's permission as I suggested or without communication with the PM which suggests some incompetence on the part of the PM. Hard to imagine this guy disobeying a direct instruction but pathetic to think Trudeau did not give one.

Still, many said that the ambassador's words were harmful to Trudeau. I don't think that is true. I think the situation was harmful but the ambassador to China saying what he said could have helped in China. It offered no role or suggestion for the government -- although it underlined the fact that this is a process and the government was not trying to keep her other than due to treaty obligation.

Washington was mostly ignoring the comments and the opposition in Canada would ahve had no more fuel if the PM said nothing. Looked like success. then the PM bowed to pressure from the opposition here to fire the ambassador and make things much worse with China. Seems pretty stupid when he could ahve just weathered the complaints here and taken the benefit with the Chinese for the words.

Now it looks like the PM had no control over the ambassador and may have provided him no instructions or had an ambassador ignore them. Either way Trudeau looks much worse than if he had done nothing.

I am sure the media and the opposition are grateful for the story but there is little reason Trudeau had to do anything about it. Now he has a bigger problem.

Has anyone had a chance to check my theory that Canada had until January 16 to either receive the U.S. extradition request (which they haven't yet) or else release Meng? It's driving me nuts.

That's certainly how I'd read that Article, though I'm not the lawyer you're hoping for.  Good catch, BTW -- the media has only referred to a 60 day deadline.

Where exactly do you think I over speculated? I think it was all fair and less than most speculation here.

It was predictable that the Chinese would be upset at the firing and the US had not publicy provided any justification.

The only flac Trudeau got was from the media and Conservatives which he could have weathered since it mostly said he was in a difficult position but did not claim he was at fault.

Do you really think it is unreasonable to expect that the PM speak to his ambassador? Do you really think an ambassador who has been so close to the present government and was a Liberal cabinet minister would disobey if he got a clear order?

Do real think if he disobeyed it would not be a big deal and reflect on the PM?

To me the most likely is that McCallum was doing the best he could without instructions and coordination. Most other possibilities are even worse for the PM and none are good. McCalllum was always to much of a loyal Liberal to assume that he would not know not to speak against a direction from the PM. If there was no direction then why the hell not?

AND If Trudeau did direct him and threw him under the bus this is also incompetence becuase McCallum just improved his position in China with apparently doing nothing to damage the situation with the US - so why fire him?

Firing McCallum created a problem that is much worse than the problem of his words which actually was only a political problem here, not a deal in Washington and a benefit in China. Why did Trudeau blink?

The only thing we know for sure is that Trudeau buckled under pressure and McCallum should get a peace prize of some sort. I don't really think we have anything to debate with each other. I think you must understand that government is only going to lead with conviction when it's politically acceptable to do so. Opposing the wishes of the US is not politically acceptable in the minds of the Canadian people. with a few exceptions. Jagmeet knows that as well as any politician but we would expect that maybe when speaking from an opposition position, he could show some bravery. 

Chretien did but I'm not suggesting that Chretien went out on a limb completely. He weighed the thoughts in the minds of the Canadian people and guessed that he could get away with it. And still today, he was wrong in the Conservative mind. But of course, he got it right.